Abortion

apparently abortion isn't a political issue now? fucking kike mods

continuing this thread

Attached: foetus.jpg (250x240, 7K)

>do you call an acorn a tree
I wouldn't. But I wouldn't call a sapling a tree either. A tree in colloquial usage is only really used to refer to adults. Not really relevant to the debate here. You'd probably stomp on the sprout of a tree, which'd be the equivalent of a newborn, without even noticing or caring. So the tree comparison is really irrelevant.

Now, back on topic. Being shat out of a vagina doesn't suddenly give you human characteristics you didn't have just moments before. Ergo, if a newborn is a person, then a foetus moments from birth is a person. Therefore we can conclude that personhood begins at sometime in the womb. Now, if, as you claim, that point is not conception, then you must define a point and justify it. So go ahead and stop dodging.

>It transforms from a submerged aquatic growth into its own living being. In biology we call the woman's egg an amniotic sac. It doesn't have a hard calcium shell like hatching animals do, but it is literally an egg. The fetus is submerged in the amniotic fluid until birth/hatching just like any other egg. It's literally an egg until the day the woman's "water" breaks. And that's when the fetus dramatically changes from a submerged organism to a living, breathing human being in our world. The ductus venosus and hepatic portal vein suddenly close off. The lungs begin to open and the skin is exposed to air for the first time. The nervous system lights up with a overload of sensory data. The alimentary canal starts looking for food for the first time.
>submerged aquatic growth
lmao nice squirming, jew. that "submerged aquatic growth" moments before birth is identical in every way to the newborn except it breaths through its mother rather than it's own lungs. and apparently that, and that alone, is what differentiates a "growth" which we can murder at will from a person? just the ability to breath on your own?

by that logic anyone on any sort of respiratory device in a hospital is not a person. interesting theory senpai.

Sneed

I unironically see nothing wrong with abortion before 10 weeks. Change my mind.

If it's being backed by the government, it is always because of an evil plan.

why 10 weeks

based

Pass not thy seed through to fire to Molech.

Are you a murderer every time someone in Africa dies because you wanted to buy a smartphone? No, because lack of direct intervention to help someone yourself is not a crime.

If every time that African starving tries to put his bread in his mouth and you restrain him so he starves, then that's a crime, cause you're intervening to prevent him from feeding.

See the difference? Intervention is what determines whether something is a crime or not.

In order to remove that fertilized egg from the host guaranteeing it won't develop into a child you need to intervene, thus you're preventing someone from developing a life through direct action.

That's why abortion is nothing like dumping sperm away, and that's why abortion is murder.

Takes you 10 weeks to decide.


That's 2 months and a half.

Attached: tumblr_na8u4fnKFM1s3ayobo1_1280.png (500x397, 463K)

their response is usually some mumbo jumbo bullshit that boils down to magic

because it's not a baby at 10 weeks, it's a fucking bean with no mental world. Stop being a christcuck.

From what moment becomes a baby? Birth? Then you will agree to kill a 8 month person?

If there's a fire and you can only save one, a 10 week old embryo or an 8 month old baby, what would you pick?

Stop evading the question, when do you define it as a baby?

living people always take priority, retard. that's why when the mother's life is endangered by the baby there's no debate involved with keeping the mom safe.

if a 10 week old embryo was lying on the ground in front of you would you stomp on it if I told you to?

>Jews push for abortion
>Always do the opposite of what Jews say
Looks like I’m against abortion

A newborn or anything older. I don't think a 6 month old fetus is a baby, but there's no point in aborting when you're that far along. Now answer my question.
That question doesn't even make sense. The embryo would be already dead.

you're a real piece of work dodging these questions as much as you are.

based leaf

An embryo cannot live anywhere that isn't in a uterus like environment. An embryo would be dead. It cannot sustain life without the mothers body. You're asking me if I would step on a dead embryo? Gross.

The birth canal isn't magic. It doesn't impart the properties of "baby" as it's coming out.

so how does your extreme hypothetical work? can't you use more than 5 of those brain cells?

You make no sense. Gather your thoughts before you address me again.
A baby is not a 10 week old embryo.

Attached: not-your-body-not-your-choice-abortion-is-murder.jpg (395x480, 31K)

>An embryo
Are you too retarded to know the difference between a zygote, embryo, and fetus? You’re embarrassing yourself

There’s no such thing as a 10 week old embryo it’s classified as a fetus by that point. Maybe read a book first next time?

Attached: post-abortion-regret.jpg (645x469, 28K)

The sacrifice of children to Satan is at the core of modern politics.

Attached: image.jpg (1583x2048, 445K)

A 10 week old fetus is alive however. My point is the thing inside the womb and the thing in your arms is the same thing. You want to get lost in semantics because that's what you have to do to justify it. The birth process doesn't make it go from bundle of cells to distinct human. It's not magic.