2223
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2023
2223 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
34892 readers
961 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Yea, this wasn't an abortion, this was straight up murder. Headline is clickbait as fuck.
As long as it's inside someone's body, it's a body part, not a person, and there's no such thing as murdering a body part.
Had it been outside of her body at the time it would have been viable as a stand alone person.
It wasn't outside of her body, so I don't see how that's relevant.
What makes it relevant for me at least:
This isn't a situation where the fetus/baby would have died on the table after labor without medical intervention, or an argument of "given longer time in the pregnant lady it would have been a healthy baby". This woman could have went through the same exact experience of labor, when she went through labor, and pushed out a baby to put into the system for adoption.
At the moment she took medicine to kill it, if labor had been induced instead she would have given birth to a viable baby. There's evidence of conciousness of the fetus two months before that point. The fetus would have been healthier if cooked longer, but it was "fully cooked" so to speak.
At that point I personally have a hard time writing the fetus off as simply part of the pregnant woman's body.
It shows signs of conciousness and could survive separately from the pregnant woman if removed from her without other intervention (the meds that killed it). We don't have any other "body parts" that work that way. To me, those differences require different considerations from say tumor removal.
The only thing that prevented this from being a baby capable of being given to the adoption system is that the woman carrying it chose to take medicine to kill it.
Arguments about whether it would be better not to exist than be in the system are separate from this for me.
That's still an abortion
Both can be true at the same time.