Fetus Personhood Debate

A fetus is not a person, I think is the argument.

I'll just add that many people who are pro-choice believe that the issue of whether a fetus is a person is irrelevant. You would have the legal right to back out of donating a kidney, even if you already agreed to do it and it would save someone's life. Similarly, the argument goes, you should have the legal right to have an abortion (or at least induce labor, if viability is possible) at any point during a pregnancy.

If it's a choice between the mother's life and the baby's life, because of the medical condition, I would say let the mother make the choice.But if it's a choice between the mother's feeling / opinion and the baby's life, I would say the baby's life overwrites the mother's feeling / opinion. The reason is simple, nobody gets to decide to kill the other person just because he/she doesn't like it. And the existing of the baby is the co

It is if you don't consider a fetus to be a person.

Because they are not unborn humans, they are undeveloped fetuses. Let's try not to bring political discussion to HN News. This isn't reddit.

Not if one considers the rights of the unborn.

It’s not a child or person until it’s born alive. Up until birth a fetus is a parasitic organism. If unwanted then the fetus is trespassing in the host body. If unwanted the parasite is robbing from the host. By these inconvertible truths if the fetus must be born then it must be tried for trespassing, battery, and theft and the counter party to conception must be held equally liable. Thus, the unwanted parasite must be terminated in order to preserve the rights of the host as plainly protected

Some fetuses fail to develop correctly, and the baby is born with one-or-multiple conditions that will almost certainly be fatal within the first year if not first few weeks or days. Their short life will be filled with suffering. You can always find a perspective where any choice you make here is wrong. You're not asking whether they deserve to live; you're asking whether you are a worse person to deny them the chance or to condemn them to their reality. There simply is no good option

Killing a child, or any conscious being willing to live, cannot be compared to terminating a pregnancy at a point where the embryo is just a blob of cells with no global survival instinct and consciousness whatsoever (just basic biochemistry-powered defensive reactions at cellular level).It's ridiculous making such mental gymnastics to stretch this article in order to blame "the West".

Do you find killing a new born baby reprehensible? If no this is a _very_ minority view you have. If yes what is the difference between the new born to a 9 month old fetus in the womb? Then what about an 8 month old? Most would protect it too against abortion. And so on.A compromising time limit solution for which elective abortions before is permitted and after is forbidden is the only pragmatic solution.