Is this the real reason liberals love abortion?
- Thread starter tinfoil
- Start date
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
I've always thought that you made a pretty good argument for retroactive abortion! 
apple0154
MEOW
(Excerpt) If a full-term baby 3/4 of the way born doesn’t have a right to life, why would a new-born baby the rest of the way out of the birth canal? Is there some substantial difference between the two? Here you have no rights and are a clump of cells. Move 6 inches from that spot and you suddenly, magically receive your rights and are a human person?
It goes the other way, as well. If a new-born baby has a right to life, so does a baby halfway through the birth canal, or still in the womb, and so on all the way back to conception. Intellectual consistency requires a complete opposition to abortion, or complete support of abortion, even up to infanticide, as those intellectually consistent ethicists have proposed. When we realize those are the only two logical options, the right choice is easily identified. (End)
As for the substantial difference between a fetus and a baby maybe we can start with the fact that once the first breath is taken a valve starts to close at the heart redirecting blood flow. The redirection of the blood flow, among other things, results in certain veins in the body atrophying and becoming cords which anchor the organs. If one doesn’t think that’s a major change I suggest a quick chat with one’s doctor. Perhaps one could phrase the question, “If blood flow to/from an organ is changed so that a vein atrophies would that be kool?”
If one doesn't understand the significant difference between a fetus and a baby and doesn't want to take the time to visit a doctor a simple test would be to fill a bucket with water and stick one's head in it. Let us know if there's a significant difference between a liquid environment and a gaseous one.
Airstrip One
Completely Effed
What happens to astronauts when they go into orbit?