Quote by Mystfire
Note I said my analogy wasn't perfect. Dismantling it was a waste of time on your part.
Let me apologise for retorting to what I mistook for support for an arguement. I assumed you made that analogy for a
reason but I guess I was wrong.
Quote by MystFire
And here I go to waste my time smiley. I'm a bit rusty on this, so bear with me.
The parasite attacks the mother. It tricks the body into thinking it belongs there, otherwise the mother's body
would kill it. You are right that the mother's body is equipped to grow a baby though. Doesn't change the fact
that the zygote is a parasite, though, your opinion on it doesn't change the fact that it is a parasite. And
fetuses can be quite detrimental to a woman's health. It causes odd behavioral patterns, pain, discomfort, etc.,
and can lead to death. But that doesn't matter, does it? No one gives a damn about the woman, only the parasite.
Indeed, I never disagreed to it causing pain and discomfort, but the key arguement is not whether this pregnancy is
'convenient' enough for the mother, but is about the value of the life. And I still disagree with the
'parasite' arguement. It has a negative connotation and most parents wouldnt call their 8 month old son a
parasite by any means.
Quote by MystFire
It may grow to be a human, but that does not mean the woman should be enslaved to do so. You are indeed correct; I was
once a parasite. Since I'm still dependant, somewhat, on my parents, I am still a sort of parasite.
Being still 'sort of' a parasite, does that give your parents the right to terminate your existance? You drain
their money, their time, you get into arguements with them, cause them emotional discomfort now and then, and if they
chose to terminate your life now, what right have you to stop them? You are the parasite, and you have no say? I find
that unfair. Some things are valued, like human life, even at some cost. You know you have a say in your future,
regardless of the fact that you are a drain. I think we should give children the right to live also.
Quote by Mystfyre
Everyone's right to life is equal. No one is more deserving of it than another. However, you cannot gain your right
to life at the expense of a right of another.
The mother's life is scarcely in danger. Nobody is taking away her right to live. With your arguement, discomfort
is something that can be traded for the right to live. I find that a very unequal tradeoff. I included medical
emergencies as a situation in which I believe people have the right to choose. Medical emergencies, however, make the
far minority of reasons for abortion.
Quote by Mystfyre
By invading a woman's body for nine months, causing misery and pain (especially if the parasite is unwanted), the
parasite is invading on something called "liberty" and "property". You know, two of the three basic
rights of a human being. While keeping this baby to term may be the mother's desire, other women might not want to
go through excruciating pain and discomfort because other people want her to be a breeding machine. Why is everyone so
quick to make the rights of a few cells greater than the rights of a human being?
That is the key arguement here. What about the liberty and property of the child? Those few cells are a developing human
being! If you label a human being that hasnt reached maturation as inferior to a developed human being, then you MUST
include small children too. Or anyone who hasnt reached full growth. If you extend the rights to liberty and property
only to those developed into mature humans, then abortion should be extended to anyone immature. I disagree with that
arguement, I know few people would support killing 5 year olds just because they're not physically and mentally
developed enough to defend their right to live. Until then, its true, we all are a 'mass of cells' that is
still growing bigger, developing more functions. That is what living things do. Just because a woman doesnt want it
doesnt suddenly make the zygote, or embryo or whatever stage the baby is in suddenly less human. And human life is worth
that 9 months of discomfort. It all comes back to convenience. I dont think we should trade human life for convenience.
This isnt a soup can, this is a living, growing, developing human. Stating an earlier arguement by somene else, Its not
an organ because organs dont grow into new people. Anyway, if she didnt want to be a 'breeding machine' she
shouldnt be doing what leads to breeding. As for the rape issue, I covered that in the previous arguement.
Quote by Mystfyre
And even if I do concede that these few cells are a human being (which I do not, but this is for arguement's sake),
why do you feel that it is alright for one human being to enslave another to live?
Im sure you think its completely unfair that you're living. /sarcasm. Very few people consider the right to live
something that they're 'enlsaved' with. Most people have a purpose to their lives and are pursuing it.
And if they feel that they're 'enslaved' with life, there is always suicide but I covered that already. I
believe that the need to live should be handed over to the person who is going to do the living. If that takes
discomfort then fine. Human life is worth that.
Quote by MystfyreBy your
arguements, I think any form of birth control is bad for you.
How so? Tube tying is an outpatient procedure. And if 'discomfort' is such a major factor in the decision of
abortion, then having your tubes tied isnt NEARLY as uncomfortable and isnt anywhere as close to painful as an
abortion.
