Why do people think an embryo/fetus looks like this?

Post Reply New Topic

Like what the hell.

Ok well I posted a picture of an actual baby, but apparently wrongplanet does not let you post photos anymore. Anyways point was embryos and fetuses which are the things women abort do not look like full developed babies and cannot live outside the womb in any capacity really.

It's emotional bait. That's all it is.

The base it's aimed at typically has a low level of science comprehension and is motivated by emotion. Pictures of babies are emotionally manipulative.

So?

Most pro choice people seem to think an embryo and fetus looks like it's first stage until birth (A few divided cells), then it magically grows human shaped at birth.

It begins to look human-ish by two weeks, but more importantly what they look like shouldn't determine rights or humanity.

People on both extremes of the discussion can be ridiculous and dishonest.

Acting like an embryo and a born baby are exactly the same may be manipulative and untrue.

Claiming an embryo or fetus is a parasite or not a human being is too.


Personally I think what's more important than what an embryo or fetus looks like is, at what point can you or can't you be sure if it has pain perception or any kind of consciousness.

I think even more important than that, is to question why our political pro-life leaders are so gung ho about supposedly protecting "life" when at the same time they are very much against any reform that would make health care and education more accessible for everyone.

Because while they're going on about the sanctity of life, there is NO discussion at all by the pro lifers regarding the disposal of IVF fetal tissue, wherein eggs are fertilized but only a few are implanted. The rest are either frozen indefinitely or they are disposed of.

And as IVF is expensive and only women who are of a certain financial background (and probably also race) can afford it, it leads one to believe that the real reason of the pro life movement is NOT their concern for life at all, but an effort to further reduce poor women to being second class citizens who will work any low wage, no benefit job they can get just to survive, or even being so economically desperate as to turn to crime, landing themselves in one of those pro-profit prisons.

They're not concerned about life, it's about money and power.

Embryo adoption has become a thing, and it is best to look at individual issues because both parties are full of crap. Personally, I want more support for mothers and children and I am against killing any other people as well, including criminals. I am also pro prison reform.

Because of the ridiculous amount of unused and frozen embryos in the us (Upwards of 600,000), I want IVF as expencive as possible, but not embryo adoption. The entire process of embryo adoption can be less than 5,000$, and I highly incurage it as with any adoption (Legally it is a transfer of property, not and adoption, so legally it is easier.)

Every month an egg inside of me fails to get fertilized and then it dies and and all the hard work my uterus did to contain a fetus is flushed from my system. Is that the same as abortion?

And even if the egg did get fertilized, millions of other sperm would just die. Each one of them could have grown into living human being. Is that abortion, too?

And whenever a guy masturbates... well, you get the idea.

Once the egg gets fertilized and only after it get's fertilized does it have it's own genetic blueprint and start developing. That should be simple.

Both parties may be full of crap, but one party actively tried to make health care more accessible for everyone while the other has railed against it while at the same time refusing to discuss the health issue surrounding the almost daily mass shootings this country sees. So call me somewhat skeptical that the latter party actually cares anything at all about preserving life.

The proper response to the abortion issue: MYOB. Don't like abortion? Don't have one then. It's no one's business outside of the woman and her doctor and her partner.

The democrat party may want more health care, but it throws away life, highly encouraging abortion for any disability what so ever, physician assisted suicide is big on their agenda as well.
What is the point of heath care if they just kill off everyone who needs it?

Anyway, you could say the same about anything, don't like child abuse? don't abuse your child, for instance. It doesn't work because their is a party involved that isn't being considered, in the case of what we are talking about the unborn child that doesn't get a choice in the matter. When there is more than one individual being affected, than the rights and risks to all individuals needs to be considered.

MD assisted suicide is highly regulated and made by the choice of the patient and their physician. If a patient is terminally ill yet mentally sound, you don't think they deserve the right to a dignified and relatively pain-free death and to be able to make that choice for themselves? Why not?



The reason child abuse is not legal is because of the long-term health effects it will have on the adult individual. A baby born to a mother who is incapable of caring for it for whatever reason (because of poverty, immaturity, or simply did not want a baby) will have many of the same long-term health effects, IF that baby even survives to adulthood.

It's really more an idea of increasing the health of the overall population by as many children being wanted and provided for as possible. You can't ever completely eliminate poverty and economic disparity, but you can certainly reduce it and the detrimental health effects it has as the result by giving women the choice to decide as to whether or not she can or wants to provide for a new human being.

And no, the unborn baby does not get a choice. They did not get a choice to be born into either an Ivy League educated well off family in the northeast or to a dirt poor single mother who did not even want a baby in Appalachia either. That's the way it is. Life is not fair.

First of all, I don't think fighting to live is ever undignified at all.
Second of all, there is a reason no major disability rights groups, despite most of them being left leaning, do not support assisted suicide.

If death is a right than anyone, even a suicidal teen would have access to it, but that is not the case. If someone is either dying or dealing with a condition that is likely to kill them and are feeling suicidal, it is not right to deny mental heath care and instead tell them to just kill themselves.

Also, in counties that have had it for a while, it expands. For instance in the UK a parent can now agree to assisted suicide for a severely disabled child without that child's consent, and in many cases doctors can do so without the consent of even the parent.

It values life on a scale and that is not okay.

Child murder is illegal and the effect on the future of the child is exactly the same as abortion.

Calling a woman an incapable mother, for poverty, immaturity, simply did not want a baby or any other reason, is not empowering. I have seen mothers in all three categories become amazing parents. I was personally raised by a single parent and have no problem with that.

If a mother truly doesn't want to raise her child, ADOPTION. Private infant adoption has a ton of demand, and the mother if she wants to could choose out of many parents with any level of openness. The children that struggle to get adopted are 5 or older children in foster care (And I do plan to adopt from foster care as soon as I can)

Losing your future altogether is not better than having a shaky one.

Okay have to address this in two posts:

Okay... but that was not really my question.

My question was: If a patient is terminally ill and mentally sound, SPECIFICALLY why you would deny them the right to make that decision for themselves?



Did you have a source for this statement?

Because even with a short time left there is no reason to cut the time even shorter. I don't have a problem with them discontinuing treatment, but to deliberately kill yourself shows a lack of value of self.

It is hard to source my broad statement, as I'm referring to a group, but let us start with the zika scare when democrats repeatedly tried to use it as an excuse to legalize abortion in those areas.

67 percent of unborn children with down syndrome are aborted in the us, and abortion is legal for many disabilities including down syndrome up to birth.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/ ... regnancies
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/ph ... lity.shtml

So your reason is they should value their life?

Why?

I read that article on Iceland and the Downs Syndrome abortions. The only thing I got out of it is that there is one entity pushing, but it's the Pro Lifers pushing women to have those babies against their will. The Icelandic counselors are leaving it up to the women to make that decision.

I haven't looked at the other one yet.