ColdSteel
New member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2014
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 3
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
There are no "truths" there...opinions only.
and "once we are born, life has begun"? What are you trying to say? That a fetus is not "living"?
my friend, fruit continues to live long after it has been picked, and there is "life" in a chicken egg.
"The inference is 'doesn't begin until'"
If that is your position, than I don't see it as rational. It strikes more of fear, but fear of what is not clear to me. It was a simple sentence that you are somehow afraid of acknowledging as true. The others are subjective, but this one is so blatantly obvious you have to spend a lot of time transmogrifying it to interpret is as some kind of assertion that life count not begin sooner than birth.
But hey, it takes all kinds...
So if I don't agree with you, it's just contrariness, not because of any rational reasons? :catapult:
Id like to clarify if i can. I simply mean that no matter your belief, when you are born, you are alive. If you are alive before that is certainly up to debate but once you are born you are a living, breathing human being. The reason i posted this is (as most of you guessed) as a base line for abortion, but more specifically an article i read about doctors suggesting post-birth abortions (they preferred that term to infanticide) based on the technicality that the children were both not fully developed and were basically identical to a fetus so they could still be considered not alive. This article was 2 years old when i found it so it is certainly not a new idea but it did shock me. This of course defies my logic of birth being the very basis of life however i wanted to see if people agreed with me. That might sound opinion-based of me, and i will accept that perhaps part of it is.