Those on the left frame is as bodily autonomy and a bunch of crusty old white dudes wanting to control women's bodies, those on the right don't see it as that because they see the fetus as a life and care about the life being ended, they have no intent to control a female's body

I've explained my views on the matter before but yea, there really isn't much more than can be said, other than the value of human life is seen as very low to some

yeah um i don't completely agree w the opinion that pro-lifers are trying to restrict woman's rights on purpose

*the value of a fetus

I would make the stance that the discussion has nothing to do with woman's rights unless somebody is advocating for mandatory pregnancy i,e "You must give birth to THREE children in your lifetime"

yeah i would agree with the fact that you guys aren't TRYING to make woman's rights less

but banning abortion is

imo

Also I think the fetus being alive discussion is pointless because whether it is alive is not scientific in basis (Since all single celled organisms are technically "alive") and x y z is just an arbitrary standard to whether it is alive i,e heartbeat, brain waves, etc

it's not murder if it's not alive

but i mean yeah

that's the reason we have diff views

My view is that a zygote already contains the blueprints for a whole human being, it's a potential of a life. Potential is defined as "**having or showing the capacity to become or develop into something in the future.**" A zygote, if left untouched, has the capacity to become or develop into something into the future, therefore the potential for an independent human to exist begins at conception.

But yea, that is why we have differing views

potential for a life ≠ a life tho

To me, there is no heaven or hell, or any sort of afterlife, so this is the once chance we have at a life, and to deny that is morally apprehensible to my view

That is true, potential for a life does not always mean there will be a functional human at the end. I would argue that abortion should be permitted in medical circumstances

The mother's life being at risk, or the baby being severely impaired or deformed

yeah

wait isn't you supporting abortion when the baby is severely impaired kinda contradictory to the point of pro-life

that a fetus is a life

and unless it harms another life

hmmmm

sounds like eugenics with extra steps

sounds like slavery with extra steps

shut up

😤

Yes and no, do I think all those with impairment or deformity should be aborted? No, however I think there needs to be some sort of scale formed in which a fetus is rated on it's viability for life

defintley eugenics with extra steps

No, because eugenics believes in killing off groups of people or preventing them from reproducing to "preserve the human race" or some nonsense

um what

that bad

I'm saying that aborting a fetus that would die within hours of being born would not be against my moral standing since that potential for life isn't there, since it is a 100% known fact that this fetus will not have a life

Or a fetus that would 100% be a stillborn

from the eugenics pov, gay people help stop overpopulation

ohh ok

Yea eugenics is trash

lol

i really like those images of anti abortion ads that say "who will be the next police officer" its basicly two birds with one stone

GG @Deleted User, you just advanced to level 7!

dead cops and abortion rights