• the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The law on the books is that a doctor can legally perform emergency abortions. Nobody has been prosecuted on the claim that the abortion wasn’t an emergency, or even for performing an abortion at all.

    The fetus carries its parents’ DNA, is created from their intercourse, and is descended directly from them. They may not have reached adolescence, but in terms of genetics and biology, it is still their child.

    • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Great who determines it’s an “emergency”? With how poorly worded gop policies are it’s too much of a grey area to risk for many people when the punishment is jailtime or worse. A fetus is a fetus is it’s not an adolescent, more false equivalency. A fetus is a fetus, not a child.

      • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        The doctor can determine what an emergency is. Nobody has been prosecuted for performing an abortion since Dobbs. The “grey area” you’re arguing for, if it exists, is irrelevant.

        A fetus is the offspring of two parents. You’re confusing the definition of child as in “adolescent animal” and the definition I’m using, namely “offspring”. A fetus is an organism composed of human cells, therefore it is a human being, therefore killing it without a critical reason is murder.

        • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          No it’s not irrelevant. If it was the laws should be removed. As it stands they exist and are therefore pertinent.

          A fetus is a fetus, until it is a child it is a lump of cells and therefore no one should be forced to carry a fetus. It is not murder.

          • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            It’s irrelevant because nobody has been prosecuted. You’re imagining a legal threat that doesn’t exist for the sake of pushing your ideology.

            Case in point: you’re willfully confusing definitions to claim it’s okay to kill people. Everyone is composed of cells, therefore everyone is lumps of cells, therefore, according to the “lump of cells” logic, it is okay for parents to kill their offspring at any time. You’re dehumanizing human beings to justify killing them.

            • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              It’s relevant because it is. And now you’ve moved onto strawman fallacies. Try to argue in good faith :)

              • the_toast_is_gone@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                “It’s irrelevant because it is” is just an assertion with no evidence to back it up. You’ve yet to provide evidence or argumentation to counter what I’ve provided. But if you don’t want me explaining what you believe, please tell me: why is murder wrong? If you want to complain about bad faith debate, then why will you not provide evidence (that we haven’t already discussed and disproved) to back up your claims?

                • T00l_shed@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 hours ago

                  I made my assertion with evidence (laws to punish abortions on the books) which you disregarded by saying no one has been charged (YET) so there was nothing to worry about. Then why will you not provide evidence (that we haven’t already discussed and disproved) to back up your claims?