That fetus has a full, complete human DNA sequence separate from and distinct from the mother's. From conception, that new human being meets all signs of life (made of one or more cells, uses energy, reacts to external stimuli, regulation between internal and external resources, grows and develops, potential for reproduction, and capability of movement). It is a whole, complete, separate human life, and the claim that anything beyond the point of conception is the mother's body is a denial of basic biological science. If you can provide me scientific proof that this is wrong, I will consider changing my views.
No, I am conflating living humans with living humans. My post does not mention the word "person" once. Furthermore, my argument doesn't mention religion at all. You are trying to thrust philosophical arguments and extremely questionable theology into a statement of biological science.
Do parents have a right to murder their teen-aged children? My house, my choice. They're just so expensive too. Could save so much money or headache my just aborting them at 200 months old. They aren't even adults yet.
If you wanted to argue in good faith, you'd understand the sole reason people are pro-life is the same reason people are anti-murder. But instead, you are arguing like a leftist.
My (soon to be) wife and I have already agreed we will probably adopt at some point.
So yes, I will personally take in one of those 600,000 children, at some point in my life, that otherwise would've been aborted.
Also, are you claiming that anyone that is on welfare isn't worth being alive? While I'd make the argument that we should let everyone be uncomfortable in their poverty, especially if it's by active choices, I would never make the case that they deserve death. In the end, since we come from God, every life is precious, regardless of how "bad" you think that life is.
Murder is murder. Just because it loses some votes doesn't mean I will back down on my desire to make murder illegal.
Otherwise, what good are we?
That fetus has a full, complete human DNA sequence separate from and distinct from the mother's. From conception, that new human being meets all signs of life (made of one or more cells, uses energy, reacts to external stimuli, regulation between internal and external resources, grows and develops, potential for reproduction, and capability of movement). It is a whole, complete, separate human life, and the claim that anything beyond the point of conception is the mother's body is a denial of basic biological science. If you can provide me scientific proof that this is wrong, I will consider changing my views.
No, I am conflating living humans with living humans. My post does not mention the word "person" once. Furthermore, my argument doesn't mention religion at all. You are trying to thrust philosophical arguments and extremely questionable theology into a statement of biological science.
Do parents have a right to murder their teen-aged children? My house, my choice. They're just so expensive too. Could save so much money or headache my just aborting them at 200 months old. They aren't even adults yet.
If you wanted to argue in good faith, you'd understand the sole reason people are pro-life is the same reason people are anti-murder. But instead, you are arguing like a leftist.
My (soon to be) wife and I have already agreed we will probably adopt at some point.
So yes, I will personally take in one of those 600,000 children, at some point in my life, that otherwise would've been aborted.
Also, are you claiming that anyone that is on welfare isn't worth being alive? While I'd make the argument that we should let everyone be uncomfortable in their poverty, especially if it's by active choices, I would never make the case that they deserve death. In the end, since we come from God, every life is precious, regardless of how "bad" you think that life is.