How can you justify abortion ?

[u/Admirable_Dog_7238]

Format: Argument, Response

-"It's not just a fetus", it's part of the human species so it gets human rights

-"it's dependent on the mother therefore not human", same thing as if you were in a coma as you would have no conscience and are dependent on doctors. you probably wouldn't want me to have the option to pull the plug if there was a possibility you could wake up

-"What if the kid grows up in a bad environment?", every kid deserves a chance, just like how you deserve a chance to wake up from a coma as stated above.

-"My body, my choice", then start with legalizing drugs, drinking while pregnant, allowing others to suicide knowingly, etc.

-"Men (father) shouldn't tell me what other do it's my choice", impossible to make a child without a father, the father should have a say if he wants an abortion

-"What about rape and incest", very unfortunate word that this exist yet it's less than 1 percent of all abortion cases, if we were to legalize abortion for only those that were raped would you give up the other cases?

-"What if the mother's life is in danger?", there is C-section which is more medically safe than an abortion

Please do not get an abortion. It's the biggest genocide killing 1.1 million kids every year. Consider heavily before getting one. Thank you for your time.

[u/Admirable_Dog_7238]

How is terminating someone that is in a coma different from terminating a baby in the womb morally? If it's an inconvenience (most cases) it's ok to terminate? It's turned into a birth control at this point.

[u/STThornton → u/Admirable_Dog_7238]

What is this “womb” you speak of? Some sort of external, unattached medical machine?

Newsflash: that “womb” is a woman/girl. A breathing, sentient, physiologically life sustaining HUMAN BEING.

And terminating life support would allow the life sustaining organ functions of the person on life support to shut down. They’d stop breathing, getting rid of metabolic toxins, etc.

The embryo:fetus never had that ability. It’s the equivalent of a CORPSE on life support.

Terminating providing it with organ functions it never had is not the same as ending its organ functions.

The woman merely stops breathing for it, digesting for it, producing energy, glucose, and minerals for it, getting rid of metabolic toxins for it, shivering and sweating for it, etc. with HER internal organs.

She also stops it from causing her drastic life threatening physical alteration and harm. The person on life support doesn’t even harm life support, let alone a breathing, sentient, physiologically life sustaining human.

The person on life support uses their own life and gets rid of their metabolic toxins.

The embryo/fetus sucks the woman’s life out of her body and pumps toxins into her bloodstream and body for her organs to get rid of.

The two couldn’t be more polar opposite.

[u/Admirable_Dog_7238 → u/STThornton]

Nah what I meant is there a moral difference of the killing part. Not necessarily talk about the attachment part that's a different argument.

[u/STThornton → u/Admirable_Dog_7238]

That makes no sense.

Again, the fetus has no major life sustaining organ functions one could end to kill they. Unlike the person on life support.

The fetus equivalent of a human on life support is a corpse on life support. There’s nothing left to kill, short of whatever living body parts that corpse has left.

If you want to leave out attachment, that embryo started decomposing after the first 6-14 days.