it’s pointless arguing this to the abortion worshipers.
Their rhetoric is so insincere and such false representation that what can you say things like
“keep your rosaries off my ovaries!”
“Keep your laws out of my bedroom”
I agree and I have used this argument.
Other questions;
Can DNA vote?
An egg and sperm are joined in a petrie dish, is that a human.
DNA from 3 people (it happened) are joined in a petrie dish, is that human?
DNA from a human and some other animal are joined (if it hasn’t happened it will), is that human?
I agree. What sets us apart as unique individuals versus a ‘tissue mass’ of someone else is we have unique DNA.
That's doubtful. DNA was discovered well before 1973, and the double-helix structure was modeled in the 1950s. While we did not know nearly as much about DNA, and while the Supreme Court may not have known much about it in 1973, the general idea of genes and chromosomes and Mendelian inheritace was well-known at the time (and all of your points remain accurate if you replace "DNA" with "chromosomes."
It's not that pro-abortion folks don't understand that a fetus is a human life, it's that they just don't care.
If the question is, “is it human life?”, I think it is self-evident that it is not an elm, a duck or a Pekingese.
This is a highly successful argument to bring to teenagers.
I taught religious education class to 9th graders...an age where they have knowledge of the topic, but haven’t been brainwashed by the left yet. While the religious points that I presented were well received, it was the secular point that nailed the issue with them.
I’ve also added the following:
- sometime in the next three years, chances are good that one of your friends is going to get pregnant.
- your friend is going to come to you FIRST. Be prepared to know what to say to her. Don’t let her make the mistake of killing her own child, something that she’ll regret for the rest of her life.
Considering that DNA was being taught in junior high biology classes well before 1973, that statement is just wishful thinking. The USSC *knew* the truth, but turned it on its head to achieve a pre-ordained outcome.
Roe v Wade is jurisprudence on a par with Dred Scott, and for precisely the same reason. It stands science, truth, morality, and humanity on its head at the behest of a well-heeled, vocal, and fundamentally dishonest special interest group...
the infowarrior
Fact: Stem cells from embryonic aborted babies are presently used to make human eyes, skin etc.
Ergo the stem cells must be human, coz you can`t use a horse stem cell or pig stem cell to grow a human organ.
Otherwise you`d have pig eyes, horse skin, etc., GROWING.
FACT: Only Human stem Cells can Grow Human tissues.
Ergo the aborted baby at any stage is indisputably HUMAN.
Otherwise the woman is pregnant with a non-human fetus.
What??
Biology 101 says it`s impossible for a woman become pregnant by a horse.
Reductio ad absurdam.
Yep, and I think there’s an even stronger argument from the immune system.
The placenta has a barrier that keeps the mother’s immune system from the baby. If this barrier malfunctions, the mother’s immune system will attack the baby’s cells and kill it.
The very system whose sole job it is to distinguish what belongs to the body and what doesn’t, doesn’t recognize the baby as part of the mother.
So to prochoicers I have a simple response:
How can you claim that fetus as part of your body, when *your own body* says otherwise?