Message from @An Elbow
Discord ID: 447691333331845130
no
who is pro-choice
and i would like evidence for that.
It is not an assumption
then evidence
pro choice people are 'uneducated' about this 'objective' reality that 'a child is not human or living'
i want evidence specifically for that
They say it themselves.
And they don't even care that another life is in question
are they using the word *child* or are you spinning it again for emotion points.
because pro-choice pro-life is all about medical semanitics and economic realities
that's the only things you can argue in certainity
no, it is not.
any emotional argument is just fluff around those.
it doesn't say anywhere in that
that 'a child is not human nor living'
all it says is terminate pregnancy which you're assuming means that a 'fetus' is a 'child' and does the medical definition really mean that?
"are they using the word child or are you spinning it again for emotion points." ?
You dense pigeon. Child = a young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority.
young human when does something become human?
????????
when does a gamete become a human?
Do you even know what a gamete is?
It is the singular for a sperm or egg cell
yes so when do the male gamete and female gamete 'become' human
There is no magical point at which they become human.
Pretty sure most argue at conception. But something I've never heard explored is instead of working forward from ejaculation to the point of becoming a human, what would be the point at which a newly born child stops being human working backwards?
is it at the very inception?
why at conception?
When a person will result
can the cell even *think*
*is it conscious*
does it *feel pain*
because then it will result in a person
these are all characteristics of a human
wrong questions
no
those are not
so you're saying to me 'something' that doesn't act at all like a human
is a human?