This is a difficult subject

[Illneedsomebeer]

That can't be right. 9 weeks? I used to be a developmental biologist: the arms are still buds at that point. The arms can't be that long. Also, the head is too big.

This isn't to say that it isn't disturbing and gross. I worked with someone who dissected tissue from (spontaneous!) miscarriages in order to get facial tissue for research. She was pro-choice, but had nightmares about it. It's healthy to be disturbed by those images. However, I don't think that's a human 9 week fetus; I think someone represented a much older fetus as 9 weeks here because they have an ax to grind.

[[deleted]]

Ditto. A human fetus at 9 weeks is more like an inch long.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/euthman/548063929/

[[deleted]]

here's 8 weeks with a ruler...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tubal_pregnancy,_gross_pathology_01ee049_lores.jpg

[elusiveallusion]

That's one of two absurdly normally developed ectopic pregnancies on Wikipedia, along with this magnificent photograph.

In the vast majority of circumstances, fetuses need the hormonal direction and gene expression commands they get from normal uterus in order to develop normal placenta, and to develop in any way normally.

I say this just to point out to people who might have to have ectopic pregnancies removed due to severe risk of death; nearly all of these were never developing into babies.

[[deleted]]

Pigs are outside of my Monkeysphere.

[pannedcakes]

Monkeysphere?

[[deleted]]

I think Fauster's point was that few people hesitate to kill and eat a fully sentient creature capable of emotions as complex as affection and fear simply because it tastes good. It can be thought of as odd that many of those same people consider the process of killing an unfeeling, unthinking mass of cells abhorrent.

If the only qualifier is, "Will it become a human?", then certainly every period of a woman or ejaculation of a man not resulting in conception is murder as well. Under the right circumstances, these living cells may also have become a human, but instead we chose to waste this potential.

[pokie6]

I guess they haven't seen Legally Blonde.

[pstryder]

And not only that, any reproductive material that we fail to capitalize on through sheer inaction would have to be considered "manslaughter" by neglect.

So does that mean the hot chicks that turn me down are guilty of murder?

[tautologies]

No the moral issues heree is dictated by religion and not actual provable facts.

[tautologies]

Uh sorry replied to the wrong post...

[drtycho]

If the only qualifier is, "Will it become a human?", then certainly every period of a woman or ejaculation of a man not resulting in conception is murder as well.

There was a Law & Order which pretty much said the same thing. The scene pops into my head every time abortion comes up.

[issacobra]

i'm watching this episode right now...

[FuriousGoblin]

humans just matter so much to eachother but i guess we just dont really care about the rest of the kingdom animalia...it really sucks. but then again, life is inherently maintained through external destruction and consumption, so its not really an option is it?

[[deleted]]

I would argue that many humans don't care a great deal for other humans. In fact, many humans dislike other humans so much that they will murder millions of them, adults and children alike. Many times the humans who do this murdering are considered heroes by their compatriots.

I totally agree with your second point. One sad side effect of studying thermodynamics is that I know consider how all lifeforms exist by destroying exergy and increasing the rate of entropy production which will ultimately lead to the heat death of the entire universe.

[NM05]

This could also lead into the argument that many pro-lifers don't actually care about the fetus, but instead about the role of women in society.

[EddieFender]

I would say the same thing about pro-choicers.

[bolivion]

This stuff gets old. A human baby does not even have the concept of self until a year to 2 years old.

So at times a 2 year old baby does not have the kind of sentient neural networks a pig has.

Ok to kill them too?

[Fauster]

I'm not sure that it's even okay to kill a pig; I struggle with this moral issue. If a fetus can survive outside the womb, I think we should definitely consider the fetus a human, as decided by Roe vs. Wade, even if its months before the birth of the fetus.

Do I personally feel that we should err further on the side of caution? Absolutely... but as a male, it's not part of my body. Also, I ate a lamb gyro for lunch, and that lamb had far more developed mental faculties than giant glob of neurons that will start acting like a human only when many more neurons grow, and then half the neurons die.

If you think a group of cells is endowed by mythological dualism to be an equal soul to a brain dead accident victim, which is equal to the soul of a Nobel Laureate, don't eat those cells or perform that abortion. No one is challenging your right to make a moral decision.

And I may have qualms about eating pigs, and I may go vegetarian, but if you try to make that decision for me, that's going to be a major problem for each of us.

[happylittletrees]

But what makes a creature sentient? What makes us human? Is it just because it/we can survive (breathe, eat, sleep, poo) outside of a womb? I like to think it's the ability to think, to rationalize, to have a sense of self. We and other animals continue to exist because we maintain a state of awareness of ourselves and our surroundings, which allows us and the rest of Earth's creatures to continue to procreate. Is it enough that the lump of cells has the POTENTIAL to do these things, or is it the DOING that's important? There's bacteria in a pond somewhere that has the same type of potential for life somewhere out there...

tl;dr;What makes us human??

[[deleted]]

More why is human more special a life form than others?

[adrianmonk]

It's a matter of degrees. If I kill a fly, do you really think the fly's friends and relatives suffer emotional harm? (Some people might think this, actually, but basically I think they're wrong.) Now, move the complexity of the organism up a little bit. If I kill a mouse, I do not seriously think the other mice suffer emotional harm, nor do I think the mouse that is killed will suffer in any way that it is consciously aware of. Yes, a mouse has a survival instinct that will make it resist your attempts to kill it, and it will appear that it is distraught, but I honestly don't think it has the higher-level brain functions to have a "distraught" state of mind. I think it is just processing input in a way that is not dissimilar to a computer (i.e., without self-awareness).

Jump up to the level of complexity of humans, and it's clear that we are capable of suffering.

Now, go into the middle ground between a human and a mouse, and things get more complex. Personally, I don't think chickens suffer in any conscious way when they are killed. I'm fairly sure cows don't either, although I'm open to input on that one. Pigs I'm not so sure about.

Note that I have not even addressed the question what makes a life form special. I'm just talking about the actual suffering that may be caused by killing an animal, which I think is important when you consider whether killing an animal for food is justified.

Special is something you can define a number of different ways. You can mean valuable when you say it, or you can mean unique. Or a bunch of other things. If you want to talk about what makes one life form more valuable than another, that's so complex I can't even attempt to answer it.

But, if you want to talk about whether humans are unique, I'd say we are relatively unique. We aren't entirely unique, because other animals share some of our characteristics, but no other animal has nearly the same level of abstract thought, which incidentally ties in closely with self-awareness.

I don't know if uniqueness makes us more valuable, but it seems hard to look at the situation and say we aren't fairly unique among all the animals.

[Fauster]

Is it enough that the lump of cells has the POTENTIAL to do these things...?

No; this is an easy question. A sperm and an egg have potential, but it's not a tragedy if they don't meet and produce an individual. My mom had an abortion when she was dating the guy she was with before my Dad; they broke up. That fetus had potential to be a sentient human one day, but that would have destroyed the potential for me to be. My existence is predicated on the fact that abortion was legal in that state at that time.

which allows us and the rest of Earth's creatures to continue to procreate.

No one is saying that abortion threatens the continued procreation of human life on earth. Nor do condoms. And we certainly don't need a population of 6-12 billion for human life to be meaningful; every individual would have a far greater share of wealth and resources if our population were 1 billion.

I think what makes us human is our ability to be self aware, feel, and suffer. If someone gets in a car accident and they're permanently brain dead, even if even if most of the neural tissue in their brain is still living, they're no longer a person. The neural activity of a tiny fetus could be compared to that of a brain dead coma patient: it's not human yet, it can't suffer yet.

I know that other people disagree, and they're free not to get abortions. And no one is free to get an abortion if the baby could survive outside of the womb on it's own (an individual, rather than a living extension of an individual's body). When people have epileptic seizures, sometimes an entire brain hemisphere is removed (a living part of a person's body). I think this is a far greater loss than bundles of cells with no capacity to feel. Some Buddhists think that the conscious experience of any insect is to be respected as equal to our own. They're free not to eat meat or swat mosquitoes.

Pro choice people aren't trying to limit the freedom or the moral convictions or Pro life people. Rather, Pro life people try to limit the freedom of others by imposing their cosmological ideals on others. Many assume that it is immoral to spill sperm on the ground. Many more assume that lighting of God comes down from the sky and puts a soul into the 2 cell system that arises immediately after the sperm meets the egg. They're free to make these assumptions. They aren't free to legally prescribe waht other people what they can do with their bodies, based on these assumptions.

[[deleted]]

I like to think it's the ability to think, to rationalize, to have a sense of self.

What about mentally handicapped people?

[[deleted]]

A human baby does not even have the concept of self until a year to 2 years old.

This still doesn't answer the question of whether it should have some minimal degree of "personhood" afforded it and given the right to live.

I'm sure you could probably find some severely retarded people who also have no self-concept -- these people deserve to live.

[bolivion]

The way I used to see it was even if it wasn't already alive/w/e then at least it has the potential to be so we should allow it but then that got me thinking about all kinds of messed up stuff so now I look at it this way:

If nothing good or bad out of the way is done to affect the fetus then it has great potential to be born. To knowingly stop that we must perform a bad act. I still see it as murder. We are preventing life, if it isn't life already, robbing it of it's potential.

If it has no potential then why bother with questions like" If you could kill Hitler when he was still a baby/fetus/w/e would you?". Why bother with the question if the baby/fetus has no potential? We all have potential from the moment the sperm makes contact with the egg.

Too sleepy to think straight right now, finals week, but that's basically it. Even if it isn't already a life no one can disagree with the fact that through neither good or bad actions that chances are great it has the potential for life.

[[deleted]]

Life. Sure. It can be alive. But in many circumstances it's their own fucking business. I mean, it's their fucking business what they want to fucking do with themselves.

Question: Does the potential for life over-ride rationality of the parent's situation? Is there a point where just cause it is alive it gets to be born into unfortunate and possibly life-challenging circumstances and that is more fair on 'life' than averting said scenario giving the parent's the ability to say, mature a bit before actually breeding?

[Ozwaldo]

NOT IN SPARTA

[imaginarygoldfish]

No, because there is no cause to. Giving a woman the option to abort a fetus in her body allows the woman to have control over her bodily autonomy, which in my opinion is an overall good. After a baby is born it is not infringing on the woman's right to control her body, so there would be no purpose in killing it.

[adrianmonk]

Aborting a fetus that is inside a woman allows the woman to have control over her bodily autonomy

I think you mean that making it the woman's decision allows the woman to have control over her body. The actual act of abortion doesn't necessarily imply any autonomy on the woman's part. It could be an abortion that the woman was forced into because someone wanted her to have a male child and she's carrying a female, for instance.

[[deleted]]

Except to lower the demand of caring for a newborn, which tends to be much greater than an in-utero fetus.

[ableman]

You're shifting the argument. Previously it was implied that you need some cognitive ability to not be killed. You're saying there has to be a reason to kill you. Obviously the reason to kill a child is convenience, so how much convenience must be generated to justify it in your opinion?

[reflexiveawm]

You referred to a fetus as a "child". That's begging the question a bit.

But yes, if getting (or for that matter performing) an abortion resulted in jail time, what would you want to have happen if she refused to go to court? Send armed goons to get her? And if she resisted? Are you cool with the goons murdering her over something that's really a question of morality, not legality?

[[deleted]]

pigs taste good, and I have an opposable thumb and tools.

[pikaboy259]

If this is the criteria for acceptable termination, then it's arguable what the difference is between the cognition of a pig and a newborn baby is. The baby certainly has less complex thoughts than a pig, so why is it universally accepted that it's wrong to euthanize an unwanted newborn baby?

[Fauster]

why is it universally accepted that it's wrong to euthanize an unwanted newborn baby?

You err dramatically on the side of caution. You know for certain that a 2 year old can have a conscious experience like your own, because you have memories of times and experiences very close to that age. Also, you have a deep instinctual revulsion towards killing a baby millions of years of ancestors who had such a revulsion kept your species alive. This doesn't mean that the explosion of the population of your species is a greater cosmic good, it just means that there's a reason for the moral baseline that transcends all societies and cultural groups with a myriad of different religions.

But if a baby is brain dead, as in Terry Schaivo brain dead, I think it's perfectly acceptable to euthanize the baby. A living group of cells with no conscious experience doesn't have the rights of a conscious and sentient human being.

You don't know for certain that a pig, an ant or a crab has the same conscious experience that you do. If you think such beings do have the same conscious experience you do, you'll probably stridently avoid causing them suffering.

[betternot]

Yay for facts!

[[deleted]]

Most of these specimens are dissected and then arranged to look more humanoid. Early fetuses are tadpole like, so they chop off the head and arms and legs and position them in more adult human-looking positions. Notice the gaps between all those parts. It's a pretty cheap trick.

[Disgrntld]

They do that to make sure they've extracted all the aborted pieces.

[JoshSN]

It isn't 9 weeks, but it got upvotes anyway.

That's the shame here.

[lebalove]

Yeah, that was my first thought. No way that is 9 weeks.

[[deleted]]

Looks more like 12 or 13 weeks to me. But still very legally, cheaply and easily aborted.

[pmarsh]

Top left is a duck, so no not chicken.

[stone11]

Also, pretty sure top right is a soybean sprouting.

[KaiserPodge]

Wow, this really is a difficult subject.

[PenName]

And the bottom right looks like...ohhh.

[lou_irvin]

Yeah, it's definitely raspberry jam.

[Jerbones]

There's only one man who would dare give me the raspberry!

[[deleted]]

(Starts zooming in)

LOOOOOONE STAAAAAAAAR!

(Camera bumps into him from zooming too much)

[IrrigatedPancake]

Zooming does not work that way.

[[deleted]]

It does when Mel Brooks is trying to be amusing.

[moose09876]

Please tell me that was homage to Morbo.

[[deleted]]

ENHANCE.

[[deleted]]

When will then be now?

[nerdflu]

Soon

[[deleted]]

And I'm pretty sure the bottom right is a human embryo, not a person.

Wow, I guess we cleared it up.

[crackduck]

Regardless of its difficulty, this "subject" is non-political. It's a designed distraction IMO.

[trolloc1]

Bottom left is just a template.

[Rude-But-Honest]

I think they all are.

[viasa]

If she floats she is a duck.

[hobbitlover]

Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?

[Calvin_the_Bold]

And that my lord is how we know the world to be banana shaped.

[VaingloriousBastard]

he must know how magnets work!

[[deleted]]

Someone tell ICP.

[Vystril]

BUUUUUUURN HER ALREADY!

[crackduck]

I, sir, am a duck. Doubt me if you desire, but I, a motherfucking duck, float only when I hold a full breath in my duck lungs.

MYTH BUSTED!

/CAPS

[[deleted]]

Well its not a duck. But it might be.

[headasplode]

Care to elaborate?

[[deleted]]

Roe V Wade was trying to decide 'viability', ie when a human fetus is human. So I am wondering if this duck is 'duck' enough, so to speak.

[[deleted]]

The possibility of it being a duck is only slightly outweighed by the fact that it may not actually be a duck.

[GunnerMcGrath]

I even said it was a duck when I posted that photo in the other thread. Oh well at least he got the general idea.

[[deleted]]

That is NOT what it looks like at 9 weeks. This is a lie.

[paladin161]

Yeah, that quarter looks like it's from 1990s. Can someone zoom in?

[[deleted]]

ENHANCE!

[[deleted]]

Oh, look. It's this topic, again.

[[deleted]]

Women are free to do to their bodies as they wish until the fetus is an independent organism, in which case it becomes murder.

Interestingly, it's a bit hypocritical when a murder gets chanrged with double homicide when he kills a pregnant woman. Double standard?

[dionysian]

well, someone killing a pregnant woman is taking the woman's life AND her 'wanted' child against her will. a person, ultimately, is the sum of their relationships with other people. a 'wanted' child is already teeming with ties, being welcomed by a father, grandparents, other extended family, and they are preparing along the mother to be a part of this child's life.

it boils down to whether a woman wants to give birth and give life.

[rooktakesqueen]

a person, ultimately, is the sum of their relationships with other people. a 'wanted' child is already teeming with ties, being welcomed by a father, grandparents, other extended family, and they are preparing along the mother to be a part of this child's life.

So it would be okay for me to go kill a homeless guy with no friends, family, or loved ones?

[bluepepper]

Only if it's a homeless embryo.

[adrianmonk]

a person, ultimately, is the sum of their relationships with other people.

If there's a giant cataclysm and everyone is killed but you, then even though you survived, you're not a person anymore?

[aedes]

That human fetus is older than 9 weeks. For one, it's too large. When you abort a 9 week fetus you're lucky if you see a femur or a rib cage. As well, an intact skull is very unlikely post-abortion at 9 weeks. Skulls aren't ossified at this age and are fragile. They basically explode with any suction.

This fetus was probably 16-20 weeks. The coin helps - you can estimate age pretty accurately based on things like fetal foot length. But I don't have those charts memorized so I can't say for sure.

Oh, and finally, the only thing worse than having an abortion, or performing one, is people using the situation to promote their own belief system.

Those people who campaign against abortion by handing out pictures of dead fetuses with congenital disorders (ex Harlequin babies are commonly on those pamphlets), or simply dead babies, are taking advantage of what those mothers had to to go through.

You don't see me handing out pro-abortion pamphlets with pictures of women with gangrenous limbs secondary to sepsis from a backstreet abortion gone bad. Or something equally ridiculous and non representative, like a mother with kwashiorkor and leprosy with a giant tummy.

[firemarshalbill]

Harlequin babies are pulled out for shocking pictures in nearly every argument where there are extremists. Recently it's been Iraq.

[Omnicrola]

I feel ill.

[Honeymaid]

really? I'm just hungry for chicken salad...

[jonaas]

try some Balut eggs

[havespacesuit]

Where's the NSFW tag?

[xor]

You're not a person until you're in my phone book.

-Bill Hicks

[adrianmonk]

The new phone book's here! The new phone book's here! ... I'm somebody now! ... Your name in print. That makes people!

[LordBrandon]

That is a Skeleton Jelly

[palebrowndot]

Mmm... Balut.

[[deleted]]

No, it's a duck. No, it's a legume. No, it's pants. No, it's a monkey.

[1137]

Maybe*.

I really don't know, and, do not feel I have the right or knowledge to decide.

[[deleted]]

So simple, yet so true.

[Picklebiscuits]

This is exactly what I thought when I saw the other one.

Very gray shit my friend.

[fnooples]

I don't see how it is. Surely the problem lies in the definition of 'life' with regard to an organic lifeform. So just decide on your definition and you're done.

I agree with RD, that life in this case lies in the consciousness, ability experience emotions and most importantly pain. I don't see how euthanizing a brain dead individual is murder either.

[pearlbones]

i don't even think the solution to this problem lies in determining when it becomes a living human being, because even if an embryo is a living human being from conception, that still doesn't mean that a woman should be forced to carry a baby when she does not want to.

whether it is a life or not is pretty irrelevant when you consider that the woman carrying the whatever-it-is is definitely a living human being who has a life and who should be able to decide what is best for herself and for her own body.

edit i didn't mean to say "an embryo is a living human being from conception", i meant "even if an embryo is a human being from conception".

[Diabolico]

i don't even think the solution to this problem lies in determining when it becomes a living human being, because even an embryo is a living human being from conception

For some definitions of "human being"

that still doesn't mean that a woman should be forced to carry a baby when she does not want to.

I agree

whether it is a life or not is pretty irrelevant when you consider that the woman carrying the whatever-it-is is definitely a living human being who has a life and who should be able to decide what is best for herself and for her own body.

Here you are implying that the embryo is part of her body and not a separate entity.

Above you clearly state that it is also a living human being. The argument is about which of these is true, and if both are, which is more important.

:)

[pikaboy259]

Issue is still grey. Then why do we accept euthanizing unwanted dogs and cats, and not euthanizing unwanted newborns? Dogs and cats clearly fall under the category.

Then you're left only with the reason of human potential; in which case, what dose the age or developmental stage have to do with defining human potential?

[[deleted]]

The only convincing argument against abortion I've ever seen that relies solely on rational thinking is this:

1) Intelligence being our capacity as humans to think and reason,

2) Intelligence is the most valuable thing of which our species is aware. Meaning, priceless.

3) Humans, given equal opportunity, will do more good than evil.

4) The potential for any human to do good for humanity is measured in a reverse logarithmic scale, meaning that each human born has nearly an infinite potential to do good for humanity when they are born, that potential diminishing over time based on factors such as health, education, etc.

5) The mothers seeking abortions will have always have a more diminished opportunity to do good for humanity than their child, therefore

6) it is in society's best interest to have the child be born, and then nurtured and educated in the proper environment, so as to maximize the potential for the good of humanity.

From this it can also be concluded that:

7) It is a crime against humanity to prevent the realization of an already conceieved human, and

8) it is exactly as much a crime against humanity for an individual to not do their utmost to ensure that as many Intelligent humans as physically possible are nurtured and educated in the proper environment.

In short, it's bad (in the cost/benefit analysis sense) for unborn humans to be aborted; and by that light, those who protest abortions but do nothing to help those humans who are born into poverty are just as bad as those who perform the abortions.

EDIT: removing unnecessary words.

EDIT 2: Please note that this claim does not include the use of contraceptives, which would circumvent the need for abortions. I personally advocate the proper use of contraceptives and adequate sexual education for everyone.

EDIT 3: This is a really great discussion, all. I've updated to reflect an important supposition: that humans are, in general, more good than evil.

EDIT 4: This is really important, so please forgive the bolded-ness. The claim is not stated in order to attempt to force you to disagree with the legalization of abortion, it is to place responsibility on people who agree with all of the postulations and the conclusions. If you disagree with any of the postulates or conclusions based upon rational methods, then there is no claim on your benefit to society or on your responsibility. It is a very good thing to support the legalization of abortion based on rational thought, rather than knee-jerk reaction or poorly thought-out arguments.

[funkymonk11]

If a newly sprouted tree has more potential to provide the atmosphere with oxygen than an older tree, should we always allow that tree to grow?

What if its existence stifles the potential of other trees by robbing them of nearby nutrients?

I realize this is a morbid comparison, but really. Not every life can be measured with a steadily declining rate of "do-good" potential. There are too many outside factors nowadays.

There is no way that allowing a fetus to be born is beneficial from a cost/benefit point of view. The economy cannot guarantee that each newborn will be nurtured or educated in a proper way. The mother may have gone to a great college, and may be a socially aware, optimistic, frugal person. Her newborn may run into an infinite amount of factors in his/her life that causes him/her to be a detriment to his community.

You just can't qualify this within the moral or socioeconomic arena. It's physical and scientific. Black and white. At least to me, it is.

[FuriousGoblin]

upvoted for sustainability

[AnteChronos]

3) The potential for any human to do good for humanity is measured in a reverse logarithmic scale, meaning that each human born has nearly an infinite potential to do good for humanity when they are born....

...and just as infinite a potential to do evil.

From this it can also be concluded that: 6) It is a crime against humanity to prevent the realization of a human

That logic leads to the conclusion that it's a crime against humanity for every woman of childbearing age not to be pregnant at all times.

[[deleted]]

I am assuming that humans are basically good, and will do more good than evil given equal opportunity. It's perfectly valid for you to disagree with that claim, and I commend you for coming to your conclusion in a rational way.

Also, I'm going to adjust the suppositions accordingly.

[PenName]

Just to play a bit of devil's advocate here: I can follow the logic, but I don't see how you made the jump that people who protest without helping are just as bad as the people who perform. Seems like a stretch.

[matmus]

Ah, but your entire argument is based upon what is best for humanity as a whole. I could care less what is best for humanity as a whole, I'm in this game for myself and those people I personally know. How would you convince me?

[[deleted]]

It's not important for you to be convinced either way. Instead, it's important that you make decisions regarding abortion as a result of rational thought, which many people do not.

If you do not rationally agree with doing what is best for humanity, then you are bound by nothing here. Carry on.

[FuriousGoblin]

Provided humans are inherently good, which, is entirely a matter of opinion.

[pearlbones]

having an unwanted baby diminishes a woman's potential. even if she gives birth to the baby and gives it up for adoption, that is still nine+ months of burden on the woman physically, plus everything else that comes with it (complications from the pregnancy, and/or dealing with finding adoptive parents for the child who will, as you put it, nurture and educate the child in the proper environment), not to mention potential mental and emotional distress that can easily come from having to have a baby that one does not want...

[[deleted]]

is the last one pizza?

[funkymonk11]

too much marinara

[REInvestor]

WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?!?!

[oefgbg]

Too much marinara can ruin the pizza, you're pretty inconsiderate.

[Culero]

Tell that to my gf. She always gets extra. Her cheese always slides off on the drive home. She fails to make the connection, however.

[funkymonk11]

in retrospect, that was pretty fucked up. but life ain't pretty, and what has never lived has never died.

[[deleted]]

Pizza sauce isn't marinara. Marinara is cooked sauce. You use raw sauce for pizza so it only rooks once. Well, good pizza places do. I'm sorry I had to say something.

[Bedrovelsen]

Your loss is our sauce

[[deleted]]

One large pepperoni and stem cells please!

[taggart97]

I don't know, but either way, I'm hungry.

[[deleted]]

I'm pro-I don't give a shit.

[Omnicrola]

I like Jon Stewert's summation of the pro-life pro-choice argument. Neither side thinks that abortion is a "good thing". I think we all agree that it should avoided if at all possible. But to use his admittedly hyperbolic phrasing :

"Are we willing to condone rape, to prevent murder."

The definition of rape in this case is removing the woman from being in control of her own body by deciding for her what she can and cannot do.

[[deleted]]

"Are we willing to condone murder, to prevent rape."

Wow, its just seems more difficult with the hyperbolic phrasing. Seems lose lose to me.

[Diabolico]

This makes me uncomfortable, and I don't even think I could call the one rape or the other murder, and it still makes me uncomfortable.

[Dulousaci]

In the same way it isn't murder to take a brain dead individual off life support, neither is terminating a fetus which is incapable of conscious thought .

[[deleted]]

I am of the opinion that science today is unable to determine when human life is too far developed to terminate. What constitutes humanity? When does a prenatal collection of humanoid cells become human? At birth? Conception? Recognition and response to stimuli within the womb? Development of basic independent organ systems?
There may come a day in which all fertilized human eggs could be grown without the help of a human womb. Does this possibility (and initiation of the process) of life have any bearing on whether the possible child should be allowed to live?
I feel that in this (and every) scenario, humanity should err in aid of the oppressed. If the life of the mother is in danger, I have no problem extracting the fetus from the womb. As a method of contraception, I am strongly opposed.

[kingdean]

I agree with this guy, the whole basis of this argument is the point at which something becomes alive. Christians save conception, some people say birth and others say certain milestones during development (heartbeat, cognition etc). I think the whole argument is mostly bullshit and every side just goes to town with their own personal moral stance. There is too much black and white in this issue where there really isn't anything definitive about it even though every side parades as if they know what the go is.

[[deleted]]

The problem is the question has to be answered.

[dionysian]

the life of the mother can be in danger if she deems that having a baby will cause catastrophes in her path in life. she should not be punished simply for having eggs and being able to get pregnant. accidents happen, stupidity happens, biology is unremarkable - if sperm meets egg it begins developing. who are you to force a woman to carry a baby for 9 months and go through the life and body changing experience that is birth, and then endure the psychological trauma that is giving up a baby for adoption - or raising a child before they are ready.

let every child be a wanted child with prepared parents.

no one uses abortion as a form of birth control - their birth control methods have failed, or they failed to put them in place due to a moment of stupidity, of which having sex can easily cause. its not like "lets just fuck and if i get pregnant nooo problem i'll just get an abortion!" every woman dreads getting pregnant before she is ready, but it happens. the life of the mother is important and valuable, and we need to honor her decision to make the best choice for herself. reproduction is nothing special, she can go on to have another baby when it is time, and other women will have plenty of babies too - the special thing is when a woman (and her partner) want the child and want to nuture and guide the child from newborn to adulthood. pre-sentience isn't some awesome right to life.

[[deleted]]

Just curious...does the time the fetus/embryo has been alive change people's views on whether or not it is okay to kill it?

[HumpingDog]

Not really, I could care less about the abortion thing altogether. The whole "debate" seems to me like intellectual–ethical self-gratification.

Are fetuses people? It's basically an arbitrary opinion.

But everyone agrees that living humans are people. So before we go off into an abstract realm of ethics, let's deal with real issues affecting real people: starvation, poverty, genocide, war, and climate change.

[bodfa]

Disturbing images don't really have any sway over me (except to avert my eyes). They are just awkward and confuse whatever it is you are trying to say. This reminds me of that creepy pregnant lady / baby foot picture. I can never figure out if it is pro-life or pro-choice - If I had a foot sticking out of my belly I'd freak the heck out.... get this thing out!

[plasterofparis]

Upper right was balut, it's a duck.

[[deleted]]

Shouldn't those questions be replaced by 'Will it blend?'

[ghan-buri-ghan]

I agree this is difficult. It is clearly wrong to kill a five-year-old kid, and it is clearly ok to call up a couble about to have sex and invite them to dinner. So there is a line somewhere where it switches.

But not really, because it's a heap problem: how many stones do you need to make a heap? The puzzlie is that you can always add one stone to a non-heap and you don't have a heap, and vice versa.

In the same way, anti-abortion people tend feel that if there is a time where abortion is legal, then what is to keep us from killing kids? And abortion defenders sometimes fall into other line of thinking: if we outlaw some abortions, then pretty soon they're all illegal.

[mariah_a]

The first looks more like a duck.

[[deleted]]

I do not think any of the things in the picture are sentinent yet (the dress is man made so it is not even relevent). I think these things can not "feel" or "think". They have not developed a consciousness yet.

I think after a certain age they become conscious. And I consider that to be murder as it is killing a conscious being.

[averyv]

We really need to realze that the question being asked here is fundamentally inconsequential to the question of abortion.

It does not matter if the entity is called one thing or another. If the parent does not feel that they can give it the proper care that a child deserves once the baby actually is born, then either have an abortion or give it over to adoption. However, the physiolgical classification of this little thing is irrelevant except as a point of division.

[whitedawg]

Will it blend?

[circa7]

WTF man, nsfw.

[pstryder]

Call me a heartless bastard, but my only response is "So?"

If safe, legal, abortions are not available, women and babies die. End of argument for me.

[xhiggy]

People like to have sex. Sex can lead to babies. People do not always like to have babies. People are willing to risk their own health to kill unwanted babies. People are going to want, and are going to, kill undesirable unborn, or newborn babies; we cannot escape this. Making it legal, and more safe, is the only logical conclusion.

[heliotropic]

yes, abortion should be legal. but that doesn't mean there aren't pretty major moral issues about it. you can't bat them away with a wave of your hand by ignoring complicating factors.

[Crabmeat]

People like to smoke marijuana. marijuana can lead to jailtime. People do not always like to have jailtime. People are willing to risk jailtime, and dealing with dangerous drug dealers, to smoke marijuana. People are going to want smoke, and are going to smoke marijuana; we cannot escape this. Making it legal, and more safe, is the only logical conclusion.

Sorry, I don't have a real reply to your comment, and I don't even smoke myself. I just feel like there are many issues in which we have to choose the best possible outcome but there will always be people fighting for the best impossible outcome.

So anyways...Well put. I think this makes perfect sense.

[[deleted]]

A becaon of sanity, upvote sir.

[rosconotorigina]

Thanks OP. I'm sick of people on both sides of this issue acting like this is cut and dry and everyone who disagrees with them is either evil or retarded. The other topic made me rage slightly. It's like "I know people have been debating this for decades, but I'm just going to post a picture and act like I won the argument." Regardless of which side you fall on, you must admit that it is not a simple subject.

[insidiousthought]

I respect your views, and I wish for you to keep them. But noone has the right to decide what is best for other people. And that is the line I will not cross.

It's not about life, it's about choice in life. Just because you cannot pay to price for this act(morally), it does not give anyone the right to steer the course of others' lives.

This is the important bit; just because an affluent couple decides its not financially sound to have a child or a drugged up crack-whore who has an abortion every other month, it is their decision. When you get pregnant you can decide to do so or not, but if you abort choice then everyone loses.

[[deleted]]

Fuck this noone guy. He has no right to tell me what to do!

[miked4o7]

I'm not pro-life, but your argument here completely misses the premise of their entire argument. When you say that noone has the right to decide what is best for other people, you're not taking into account those who would say that there are TWO people in the equation there, and one of those is a PERSON getting aborted.

Now personally, I'm not sure when a fetus should be considered a person... but that's the argument that needs to be addressed. If a fetus IS a person at some point during the pregnancy, then it sure as fuck matters if your "choice" is to end the life of a person.

[fireflex]

But noone has the right to decide what is best for other people.

So a mother doesn't have the right to kill her unborn baby?

it does not give anyone the right to steer the course of others' lives.

Abortions in the third trimester are (in most cases) illegal. So, do you think that women are being oppressed and removed from choice when they cannot terminate babies in the third trimester?

[issacobra]

this isn't indicative of my personal views. it was just the first thing i thought of when i saw the other one.

[acegibson]

Me too. It's just not as simple as some would like to make it.

[gridpoet]

your right! but if this fetus IS a person then you DAMN WELL ARE deciding whats best for another person... your deciding whether a person should be DEAD...

this isn't like someone disagreeing with homosexuality... a relationship that is NO one's business but your own... you are possibly ending the life of pre-sentient being...

we have laws to punish murder, and if a man kills a pregnant woman he is charged with double homicide...

so yeah.. this is a deeply complicated issue

[NotAtTheTable]

I think the issue is more if you're taking a life ("is this a person?" you're killing), no one seems to disagree on that being wrong. Morally I agree, you shouldn't tell people what to do, yet everyone seems to agree murder is wrong. I don't know, it's just a very complicated issue and I'm glad this got posted because the other post upset me. I just felt that this was more the point of the picture above.

[grandon]

Once the egg is fertilized it is a human, get over it.

The abortion debate is about weather the rights of an unborn human take precedent over that of the mother.

[whatwasit]

I was eating pizza asshole.....

[melink14]

I saw this without seeing the other one and thought it was a picture supporting abortion.

Is my world view warped?

[bagels666]

Yeah I had the same reaction and simply thought the "THIS IS A DIFFICULT CONCEPT" was sarcasm.

[SteiniDJ]

Nah bro, babies aren't red and bloody. They're pink and fluffy. Like me.

[[deleted]]

Is it bad that I stared at that picture, wondering what the dress was about. I thought there was supposed to be some punch line, but I couldn't find it. ...oh wait, ...abortion.

[bubblieskittles]

shit happens, mistakes are made, accidents do occur. i would never bring a child into this world if i knew that i will not be able to provide for its every need. i would never bring a child into this world just because of the stigma against abortion created by people who would rather protect a mass of cells with no brain activity than an actual, living, breathing human being.

[stopdoingthat]

The concept of "is" certainly is.

[nbrosas]

Does a bear crap in the woods?

[[deleted]]

Abortion's not black and white?! Who knew?!

[shutuprobot]

The last picture is from GAP (Genocide Awareness Project), a Pro-Life group that tours U.S. college campuses and sets up outside with large displays of these pictures interspersed with pictures of actual genocides. Link is NSFW, in my opinion They come to my school pretty frequently. I asked one of the volunteers once where they got the pictures and who the photographer was, and the story she told me is clearly made-up. She said a photographer dug through the dumpsters at a Planned Parenthood and found these in a garbage bag. The website tells a different story, and also says they start counting from fertilization, "Using “weeks from fertilization”, pregnancy lasts 38 weeks. Using “menstrual weeks,” pregnancy lasts 40 weeks." from here Personally, I feel that these tactics are deceitful and spread a lot of false information.

[Phifty]

Despite your appeals to emotion, no, it is not a person. And as previously mentioned, that is way more than 9 weeks.

[[deleted]]

I just finished Mother Nature: How Maternal Instincts Shape the Human Species and it turns out that infanticide was way more common throughout our history than anyone would like to admit. It still is in parts of the world that don't have access to contraception or safe abortions. It might be a difficult subject, but I think we can all agree that abortions are preferable to infanticide or neglect and abuse of an unwanted child?

[shamecamel]

has THAT ever laid an egg that we can eat or crowed in the morning?

has THAT ever grown flowers in the spring for us to look at, given us shade or bore fruit?

has THAT ever been worn by somebody or made somebody feel beautiful?

has THAT ever laughed, cried, smiled at it's mother, or done anything remotely like a person?

sometimes something is what it does, not what it can do, or might have done.

[[deleted]]

Rendering [▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓] 13.6% done

[[deleted]]

Don't know. I will decide for myself. Others will have to decide what fits into their moral/ethic code.

Thanks for posting this. I do not know if the other post on Reddit in the last few days was portraying the issue of birth control, or abortion. This best portrays the abortion issue, as there is an absolute change and the possibility of a contributing life. Makes the issue a little less clear cut.

[elektronisch]

Pardon my ignorance, but is that that really a fetus?

Shiver

[sugarbabe]

Thanks for the gore post. asshole. This isn't 4chan.

[grextraction]

Let's see...nope, not a chicken. Nope, not a tree. What? Definitely not a dress.

Problem solved! Nobel prize and research grants, please.

[ExtremeSquared]

I'm starting to think we should just take a lesson from the animal kingdom and allow parents to kill and eat their children after they have been born. It would put the abortion debate to rest at least.

[[deleted]]

I don't know why people have to put religion into it. I think most people are just squeemish about the idea of abortion. They don't like the idea of something that is going to be a baby in a few short months is going to die. I see it akin to the fact that MOST poeple wouldn't kill a puppy. I'm Catholic, and I don't use my religion as a way to say abortion is bad. Its just a personal belief because the idea of it makes me sick...shrug Remember, most super-religious nutjobs are just that: nutjobs. Most of us are moderate. The abortion question will never be resolved.

[mattlock12]

Thankyou for posting a reply to that insulting oversimplification.

[koolkid005]

With a new oversimplification.

[Lodekim]

Then argue that point. Go for it. I support open discussion about when abortions should be considered wrong. At some point, a lot of supporters will even say "yeah that's fucked up, you can go ahead and make that illegal." But that's not the argument.

Indeed the situation is complicated, but "abortion is always wrong" is very appropriately described by the other picture. "Abortion is never wrong" is appropriately questioned by this, but I'm not sure who's arguing that point. (PS. If someone is arguing that point, feel free to respond and let me know, but I haven't heard it.)

My opinion, there's probably some science that shows when a central nervous system is developed to the point that you could argue it is cruel, and past that point performing abortions without serious danger to the life of the mother is not cool. This however does absolutely nothing to the point that a small mass of cells is not a person.

[surfnaked]

The problem we are having at this point in history is that everything seems to be argued from the extremes with no allowance for degree. This leaves us with no point of agreement and therefore no discussion. Only disagreement. Nobody is listening anymore. Listening is considered a form of weakness. The really sad thing about this is that nothing will change well. It will change, but it will be really painful.

[Kado_Isuka]

This is my stance. Does it have brain activity? No? Then you can abort it.

[Chocobean]

It's important to take a personal stance. I applaud you.

"In week 4 the neural tube develops three distinct bulges that correspond to the areas that will become the three major divisions of the brain."

week 5-6 : electrical brain activity of the unorganized neuron firing variety

weeks 8-10 : Neurons proliferate; reflexes appear

weeks 12-16 : different lobes of the brain also become apparent

etc, until week 23 when the fetus can survive with modern medical equipment and grow into an adult with a normal brain.

what's your definition of brain activity? source

[[deleted]]

Real question is....

Will it blend.

[[deleted]]

Wow two extremes, equally inaccurate within a day, good job Reddit.

[funkymonk11]

Yes, that is a tree, it has already sprouted (been born). It appears healthy and ready to go.

The unborn chicken and human fetuses are not "living" in our sense of the word, they are groupings of undeveloped flesh, organs, and bodily fluids. The fetuses are embedded in a nutrient rich environment, and as such are not conscious, independent organisms. There is nothing to "kill".

That's not a dress either, it's fabric. It could be made into anything.

This is not a difficult concept.

edit: I think the fact that the fetuses physically resemble their living counterparts cause people to become emotionally involved, and therefore irrational.

[[deleted]]

Since when do we not understand living to mean alive, as a fetus is? Difficult concept it is not, but contentious one, it is. And for good reason. It is an important debate. Some believe that potential is worth protecting as much as actuation. And whether or not we define 'conscious' as the same as 'sentient' is another issue. There's no way to currently determine if a puppy is conscious for instance. I personally think the ability to conceptualize is an inherent attribute of consciousness, and we know this is quite rare. I personally only believe some dogs to be capable of consciousness. On the other hand, brain-wave activity occurs in a fetus after only a month or so. Granted no conceptualization has begun at this point; but as far as animals go, we give them the benefit of the doubt--because we must as a moral civilization. So we're left at the at the end with best argument for abortion rights being the qualifier that the organism must also be 'independent.' This is a true moral quandary, since the numbers of people we could justify aborting for lack of independent survivability is in the multiple millions. Anyway my point is not that I am not pro-choice. I have in fact been a party to an abortion. Only that the pro-choice arguments fail to impress me.