Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "inativo" —a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Reative o tópico publicando uma resposta.
It made me realize that my pro-choice viewpoints were putting me in the position of deciding who was and was not human, and whose lives were worth living. I (along with doctors, the government, or other abortion advocates) decided where to draw this very important line. When I would come across Catholic blogs or books where they said something like “life begins at conception,” I would scoff at the silliness of that notion as was my habit…yet I found myself increasingly uncomfortable with my defense:
“A few cells is obviously not a baby or even a human life!” I would say to myself. “Fetuses eventually become full-fledged humans, but not until, umm, like six months gestation or something. Or maybe five months? When is it that they can kick their legs and stuff?…Eight weeks? No, they’re not human then, those must be involuntary spasms…”
I was putting the burden of proof on the fetuses to demonstrate to me that they were human. And I was a tough judge. I found myself looking the other way when I heard that 3D ultrasounds showed “fetuses” touching their faces, smiling and opening their eyes at ages at which I still considered abortion OK. I didn’t have any interest in reading the headlines at Lifesite. Babies — I mean, fetuses — seen yawning at 12 weeks gestation? Involuntary spasm. As modern technology helped fetuses offer me more and more evidence that they were humans too, I would simply move the bar of what I considered human.
If you leave this to the government, NOBODY is safe.
Oh, come now.
First of all, no one is leaving the life or death of a fetus to the government. Some want it left to the mother whether the fetus will continue in her body. That is it. Try not to exaggerate or offer nonsense mischaracterizations of opposing points of view.
Second of all, this "a fetus is a REAL human being, with all the rights of an adult normal human being" position is historically brand new. NO ONE previously believed this sort of doctrine. That doesn't make it wrong, but it does mean that there has to be some rationale why the traditional point of view should be abandoned. The previous "Judeo-Christian" doctrine, for those who haven't looked into this matter turned around the concepts of "quickening" and birth, not around conception.
Third, as to the OP, you obviously haven't had much experience with animals. They often yawn, touch their faces, express pleasure, etc. Crusading to give your dog the same full rights as an adult normal human being, are you?