"The main differences between a living human being at it's earliest stages and you are size, level of development, environment and the degree of dependency"
There are only two pertinent differences that inform the (rational) abortion debate: 1). The inability of a human being to hold rights if those rights are suborned by the "rights" of a parasite dependant, and 2). the critical difference of consciousness or sentience which defines a human "PERSON".
"You are "nothing" but a rather large speck of Protoplasm; so if small specks can be eliminated for the convenience of others, then those who are more powerful than you can do the same thing and eliminate you"
That is why it is so important that human rights attach to consciousness rather than "specks of protoplasm"--of whatever size.
"Size does not matter." OK, Girly!
"we do not, (nor should we) assign MORE value to human beings based of their level of development"
We do NOT assign human rights to human dna. Human dna is NOT a human person.
"Newborns do not posses any of the qualities that you arbitrarily deem necessary to qualify as a Human person worthy of protection or rights"
Not at birth--NO. (and none of these scientific regulations that humankind has adopted can be deemed "arbitrary). But when abortion is legal the child is a WANTED child so for those couple of months where it may not logically have interests or ends or desires..it is still desired. And the sacrifice of the mother or father is VOLUNTARY. It is LOVE.
"Do you advocate that mothers be allowed to kill their month old babies because they are too tired or poor to take care of them"
It is their property and if they wish to do so they WILL. It doesn't matter what you or I want them to do. There is no reason to think that in a rational society (which allows the abortion of specks of dna) that mothers will turn against their DESIRED and SENTIENT offspring. Indeed, even though it is not logically a human person, there is sufficient cultural precedence that we can truly ignore the philosophers when it comes to newborn. Once they can take in and utilize oxygen through lung power instead of umbilical I think there are sound grounds for a practical approach to societal cohesiveness.
"Partial birth abortion should be an unspeakable evil but people like you think it's just great"
You are an IDIOT. I don't think ANY abortion is a happy event for the mother or for society. But rights must not be decided for superstitious reasons for zygotes or spirits or God knows what fluff. RIGHTS ARE FOR LIVING CONSCIOUS PEOPLE
"we should not allow mothers to kill their unborn children for nothing more than convenience sake"
It is not our choice. She can abort her zygote with or without YOUR smug arrogance and religious superiority. When society supports human rights there are far less abortions and their are infinitely less unwanted babies born to suffer and be "accidentally" killed or engulfed by mouthy "debaters" who watch both the mother and her kids suffer and die.
"You can't seem to grasp that the science is very clear that an embryo is a unique living Human being."
Are you going stupid again??? There are so many living beings in your nose alone (never mind this planet) that they cannot be counted. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT???
Our species has a bias to the survival of our species. Our tribes have a bias toward the survival of our tribes.
"Finally; Dependency is not a reason to allow the killing of human beings"
Again you miss the point. 1). Human dna is NOT a human PERSON, and 2). the relationship of a zygote to the mother is much more than social dependency...it is BIOLOGICAL dependency. And RIGHTS attach to a SENTIENT biological entity. You cannot attach rights to mutually opposed interests and goals within the same biological entity. I don't have a right to turn left if you have a right to turn right and you happen to be a parasite in my body the size of a pencil tip and no nervous system or existence.
Therefore only ONE of us has a right to decide which direction to turn and IT AIN'T THE SPECK OF DUST WITH NO NERVOUS SYSTEM AND NO SENTIENT EXISTENCE AND NO INTERESTS, GOALS, OR ENDS TO DECIDE...IS IT?????
AND YOU CAN'T BOTH HAVE THE RIGHT TO DECIDE (with a conscious society under Allah or Jehovah, or Grandma, or YOU acting as proxy!).
Rights are not proxy, fella...
I used the metaphor of the "right to turn right". You know what I mean, RIGHT?? |
