First of all, if the heart is beating, you can see a human shape, and if it has fingers, toes, or bones it is a living, breathing human person. If you kill a human like this it is definitely murder. One of these humans MURDERED could have found the cure for CANCER! But they killed him/her. If people can't take care of a child, don't have one to begin with or better give the child to an adoption center. It is certainly better than murdering a child. A fetus is a DEVELOPING child. In the future, if it was out of the womb, the child would have been killed. The truth of the matter is that fetus' have hearts. THEY ARE ALIVE!
The link below is an example of a conviction in which a fetus is killed and the killer is charged with manslaughter, original charge was murder 2. So, currently the law allows a mother to abort without considering it murder, but it's murder if anyone else kills it. This is unjust. If this is true, we must downgrade killing a pregnant woman's fetus to an assault charge, nothing more... Let's see how that goes over with the population.
After about seven months growing in the womb, a human fetus spends most of its time asleep. Its brain cycles back and forth between the frenzied activity of rapid eye movement sleep and the quiet resting state of nonREM sleep.
Only 3 weeks and 1 day after FERTILIZATION the heart begins to beat.
SUCKING a thumb in the womb is a sign of a healthy baby to come, according to a study.
Touching different parts of the face and head can also be an indicator of how well a foetus is developing physically and psychologically.
Fetuses car hear: (Summarized, to the point)
Babies who listened to the CD in utero recognized the made-up words and noticed the pitch changes, which the infants who did not hear the CD did not, the researchers found. They could tell because their brain activity picked up when those words were played, while babies who didn’t hear the CD in the womb did not react as much.
“We have known that fetuses can learn certain sounds from their environment during pregnancy,” Eino Partanen, a doctoral student and lead author on the paper, said via email.
They look pretty alive to me....Challenge me to a debate if you wish.
When an organism, animal, human has a heart that beats, its proven that its living. When you kill a human its, murder. Why is it a difference to kill a baby in the mothers womb than after birth. Its the same thing. You are keeping this child who is living from having a future. It may not be murder in law, but if you have a contuse, then it should affect you.
Just because it is in a womb doesn't mean it isn't a human because technically it is alive after approximately 2 weeks it can feel pain or anything that happens. Like a human it can eat, drink anything a 2 month old can do but if you kill a 2 month old its murder but not if you kill a fetus
A baby is not bacteria!! From week 2 after conception the baby is fully alive and can feel anything that happens to it! Abortions are dismantling babies so that it is not called a baby anymore and therefor not classified as murder. It is murder, it is literally the same as ISIS decapitating people!!!!!!!!!!!!
Some 45% of people who don't have a brain to think it through say it's not murder. Think about it is murder, you're taking the fetus out of the womb and taking off its life support, what 2 month fetus is going to know how to survive on its own.
Abortion is not currently murder, from a legal perspective (at least where I live). For it to be murder the embryo/fetus would need to be considered a legal person. Can someone "prove" that personhood precedes birth? In a sense, yes. If we consider "successfully argue" comparable to "proving". If someone could make a compelling case that the unborn should be granted full legal rights and the status of person, then they would have grounds for calling abortion murder.
Science is yet to find solid evidence of WHEN a baby is conscious in the womb. If we had absolute proof that a baby is alive and has human definition of feelings, then abortion is bad. IF, however, the baby has not reached that stage, then you aren't destroying a life, you are simply doing the same thing you would to a chicken.
The brain begins to develop early on. Some say it cannot be alive if it is "brain dead". A fetus is never brain dead. It simply doesn't have the criteria that some people believe it requires in order to be considered alive. Point in fact... It is a growing organism from the start no argument about that.
Even most pro-lifers will refer to fetuses as "unborn", which is counterproductive to their point. A fetus doesn't have any fully developed organs or muscles (including the brain) and for many weeks it cannot breathe or hear. You can't really consider it alive if it isn't at least partially functional on its own.
Abortion when performed legally cannot be defined as murder as murder is unlawful. Ultimately a fetus is alive in the same way that a fungus, or a bacteria is alive (at least until late in the pregnancy) and I think we can all attest to how funguses and bacteria are treated.
Although science states that 'life begins at conception' and that means that abortion is a form of murder, I believe that it is not.
By law, a foetus is not considered a person.
The concept of personhood is different from the concept of human life. Human life occurs at conception, but fertilized eggs used for in vitro fertilization are, by the argument of the affirmative, also human lives and those not implanted are routinely thrown away. Is this murder, and if not, then how is abortion murder?
How can the termination of a foetus who is not a person, be considered as murder?
Murder is the unlawful killing of a person, and that's why abortion is not murder. Fetuses are not people, and it isn't against the law. Plus even if it fit the definition, it wouldn't matter. It's using the woman's body to survive, and she has the right to end it.
A fetus isn't considered a person under law. And as long as abortion is considered legal, which it will be for at least a very long time, it cannot be considered murder. A fetus is incapable of possessing the same conscious capacity as a newborn anyway. And, whether or not it feels pain is irrelevant considering there are methods to prevent fetal pain, and some can be developed in order to accomplish that task also.
A fetus isn't a baby. It's two different stages. A fetus is a potential to become a baby, just as a baby is not a potential to become a baby because it is already one. Aborting a fetus is not murdering a person, or killing a person. It's aborting a potential to become one before it becomes a baby.
Calling it nonhuman is false. It's very much a human, but the question lies in when it becomes a human being, because it isn't an individual yet (it's an individual when it becomes a true separate entity. As long as it's in her womb, connected to her by an umbilical cord, surviving off her body, both her body and the fetus's acting as one, it is not an individual. It is part of her.)
By law, it's not murder in both counts. Being that the concept of a person is not a consensus, and it likely never will, results in it remaining legal. As long as there are many say that it is not a person, and that it should be a woman's choice, it won't become illegal. It was stated in Roe v Wade too. If you don't want a fetus to be aborted, then don't abort the fetus that invades your body. There is no way that the Government will allow others to dictate what a woman does with her body. Invaders can be done with at will.
As one other person stated, it can only be categorized as "murder" if it is unlawful, which at the moment is not the case in the U.S.
The correct term to use would be "Genocide." Genocide is defined as "the deliberate killing of a large group of people..." Abortion only affects one group of people: unborn infants.
The word "people" is defined as "a collective of human beings."
"Human Beings" are simply defined as men, women, and children of the species homo sapiens.
"Children" are defined as human beings below the age of puberty or below the legal age of the majority.
On the debate of whether or not fetuses are really alive, the word "life" is defined as "the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death." (notice the key word, "capacity")
Unborn fetuses meet all of the definitive qualifications that makes someone a "person," so the argument that fetuses are not "people" is scientifically invalid, and if anyone tries to argue that point, they are stating opinion, not fact.
Abortion is a form of killing (killing defined as "causing death", death defined as "the end of life") and it exclusively affects only one kind of people (unborn babies), and that is known as genocide.
Therefore, Abortion=Genocide, not murder.
If the fetus were still in early development and unable to survive on its own, then an abortion is not clearly murder because the fetus was never "alive" in any meaningful way. Had the abortion not happened, the fetus could have just as easily been naturally miscarried anyways the day after.
I'm personally against abortion beyond the point where a fetus could survive outside the uterus if it were born prematurely. By that point, you should see it through and give the child up for adoption.