Amazon.com Widgets
  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • Save the unborn

    It has a heartbeat, eyes a nose, it has hands and feet, fingers and toes its made from you, you created it and you shouldnt deny it a chance at life, what if your parents aborted you? Gave you no chance at life? Its not just blood and mucus its a baby its half of your genes how could you kill something so innocent?

  • They are human:

    Some say that the fetus is not human because he/she can't talk, or he/she can't walk, or he/she can't see. What about an infant, or a mentally challenged person, or the deaf? Are you saying that they are not human? I've even seen someone who said, "IT" is just tissue. For one, you never classify a human with "it" what if I called you "it" how would that make you feel? And we are all made of tissue, We are slowly developing into something greater than a fetus. A fetus is considered a fetus until it is out of the mothers womb. So u are saying, someone with a heartbeat isn't human, what are they aliens? NO! They are people who have the same right as a born child.

  • This debate is illogical and defies Science not just Religion/Morality.

    I can't believe this is still an argument. Outside of obvious religious and moral issues, pro-choice defies logic and science. Countless experiments have been conducted in the realm of science (not morality or religion) which include pain testing, heart rate, DNA, etc. Pain testing monitored heart rate to see if pain could be assessed, and it did! This was also conducted to see if a fetus would move away from pain (needle), and they did! DNA Experts conclude that the DNA between a fetus and an adult is nearly identical! What about flipping the argument onto death. Breathing could be used to acknowledge death, but science have moved to brain scans and the heart. For a doctor to confirm death, they have moved from breathing, to heart, to now brain. So based on this logic, both have been confirmed for fetus's, so therefor why aren't they applied to life! Now people will jump on here, and realistically I probably will never view this posting again. But you will have responses against me from people who are incapable of thinking objectively. But I can, and so should you!

  • The Logical (unbiased) truth.

    I can't believe this is still an argument. Outside of obvious religious and moral issues, pro-choice defies logic and science. Countless experiments have been conducted in the realm of science (not morality or religion) which include pain testing, heart rate, DNA, etc. Pain testing monitored heart rate to see if pain could be assessed, and it did! This was conducted by both

  • Abortion is Morally Wrong

    People that are Pro-Choice consider a new fetus to be of as much significance as "a flake of dandruff", although it has been scientifically proven that all fetuses are alive, and I would like to think that we live in a country where everyone has an equal right to life. Just because a woman may have to go through a certain level of emotional trauma in order to have a child, that does not justify discarding a living person into the trash. Abortion is absolutely awful, and should be completely outlawed in this country, with the possible exception for the life of the mother. A quote by Ronald Reagan: " It seems to me that all of those who are for abortion, have been born"

  • Not a living human being

    A human being is someone who can walk, or talk, or react to something. It can defend itself, it and argue with someone. A fetus is none of those things. This is a very religious and moral issue to debate about but it needs to be discussed and an answer needs to be decided.

  • Not a black and white question, different stages of development.

    This argument comes down to your religious and moral beliefs. A fetus only a few days old is a living organism but not a viable living breathing human. It's completely dependent on the mother. I wouldn't answer this question either yes or no, but given the broad question I would be forced to answer no, a fetus is not a living human until it reaches a certain stage of development.

  • Fetus' are NOT human beings!

    Aborting the fetus does not hurt it, it has no feelings nor does it have a heart beat until a certain point. The first 28 weeks is when you should get the aborting over with but maybe a week after would not make a difference. ALL the professional abortions are safe, none of the methods will damage having a child in the future.

  • Foetus versus human

    A foetus has the characteristics of life yes ie: composed of cells, having energy and so forth however it is not a viable living human being. The foetus cannot live without the "shelter and food" of the mother, it can not fend for itself, nor can it breathe if outside of the womb. A foetus doesnt have a brain to make concious decisions therefore cant be called a human being. We dont go around calling cells isnt human, only a developed baby can live outside of the womb, has a brain can support itself and LIVE!

  • No.

    A fetus is a stage in reproduction, it is an egg and a sperm, not a being. A fetus does not have eyes, ears, a nose, not even a heart beat. A human can talk, and listen and understand, can a fetus do those things? No, I didn't think so.

  • No--A fetus is not a living human being

    It is my belief that a fetus is not a living human being for most of its gestational period. Typical gestation is 40 weeks, and for most of those 40 weeks, a fetus does not even approach sentience. Would the average Pro-Life advocate feel that an embryonic cat or dog deserved the level of respect that same person feels about the proto-humans that are fetuses. In order to be human, a being must be alive--must have been born--and must be sentient--must be able to learn, to think, and to speak. Those who feel that life begins at conception do not think about the ramifications of that point of view. Many of those same people would be unwilling to show proper deference to a fully-mature being if she were female, pregnant, and her life were in danger from that same fetus; they would chose the fetus over the mother. It is nonsensical!

  • It doesn't meet all of the characteristics of life

    What the fetus meets
    Growth and Development
    All living things grow and develop. For example, a plant seed may look like a lifeless pebble, but under the right conditions it will grow and develop into a plant. Animals also grow and develop. How will the tadpoles change as they grow and develop into adult frogs?
    Organization:
    Being structurally composed of one or more cells — the basic units of life.
    Metabolism:
    Transformation of energy by converting chemicals and energy into cellular components (anabolism) and decomposing organic matter (catabolism). Living things require energy to maintain internal organization (homeostasis) and to produce the other phenomena associated with life.
    Response to stimuli:
    A response can take many forms, from the contraction of a unicellular organism to external chemicals, to complex reactions involving all the senses of multicellular organisms. A response is often expressed by motion; for example, the leaves of a plant turning toward the sun (phototropism), and chemotaxis.
    What it does't meet
    Adaptation:
    The ability to change over time in response to the environment. This ability is fundamental to the process of evolution and is determined by the organism's heredity, diet, and external factors.
    Reproduction:
    The ability to produce new individual organisms, either asexually from a single parent organism, or sexually from two parent organisms, "with an error rate below the sustainability threshold."
    Homeostasis:
    Regulation of the internal environment to maintain a constant state; for example, sweating to reduce temperature.

  • Alive is different from human

    A bundle of cells is technically life, in the way we classify bacterial colonies as life: scientifically. However the practical use behind this information defines the debate itself. The real ethical question we ask when we have this issue is whether said bundle of cells deserves the legal protections of an independent human. Is using stem cells an immoral use of human life? Is aborting a fetus murder? The real ethical question here is whether or not a fetus should BE TREATED as a human by governing bodies. In this question is likely where I stand differently from my "yes peers". I do believe that that a fetus is alive in scientific terms, but i disagree with the notion that a fetus should be granted the legal protections of a human, because said protection directly interfere with the mother's right to bodily integrity. We do not provide full legal protections to children either for that matter (though not to this extent). For example, in the US it is legal for a parent to strike their child, a direct contrary to any state or federal law regarding assault. Quite simply: a fetus is alive. But to extend the rights of a human being to said fetus is a gross overstep of any governing body.

  • A fetus is not a human.

    If a zygote is considered a human, isn't a skin cell the same? A zygote is a combination of the mother and fathers gene pool. A skin cell still contains that DNA. The only difference is the potential for life, and by that definition its not alive. It can't reproduce. Reproduction isn't cell division, its creating offspring. Therefore also making it not alive until between 14-18 weeks, when the issue acts on its own.

  • Don't be dumb

    How can this even be argued. This is a joke right. All the yes arguements are pathetic and so are the no's but cmon guys use your tiny heads why would a fetus be a human its like saying eating eggs is the same as eating fried chicken kind of common sense.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Anonymous says2013-06-21T15:23:56.860
I agree with one thing stated by these no voters. Some people are not human beings, and they are a very good example of such, since they can not think for themselves, care only about themselves, and do not have a heart. I suppose preemies are not living, breathing, people, because they didn't go full term, and therefore are not human beings. By useing their reasoning, it would be Okay to murder those children. It's Okay to kill a full term baby if they take it out feet first, but murder if they take it head first, then kill it. No wonder our society is becoming so illogical, and self serving. Pathetic, for sure. " Common sense"