Do you think women are conceiving intern minerals in their womb? What is this question xD
I’m going to assume you’re having a laugh, because by every metric a fetus is alive. If those cells are multiplying, consuming various stuff to continue multiplying; the fetus is alive. If the fetus, removed from its source of food, dies; it must be alive. If you removed me from all sources of food, I too would die.
If you have a compelling argument, I’d love to hear it though.
Your hand is a functioning attachment of your body, having the same DNA as every other part of your body. A fetus is a separate organism with its own DNA.
Not separate, but it is a living thing. If you starved your hand off by constricting the blood flow, I don’t think anyone would question you when you say your hand is dead.
Actually isn’t that literally called dying off in English?
I think we’re using 2 different meanings of “dead” here. There’s “dead” as in “dead tissue” and “dead” as in “corpse”. My point was that a fetus fits the first meaning of “dead”, but not the second. You can’t “kill” a fetus.
I don’t really think we are. A corpse is also just dead tissue after all. I don’t think there’s a significant difference in semantics here.
At the end of the day I don’t think we should be debating the meaning of the words, just what we think they represent.
The main difference (to me) is when it’s a separate living being. I would definitely call a just-conceived foetus “alive”, but it’s not an individual yet, and I would have no issue with aborting it.
Also I do want to make clear I’m very pro-abortion. I’m just autistic and get triggered by “misinformation” (this isn’t misinformation but again my autistic ass can’t think of the proper term).
This does not actually refute the claim that the fetus would be dead. I’m not actually sure if you’re contesting anything.
Can it be dead if it was never living?
Do you think women are conceiving intern minerals in their womb? What is this question xD I’m going to assume you’re having a laugh, because by every metric a fetus is alive. If those cells are multiplying, consuming various stuff to continue multiplying; the fetus is alive. If the fetus, removed from its source of food, dies; it must be alive. If you removed me from all sources of food, I too would die.
If you have a compelling argument, I’d love to hear it though.
My hand also consumes nutrients to live. Is it a separate living being from me?
Your hand is a functioning attachment of your body, having the same DNA as every other part of your body. A fetus is a separate organism with its own DNA.
Not always correct. It’s possible to have a living organism with different DNA in different body parts (chimerism). Also, gut bacteria.
Not separate, but it is a living thing. If you starved your hand off by constricting the blood flow, I don’t think anyone would question you when you say your hand is dead.
Actually isn’t that literally called dying off in English?
I think we’re using 2 different meanings of “dead” here. There’s “dead” as in “dead tissue” and “dead” as in “corpse”. My point was that a fetus fits the first meaning of “dead”, but not the second. You can’t “kill” a fetus.
I don’t really think we are. A corpse is also just dead tissue after all. I don’t think there’s a significant difference in semantics here.
At the end of the day I don’t think we should be debating the meaning of the words, just what we think they represent.
The main difference (to me) is when it’s a separate living being. I would definitely call a just-conceived foetus “alive”, but it’s not an individual yet, and I would have no issue with aborting it.
Also I do want to make clear I’m very pro-abortion. I’m just autistic and get triggered by “misinformation” (this isn’t misinformation but again my autistic ass can’t think of the proper term).
deleted by creator