When does a fetus become a person?

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^ | 8/1/03 | Shaunti Feldhahn, Diane Glass

[kinsman redeemer]

The correct answer is:
"It was never NOT a person."

The way the question is posed is somewhat akin to, "Do you still beat your wife?"

[agrace]

The lefty column is UNBELIEVABLE. I could write a better column than that, in fact I'd love to have a chat with her about it in my living room. What a lame defense, inaccurate even and probably downright disingenuous.

[ApesForEvolution]

When does a fetus become a person?

Ranks right up there with 'When did you stop beating your wife?'. And, for the record, Diane Glass is a foolish, knee-pad-communist beotch whose level of awareness is just short Dilbert's.

[proxy_user]

A person: when the soul enters the body.
A citizen: at birth.

I'm sure there will be a few replies...

[Straight Vermonter]

To assume human superiority is the height of narcissism and wishful thinking. It's the same kind of mindset of Nazi Germany. We're no more sacred than the ocean or sky.

So why not legalize all forms of murder?

[Straight Vermonter]

The lefty author never actually gets to the point. She does not even make the weak pro-murder arguments the lefties usually make.

Simple logic tells us that at one moment there is no life at another there is life. Therefore something must happen at the interval between these 2 moments. The only time during gestation that we can find such a dramatic moment is at the meeting of the gametes.

From that point on there is development and change but the person is already there. The "magic" of life has already happened.

[My2Cents]

Ms. Glass is pretty confident in her opinions, considering that she doesn't believe in anything absolute. Slaves weren't considered "persons" under the law either, but the Constitution was amended to correct that. The Constitution can be changed to declare unborn babies "persons" under the law as well. So the question, or really the answer as she frames it, isn't a moral or spiritual issue in her viewpoint, but a political one. So if the pro-life movement eventually becomes the majority in this nation (and on some issues it is), I hope she embraces the rights of the unborn when they are finally protected by law.

[ivanhoe116]

We're no more sacred than the ocean or sky.

Maintain this line of thinking and you have named your own poison.

[My2Cents]

Ms. Glass again: "This isn't a debate about when life begins. This is a debate about what life we value." Spoken like a true fascist.

[My2Cents]

BTW, I'm all in favor of protecting a woman's "reproductive rights," as Ms. Glass would call it. I believe a woman should be able to prevent a pregnancy by whatever means possible. But as soon as a conception has taken place, there's a new life involved, and the woman's "reproductive rights" no longer apply.

[thoughtomator]

Either one must accept that it is a human life at the moment of fertilization when a unique DNA pattern is created, and therefore that is a human life that deserves legal protection; or to go the Peter Singer route and declare that human life is worthless until it is self-supporting. There is no other position that is rationally consistent with itself and the scientific facts of the question.

If you assume that abortion is a right because a woman has a right to control her own body, then you must also assert that prostitution should also be legal on the same basis. How many in the baby-killing camp support legal prosititution. I will hazard a guess and say not many.

[thoughtomator]

If we're no more sacred than ocean or sky, why then is it wrong to kill another person?

[DannyTN]

"To assume human superiority is the height of narcissism and wishful thinking. It's the same kind of mindset of Nazi Germany. We're no more sacred than the ocean or sky."-abortionist viewpoint

Notice the comparison of anti-abortionists to Nazi's. (For that matter she compared all who hold human life sacred) Yet it was the Nazi's who were attempting to breed the perfect race. Applying a strictly scientific approach to repopulation without regard to morals, marriage, family or God.

[kdmhcdcfld]

Fetus is Latin for "baby", so there's your answer...it always is a person.

[ravingnutter]

If fetuses are given more rights than adult women other worrisome repercussions are not far along. Pregnant women who smoke, have a glass of wine, do not visit their doctor or do anything deemed inappropriate can be arrested. Their body becomes a weapon and their lives enslaved. A woman's body is not her own.

Ummm...hate to tell her this, but her worst fear is already happening via CPS, so what's her point?

[fml]

What a bunch of goobly-gook on the part of Ms. Glass.

[FReepaholic]

Person: the instant the DNA of the fetus is formed and is different than the mother's. It then ceases to be the mother's "tissue", and becomes a separate and unique individual.

[Verax]

A fetus is a person when it is independent of a woman's body.

So, a 6th month old baby who was born 3 months premature is a "person", but a 9 month old baby who's due to be born tomorrow morning is not?

CRAP!

You Pro-Aborts need to lose this tired old rediculous arguement and start telling the truth. No doubt you'll still have plenty of support.

A baby is a human from the time at which, left unharmed, its normal course of development would lead to birth.

The truth is more like...

"We women have earned the right to kill our offspring if we find them inconvenient for any reason. You Rasist Christian Extremists are just trying to prevent us from enjoying casual sex. Nobody else gives a damn about what we do because the children are tucked behind a thin layer of skin and might as well not exist - so just shut up and let us do our thing."