[quote=Hitetlen]No one in his right mind would assert that a fetus is not “alive”. It also has human DNA. But so has a malignant tumor, and not even the most ardent “pro-lifer” (aka. anti-choice) person would dare to argue that a tumor should have the right to “live”. The removal of a tumor could rightly be called “testing God” (which is a big no-no around here), because such a removal denies God the chance of performing a miracle and allowing the tumor to grow into a human being.
A question to all of you: Would you call a dish of scrambled eggs - a fried chicken? The eggs are potential chickens, not real chickens.
Another question: Would you call a medical student a fully qualified doctor? The medical student is a potential doctor, nothing more.
In every facet of live you all understand the difference between a potential and the final result. Why is this stubborn resistence when it comes to such an obvious difference as fetus vs. full human? (A fetus is actually a parasitic being feeding off the mother’s body and gives nothing physical in return.)
And a final question: when speaking of abortion I have yet to see a “pro-lifer” NOT calling it the “murder” of an innocent baby. Regardless of the misuse of the word “baby” here, why do you call them “innocent”? Are they not guilty of the original sin? They are guilty in the eyes of God, are they not?
According to your logic, you are nothing more than a malignant tumor that has grown out of a parasitical fetus. Since you have commited far more sins that just original sin, you far more deserve to be aborted. How can you even claim to be fully human, as there is no trace of humanity in your statements?
Perhaps a council of pro-choice supporters should sit in judgement of you and try to determine if you have justified your existence, or if you have been a parasite on society. Maybe they would judge that you are only a “potential” human being who has fallen short of someone else’s idea of what constitutes a valid human being. Perhaps they would deem that you are a tumor that society would do best to remove.
Do you not realize that when one condones the killing of an unborn, one automatically condones all forms of killing since all other people are more gulity and less defenseless? How can one accuse Saddam Hussein of killing people to preserve his empire, when we condone killing a child for the purpose of preventing inconvenience to ourselves?
Have you not noticed the Pandora’s box that has been opened? Look at the multitude of events of mass-murder or indiscriminate killings that have occured after Roe vs. Wade. The occurence of such senseless random killings has multiplied once we ratified the notion that it is acceptable to take human life to solve one’s problems.
This is what happens when life or death matters are put into the hands of people who can’t discern the difference between a fetus and a tumor.