Foetuses aren't babies or people. No matter how much the anti-abortionists try, they simply fail to make their case on other than religious grounds... wait, scratch that last part, they fail to make their case, period.
Fun fact: "Fetus" is Latin for "offspring". We all know that babies are human offspring, so in effect, you're saying that babies aren't babies. That's quite interesting.
No - as far as I know, all the Republican presidential candidates believe in God. Is that correct or not?
That is correct. However, all Democrats that ran for President is '08 were Christians as well, as far as I know. And yet, Dick Durbin happens to be with their party. So, shall we stereotype the Republicans for the sake of convenience?
I admit I don't follow your politics that much, but whenever I tune it, I hear the word God in every second sentence they utter.
Tune what? After all, if you're going to be tuning into clips of Republicans being asked what their religious beliefs are, then yeah, you're going to hear about God. However, that doesn't make every Republican in the country a Christian.
Human life includes things like human kidneys, appendix, gallbladder, etc. These things are being "murdered" on daily basis. I don't see much difference there.
Actually, no, since they aren't offspring.
Doesn't matter, your reason for being against abortions and equating them with murder is motivated by your religious views.
I would very much like to know how you can know more about my views about abortion than I do.
Or do you have any other justification for considering lumps of undifferentiated tissue which can't survive outside the body of the mother, much less develop into something resembling a human being, as "babies"?
Yes. It's because they aren't simply lumps of tissue. The fetus is very much alive. And whether it can survive outside the mother's womb makes no difference. Human life is human life, no matter where it can or cannot survive.
It doesn't really matter. For me the line is where the foetus can survive outside the body of the mother without severe damage/growth defects, etc. That's a far more reasonable position that claiming that a lump of cells or an embryo that looks more like a fish than a human can be legally equated to a fully developed human being.
For your information, before I was born, my parents had a baby. A deformed baby. I won't go into the details of what it looked like, but the baby died five minutes after birth. Now going off of how you say that a baby is not a baby until it can survive out of the mother's womb, would you say that that the deformed baby my parents had was not a baby after all?
Funny but I didn't talk about you
Oh, so this isn't a public discussion? Perhaps you should you should put a sign on your posts that says not to respond to you if someone disagrees with what you said.
