- 05 May 2021 10:55
I'm not going to respond to the OP because it's such a silly question, that I don't feel it's worth giving it the time or effort.
Anna's argument starts off by claiming that she believes that a foetus is a person in its own right.
Which is fine. She can believe what she likes, but any attempt to claim tax relief or other financial benefits off the government for it will soon put her right.
She then goes on to claim foetal personhood as a definite fact, which is not fine.
So her entire argument goes completely out of the window, but even if it didn't, it doesn't add anything to the abortion argument.
It's very common for pro lifers to mistakenly confuse social dependency with physical dependency.
Other members have already pointed that out to her, so there's no need for me to belabour the point.
However, I will add, that when my first pregnancy ended in a miscarriage whereby the embryo I was carrying got flushed away down the loo, there was no investigation of any kind, as there would have been had my newborn disappeared.
The hospital staff asked if I'd saved any clots, but were unconcerned when I hadn't.
Because my newborn baby was a person and therefore had a right not to be killed.
My embryo wasn't.
There was no birth or death certificate. Nothing. As a person it didn't exist.
My feelings at the time were mainly of disappointment. It was a wanted pregnancy, but I was philosophical. Something went wrong and that was that. It's very common. Try again.
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” -Socrates.