English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Fetuses dont think, why should they be protected under the law?
"i think therefore i am"

2007-04-12 09:49:48 · 25 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

25 answers

Why should a fetus qualify as a human being?

Because it's an immature human being. It's certainly not going to grow up to be a gold fish.

Fetuses dont think, why should they be protected under the law?

It's hard to say when sentience develops. People don't generally remember anything from before the age of 4 or 5 - a phenomenon called 'juvenile amnesia' - it may be that they're not really thinking in the human sense up to that point. Would it be OK to deny toddlers protection under the law? No.


Human being or not, though, a fetus is utterly dependent on it's mother for it's survival, and the mother assumes a very real (if, small with modern medical care) risk in carrying it to term. Risking your own life to save another is heroism. You can't legislate heroism.

2007-04-12 10:00:25 · answer #1 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 3 1

At what point do you think the "fetus" becomes a baby?

When it's born? If that's the case there are NUMEROUS cases of babies being born way before term. If they were still in the womb would you call them fetus's or babies?

There's a report of a 25 week baby being born, and surviving. That's only 6.25 months, would you have classed that as a fetus, or a baby.

I find it very convenient that when you're of taking a human life it's considered a fetus, however if you want to keep the baby you consider it a baby. Maybe it's just easier for you to ease your mind if you call it something other than what it is.

2007-04-12 10:02:09 · answer #2 · answered by TexasChick 4 · 1 1

Fetuses are little more than parasitic tumors up until the last few weeks of pregnancy, even then they don't qualify as human. Pregnancy should be discouraged as much as possible. No woman should have to waste her life as a breeder. And, the world already has too many people in it. Finally, child-rearing is the most thankless job ever; the little monsters grow up and no matter how well you've treated them, they hate your guts. Just say NO to breeding!

2007-04-12 10:04:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

This is a very controversial question
The question is when does life begin, many believe it is at the moment the sperm enters the egg. its true this is being life of for a fetus unfortunately the fetus grows so fast that by the time a fertile female knows she is pregnant the fetus is no longer a egg.

2007-04-12 10:02:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A toddlers coronary heart beats in the womb at week 6 i think of a heartbeat means its alive does it no longer? Its a guy or woman at theory. yet many human beings will disagree. anybody feels distinctive in this....An abortion at 21-28 weeks is terrible!!!! My nephew develop into born at 27 weeks and hes 10 years previous....He develop right into a guy or woman no longer a fetus! "maximum of all, he develop into indignant by the assumption of telling somebody- like a mom- what to do along with her very own physique." So the physique of the toddler in simple terms doesnt count i think........

2016-12-29 05:15:09 · answer #5 · answered by vijaypal 4 · 0 0

You'd be right if it was possible for any human being to AVOID going through the stage WE call fetus...and I have capitalize the "we" because the term fetus is a man-made word for a phase in a continuum.

2007-04-12 11:25:00 · answer #6 · answered by peace m 5 · 0 1

The Declaration of Independence states that:"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Creation begins at inception, not birth. The founders of this country understood that upon inception each unborn child had certain unalienable Rights that must be enforced by the government ("That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed").

Regardless, the right to determine laws involving murder are not expressly nor implied to be a federal right which means that these rights fall to the individual states. In other words Roe v. Wade is unconstitutional because it violates the Separation of Powers clause.

2007-04-12 09:58:34 · answer #7 · answered by whatup!!! 2 · 1 1

It should be the choice of the person or people responsible to answer that question. Bringing an unwanted unloved baby into the world is more cruel than ending it before it has any thoughts of existence. Untill these people that say its baby killing step up and adopt everyone, not just some but everyone of these children they should shut their trap.

2007-04-12 10:03:32 · answer #8 · answered by REFORM! 2 · 1 0

I am very split on abortion. I have finally decided to be pro-choice, because of the "woman has the right to choose" thing. However my big counter/ internal conflict with it was thinking what if I was used for stem cell research. If that was so, then I would never have been alive, which is like killing something before it has the chance to live. It is complicated but it works in my head. So to answer your question, because they may not be protecting the fetus itself, but what it may become.

2007-04-12 09:57:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

They are a human being because:
They have unique DNA.
The mother's immune system would kill it if it wasn't for the placenta's protection, just like any other foreign life form.
These two facts of biology define life!

Your line of reasoning isn't that much different than Hitler's was when he was justifying the murder of thousands of mentally handicapped people. That is why it is dangerous to not sanctify all human life: it easily becomes trivial.

2007-04-12 10:00:38 · answer #10 · answered by 1,1,2,3,3,4, 5,5,6,6,6, 8,8,8,10 6 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers