Mmm... Disagree. But it's a freaking touchy subject. It depends on what you classify as human. At that stage, it doesn't have conscious thought, or a brain for that matter, but the beginning stages of pregnancy are needed for it to develop the things that are needed to classify it as 'human.' And no, I'm not gonna go all 'every life is sacred,' but I think that if its easy to just use protection or not have sex at all, why do we really need it?
Also:
Pictures-
Chicken egg is unfertilized, it would never develop into a living organism.
Acorn: Trees aren't even classified as Animalia, let alone their offspring.
Cotton: A byproduct of the cotton plant, not even an organism.
I just don't find why an unfertilized egg, an acorn, and some cotton are a fitting argument on why we should kill our own offspring.
It is human, coming from human genetic material, but it is like a teratoma or other growth in that it depends on another body for nourishment, though the fetus does not rely on its host's circulatory system, using the host's body to gain nutrients necessary to finish growing.
Egg: stock picture of a chicken ovum. Unfertilized, but has the potential to become a chicken.
Acorn: Potential to become a living being, the oak tree.
Silkworm: An organism presented with its cocoon, which has the potential to be spun into silk cloth.
Human sperm and egg: Presented with egg as yet unfertilized. There is potential for this to develop into a zygote, from there if there is no miscarriage eventually into a fetus.
The point of the images is that each presents something with the potentiality to become a new thing. However, we treat the human fertilized egg much differently from any other potential thing, in a biologically-based attempt to make sure the species continues.
Now that our species exceeds seven billion individuals occupying one planet, this biological drive is illogical and may threaten our ability to survive... however, much like the appendix, the want to protect potential offspring remains.
6.7 billion. So in the name of science, gross overpopulation gives us the right to take away somebody else's potential life? If that were true, we could always just gas retired citizens. They seem to serve no purpose other than the occasional purchase of Vitamin Cottage ultimate soft-yogurt and making up half the population of Florida. And yet, we don't, out of respect for their own lives, and the fact that at one point, they served society. A fetus isn't any different, only instead it hasn't served society yet. And since 1971, there's been about 40 million abortions, meaning that it wouldn't cause a mass-inflation of our already ridiculously high population. Most were in the United States anyway, where overpopulation isn't even a worry.
Permalink Reply by Omega on September 25, 2010 at 7:38am
Oh God, Oh God, not again?
Yes, it's terrible that there are abortions, however, the way to reduce the number is to educate people and give them access to contraception, NOT ban them outright.