Yes it's wrong and not morally, it's just plain incorrect. You can't compare the growth of an organism of your own DNA in your body to become its own individual to a "parasite". I'm not saying abortion is wrong or should be banned either, but a fetus is not a parasite. Get real.
Not only do I feel it is wrong in the sense, it degrades an organism, but it is not scientifically accurate at all. A parasite is an organism of a SEPARATE species, fetuses are organism of the same species. Although in SOME animals, the fetus can have side effects, it is not only inadequate to the scale of an actual parasite, but there most fetuses of a species that are completely neutral. And living off an organism does not equal parasite, millions of organisms live off others all the time and would never be considered a parasite. And parasites can survive away from their host. Fetuses usually do not have this ability.
The ridding of a parasite is not a catastrophe. But what if the "parasite" is a fetus? If you kill something that is going to mature into a human being, you are, in essence, killing a human; you are preventing a human from existing. And as far as terminology goes, doesn't a baby require more attention outside the womb than inside, deeming it even more parasitic? Using this mindset, a newborn is even more of parasite, which really demonstrates how absurd this mindset really is.
When I hear the word parasite I think of sickness and germs, a fetus is neither. I don't think it is appropriate to speak that way about a fetus because it could possibly be a real life child being born in very short amount of time. I think it sounds so harsh and disrespectful to call a fetus a parasite when I am picturing a baby.
I see that 62% of people think it's not wrong to call a fetus a parasite. Common sense should tell you that a parasite is a different species than the host, an invader that doesn't share any DNA with the host. Also if something is a parasite it's always a parasite, it doesn't just stop being a parasite at some point, and I don't know about you but I'm not getting my nutrients from my mother's body.
The fetus obtains nutrients from the mother. Oftentimes, this is at the expense of the mother's own health (morning sickness, gestational diabetes, peripartum cardiomyopathy, joint issues, urinary incontinence, anemia, depression, toxemia, HELLP syndrome, acute fatty liver, etc.). I don't see why it is such a big deal to argue against this. By definition, a baby is a parasite.
If you distill down what a parasite is to a few sentences it would be easy to see why some would call a fetus a parasite, but that would completely ignore several reasons why a fetus is not a parasite. While a parasite and a fetus may share some similar qualities there are several significant differences. First, host-parasite relationship is one of conflict, while the mother-baby relationship is intrinsically cooperative. Host and parasite are locked in an arms race: the parasite evolves ever more complex techniques of avoidance, while the host evolves ever more complex techniques of detection and attack.But a fascinating review paper in 2010 suggests this is the wrong way to think about pregnancy--that, in fact, the cooperative choreography between mother and child is far more sophisticated:
The trophoblast [placenta] and the maternal immune system have evolved and established a cooperative status, helping each other for the success of the pregnancy. This cooperative work involves many tasks, some of which we are just starting to unveil.
In it's simplest form, the relationship between the fetus and the mother is a parasitic one. The fetus is a separate life form who is using the nutrients of the mother to grow and sustain itself. The problem I have is calling a fetus a "parasite". A fetus has not invaded the mother and taken up residence against the "will" of the body. There are very well organized structures designed to provide the fetus with the necessary nutrients, hormones, etc. they need. From an evolutionary perspective, a fetus is of great advantage to mother as it allows her to continue her family line. Some definitions for parasite also specify that a parasite must be of a different species, which obviously isn't the case in pregnancy.
I see plenty of angry emotion in the pro-parasite crowd, while decrying the emotion on the other side. But what their view reveals is the same type of dehumanizing and even demonizing verbal construct the powerful have always used when they want to justify the murder of another group of human beings. One of the better articles on this : https://www.quora.com/Can-a-fetus-be-scientifically-and-biologically-categorized-as-a-parasite
While not a true parasite, a fetus is 100% parasitic on the mother's body. It is introduced via conception from outside the woman's body, it then proceeds to grow faster than any cancer by feeding off the women's blood, to the host's detriment. This is a totally parasitic relationship.
The definition of a fetus is a being that lives inside of a house and obtains nutrients from said host. Technically speaking a fetus applies for that definition. I don't understand why people are getting so angry about this. The fetus cannot feel any emotion as far as I know and cannot get offended so what difference does it make. Saying that the fetus is a product of God, [which is not a proven fact] does not disqualify the characteristics of a parasite.
It's just a fucking parasite, and if one day I get pregnant I'll fucking kill this shit that has no fucking right to take over my body. I don't want to live for a parasite, I don't want to ruin my life with a parasite that will just get bigger and bigger.
Its mean not cool and mean mean mean and mean and not cool and mean.They aren't able to exist on their own until after birth so in fact they are a parasite attached inside the host. It's the same as a heart worm which can grow in many areas of a body and migrate to the heart effectively killing the host. Well a human parasite migrates out into the world and becomes a baby.
I believe people call it a parasite because it makes them feel not guilty of aborting the child, I'm pro choice only for the fact that getting an abortion is always possible legally or illegally so for the well being of the eldest human i approve the choice to abort, however I don't morally condone it. However anyone who is an extremist on either side of the equation wether pro-choice or pro-life is truly the real parasite here. Never forget adoption IS an option, i know tons of people that were adopted and i give thanks that they were given for adoption instead of aborted. People who abort because of monetary reasons or because the child is born with a sickness disgust me, how can they pretend a life with hardship is a life that isn't worth living? However I would support a person that had an abortion because of morally understandable reasons ie: rape, children born into war and that are going to be tortured or raped etc.
A fetus is 100% parasitic on the host's body. It is fertilized in the host via insemination and it grows faster and larger than any cancer. Without the host's blood, the fetus would not be able to survive. Its impact on the host can be debilitating, and the host gains nothing biologically from the relationship - except to pass along its genes.
A fetus is parasitic on a woman's body. It draws everything from the woman's blood, which puts a strain on the woman. It is introduced into the woman's body via conception and grows faster and larger than any cancer. Since the host contributes everything to its growth and the host gains nothing biologically in return, a fetus in a woman is a classic parasitic relationship.
If the question were is the relationship between mother and fetus parasitic any knowledgeable person has to say YES! I don't even mean it negatively; it just is simply 100% a one-sided relationship. Certainly many people choose and want this parasite, but to call it anything other than what it is just foolishness.
I am someone with an identity and life. I have every right and freedom as you do. There is a thing inside me I do not want. It cannot live outside my body. In fact it is taking everything good from me for itself and leaving me the poor leftovers. These are proven clinical facts. So I want it removed. I will see my Doctor. And that should be the only person I should have to see. A society that would force any other alternative on another individual is buried in religious barbarianisizm.
an organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host's expense.
a person who habitually relies on or exploits others and gives nothing in return
Theres the definition of parasite. So yes a fetus would fall easily into those terms for those people getting all worked up on this debate. It has nothing to do with the same or different species.
Technically, I believe the definition of "parasite" specifies an organism that lives in or on an organism of a different species, but when you consider the breadth of medical problems that can come with pregnancy, it becomes clear that for many females, the young growing within rob her of vitality and may indeed cause death.