Capital Punishment for Abortion? Yes.

[San Lumen]

That is such a arrogant statement it’s almost scary.

How is it arrogant? It's a fact

Why should someone whose just been through a horrible experience be forced to carry a criminals child to term?

[The V O I D]

Higher populations are not inherently beneficial to society. In particular, higher populations of generally poorly-raised children born to generally poor, ill-prepared (often single) parents who don't want them are rather the opposite.

Population is really irrelevant. Population growth can be prevented through contraception, condoms, sterilization, or abstinence. The real issue is defending the human dignity of our society's weakest and most vulnerable members.

The fact you assume sex is purely procreational makes me laugh. And contraception can, will and does fail. In those cases, abortion is an option since the woman doesn't want to be pregnant. Even if contraception was 100% infallible, a woman ought not to be forced to go through an unwanted pregnancy.

Nobody has the right to use someone's body without consent. Being unborn doesn't change that or make fetuses an exemption to the word "nobody."

[Petrasylvania]

Women don't need to walk alone in the darkness, men need to protect women

If a woman is raped, it seems to me that the rapist ought to be held accountable for any possible abortion. This is one reason why we need harsher penalties for rape, perhaps even the possibility of execution.

Yes, rapists should be executed. Especially when they start murdering rape victims to cover up the crime because hey, rape is now punished by death so what's one more capital crime, not like you can be executed twice.

[New Greater Netherlands]

How is it arrogant? It's a fact

Why should someone whose just been through a horrible experience be forced to carry a criminals child to term?

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Why should someone whose just been through a horrible experience be forced to carry a criminals child to term?

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

So we're equating vulnerable women with psychopaths...

[Alvecia]

The only criteria of note that I can find it violates is that of heterospecific organisms (different species), which:
1) you've already provided an example of a parasite that violates said criteria
2) this book points out these definitions are not universal, but rather "brief", "general", and "often" (not always) used.

Yes, the one outlier whose criteria is actually debatable because of heterospecific preferred definitions but is used as an example as a possibility. Not to mention once again that the relationship is closer to that of mutualism or commensalism between the mother and the fetus. Who would have thunk that there are more than one type of symbiotic or symbiotic like relationships other than parasitism. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

"It's complicated", says the only person of the two of us who's made a definitive yes/no statement about the parasitic nature of a foetus so far

[The V O I D]

Why should someone whose just been through a horrible experience be forced to carry a criminals child to term?

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

Okay, well, I need a kidney. You have a healthy one and you're a match. The transplant surgery's on Thursday; if you don't show up and I die because of it, you go to jail for murder now. Attendance is mandatory.

[New Greater Netherlands]

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

So we're equating vulnerable women with psychopaths...

The women who tend to kill their unborn babies are child murderers yes, because they shouldn't kill their child if they just don't want it, that's just horrible. She can just place it for adoption if she doesn't want the child, or take one of her family members care of the child

[Vassenor]

Why should someone whose just been through a horrible experience be forced to carry a criminals child to term?

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

Let's run some figures. In the year ending March 31st 2017 there were approximately 72,670 children awaiting adoption in England, which has been trending up since at least 2013. The number who actually were adopted out of the system in that same year? 4,350. And that number is trending down. And you want to bloat the number of children in the system significantly.

Source: Office of National Statistics (2017) Children looked after in England including adoption: 2016 to 2017

[The V O I D]

So we're equating vulnerable women with psychopaths...

The women who tend to kill their unborn babies are child murderers yes, because they shouldn't kill their child if they just don't want it, that's just horrible. She can just place it for adoption if she doesn't want the child, or take one of her family members care of the child

Adoption does not solve unwanted pregnancy. Abortion does. And it is not murder; it is the woman exacting her right to bodily sovereignty.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

So we're equating vulnerable women with psychopaths...

The women who tend to kill their unborn babies are child murderers yes, because they shouldn't kill their child if they just don't want it, that's just horrible. She can just place it for adoption if she doesn't want the child, or take one of her family members care of the child

How does adoption solve an issue that arose 9 months ago?

[Western-Ukraine]

If so, then it's all the better. That's a perfectly appropriate reason for abortion.

What are your views on abortion in terms of viable fetuses? As in, if the fetus is viable, it is removed and remanded to ICU care and then eventually shifted out into the adoptive care system because the woman changed her mind about becoming a mother?

Do you think that ought to be allowed or not? Just curious.

I'm assuming you agree with pre-viability abortion at the very least, since viability/post-viability abortion seems to be where a fetus becomes "human enough" under your view.

Instead of trying to answer your vague questions, I will just say that I consider an embryo human enough, so to say, during the phase of organogenesis, around the sixth or seventh week. Organs are reasonably close to the end-product, if you will, in their shape, and the embryo is developing a nervous system. It's a strict limit, yes, but not too much so.

[New Greater Netherlands]

Because abortion is just child murder, no matter what, i believe she can wait until the child is born and let one of her family take care of it or place it for adoption. Abortion (child murder) is as worse as adult murder

Okay, well, I need a kidney. You have a healthy one and you're a match. The transplant surgery's on Thursday; if you don't show up and I die because of it, you go to jail for murder now. Attendance is mandatory.

There is a thing called donor, that's very much different then child murder (abortion), you can refuse to be a donor or you can be a donor, but that's not the topic and has nothing to do with abortion

[Agarntrop]

Anybody who wants capital punishment for abortion should be sent to an asylum! I personally think abortion should be legal but not on request (serious risk to the woman's physical or mental health, fatal foetal defects, rape or serious socioeconomic factors)

[New Greater Netherlands]

The women who tend to kill their unborn babies are child murderers yes, because they shouldn't kill their child if they just don't want it, that's just horrible. She can just place it for adoption if she doesn't want the child, or take one of her family members care of the child

How does adoption solve an issue that arose 9 months ago?

I didn't say it would solve the issue, but if she really doesn't want that child if it is born she can also let one of her family members take care of it or place it for adoption, period. You shouldn't just murder your unborn baby because you don't want it, or just don't like that it's a boy or girl because you wish it should be the gender you want

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Okay, well, I need a kidney. You have a healthy one and you're a match. The transplant surgery's on Thursday; if you don't show up and I die because of it, you go to jail for murder now. Attendance is mandatory.

There is a thing called donor, that's very much different then child murder (abortion), you can refuse to be a donor or you can be a donor, but that's not the topic and has nothing to do with abortion

You cannot equate abortion with your definition of child murder without equating refusing to donate organs to premeditated murder. They both derive from the same bodily sovereignty principles.

[The V O I D]

Okay, well, I need a kidney. You have a healthy one and you're a match. The transplant surgery's on Thursday; if you don't show up and I die because of it, you go to jail for murder now. Attendance is mandatory.

There is a thing called donor, that's very much different then child murder (abortion), you can refuse to be a donor or you can be a donor, but that's not the topic and has nothing to do with abortion

Yeah, it does, actually - both involve bodily sovereignty. Why does the woman not get a choice but donors do? Why do people who want to get tattoos or piercings get a choice? It makes no sense to specifically remove the right of bodily sovereignty in this case. So you either remove it entirely, and then that means no need for donors because of mandatory transplants, or you don't, in which case abortion should be a legal and free choice by the woman and by the woman alone.

[New Greater Netherlands]

The women who tend to kill their unborn babies are child murderers yes, because they shouldn't kill their child if they just don't want it, that's just horrible. She can just place it for adoption if she doesn't want the child, or take one of her family members care of the child

Adoption does not solve unwanted pregnancy. Abortion does. And it is not murder; it is the woman exacting her right to bodily sovereignty.

Abortion Is CHILD MURDER

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

How does adoption solve an issue that arose 9 months ago?

I didn't say it would solve the issue, but if she really doesn't want that child if it is born she can also let one of her family members take care of it or place it for adoption, period. You shouldn't just murder your unborn baby because you don't want it, or just don't like that it's a boy or girl because you wish it should be the gender you want

That does not answer the question at all because she still has to carry the child to term.

[New Greater Netherlands]

There is a thing called donor, that's very much different then child murder (abortion), you can refuse to be a donor or you can be a donor, but that's not the topic and has nothing to do with abortion

Yeah, it does, actually - both involve bodily sovereignty. Why does the woman not get a choice but donors do? Why do people who want to get tattoos or piercings get a choice? It makes no sense to specifically remove the right of bodily sovereignty in this case. So you either remove it entirely, and then that means no need for donors because of mandatory transplants, or you don't, in which case abortion should be a legal and free choice by the woman and by the woman alone.

No, child murder should be illegal, no matter what

[The V O I D]

What are your views on abortion in terms of viable fetuses? As in, if the fetus is viable, it is removed and remanded to ICU care and then eventually shifted out into the adoptive care system because the woman changed her mind about becoming a mother?

Do you think that ought to be allowed or not? Just curious.

I'm assuming you agree with pre-viability abortion at the very least, since viability/post-viability abortion seems to be where a fetus becomes "human enough" under your view.

Instead of trying to answer your vague questions, I will just say that I consider an embryo human enough, so to say, during the phase of organogenesis, around the sixth or seventh week. Organs are reasonably close to the end-product, if you will, in their shape, and the embryo is developing a nervous system. It's a strict limit, yes, but not too much so.

That doesn't really answer anything, really, but whatever. If a fetus isn't viable, and a woman wants to abort, she should be able to and if the fetus dies - that's too bad, but it was an unfortunately necessary thing in the preservation of her bodily sovereignty. If a fetus is viable, remove it from the womb, put it in the ICU and when it is able to move on, put it into adoptive care. Simple, really.

[Vassenor]

Adoption does not solve unwanted pregnancy. Abortion does. And it is not murder; it is the woman exacting her right to bodily sovereignty.

Abortion Is CHILD MURDER

Your repeated attempts at appealing to emotion have been noted.

[Lamur]

And I'm trying to illustrate that calling them parasites is not helpful (for those pushing the pro-choice arguments) and not accurate according to a lot of biologists.

I dunno, guys, like ya know don't use that terminology? Whowouldathunk that it's a good idea to not shackle your own end.

It is one step away from parasitism, by definition:

Merriam-Webster: an organism living in, with, or on another organism in parasitism...

The fetus is an organism living in another organism and parasitizing by stealing her bodily space, resources, etc. for its own benefit while causing likely permanent bodily changes to the host, causing a risk of death should any complications arise, and using the host as a waste disposal mechanism by pumping her full of its waste.

It is, in function, a parasite. The fact they are of the same species is irrelevant.

Here's a more thorough Wikipedia definition of a parasite:

"In evolutionary biology, parasitism is a relationship between species, where one organism, the parasite, lives on or in another organism, the host, causing it some harm, and is adapted structurally to this way of life.[1] The entomologist E. O. Wilson has characterised parasites as "predators that eat prey in units of less than one".[2] Parasites include protozoans such as the agents of malaria, sleeping sickness, and amoebic dysentery; animals such as hookworms, lice, mosquitoes, and vampire bats; fungi such as honey fungus and the agents of ringworm; and plants such as mistletoe, dodder, and the broomrapes.

The fact that a fetus is of the same species and shares its genes is what makes the female carrier a mammal is NOT irrelevant, that's the function of mammals as a result of evolution.

The truth is that draining life is what sustains life. Life feeds on death and is reborn to continue the cycle indefinitely. By your logic you could say that every living being on this planet is a parasite using up Earth's resources, occupying its space, polluting it etc. - especially human beings.

The difference is that an actual parasite depends on the host for its life, whereas the fetus is only one stage in a mammal's development. The host is unaware they have a parasite, but a pregnant female understands she is pregnant, and her body was literally designed to create life.

You really are trying to justify abortion by claiming a fetus is a parasite. Why?

[The V O I D]

Yeah, it does, actually - both involve bodily sovereignty. Why does the woman not get a choice but donors do? Why do people who want to get tattoos or piercings get a choice? It makes no sense to specifically remove the right of bodily sovereignty in this case. So you either remove it entirely, and then that means no need for donors because of mandatory transplants, or you don't, in which case abortion should be a legal and free choice by the woman and by the woman alone.

No, child murder should be illegal, no matter what

I agree. Good thing abortion isn't murdering children, then.

[New Greater Netherlands]

No, child murder should be illegal, no matter what

I agree. Good thing abortion isn't murdering children, then.

Abortion is murdering a child, it is child murder