May 10 2012

A Fetus Is Not A Human Being

Published by at 11:30 pm under canadian politics

There. I said it.

I’d be standing with the people throwing condoms. And you can put away your crucifixes, “March for Life” dudes. We’re not fucking vampires.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

33 responses so far

33 Responses to “A Fetus Is Not A Human Being”

  1. johnon 11 May 2012 at 3:26 am

    “We’re not fucking vampires”…… No, but you ARE a fucking idiot.

    BTW? I don’t own a crucifix.

    xxxooo john

  2. SUZANNEon 11 May 2012 at 5:09 am

    If it’s not a human being, what is it, a dog?

  3. Blame Crashon 11 May 2012 at 6:15 am

    Wow! What a convincing argument you make! But tell me, besides your political indoctrination, where’s your proof?
    Not that your bogus assertion matters anyway. Anyone who hasn’t allowed themselves to be steeped in the Lib-left suicidal dogma can easily comprehend that an unborn human fetus is an unborn human being. It’s as simple as that and those who put on their “smarter than thou” airs, make fools of themselves by attempting to deflect attention away from that blatantly obvious truth.

  4. Blame Crashon 11 May 2012 at 6:48 am

    What ever happened to the good old days when the argument du jour for “baby killing” was that it was a “woman’s right to choose”? That one always got a chuckle out me. You’d have to be pretty stupid to buy into that stinker of an excuse.

  5. Westrobon 11 May 2012 at 7:15 am

    Then what is the ‘offspring’ (the meaning of the word ‘fetus’)? An Alien?

  6. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 7:51 am

    “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?”

    This question assumes there is a difference between a chicken and an egg. And there is.

    An egg has the potential to become a chicken, just as a fetus (or a fertilized egg, for that matter) has the potential to become a human being. This isn’t so difficult to understand, people.

  7. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 7:55 am

    Re: John, go fuck yourself.

    Re: Suzanne, see the comment above re: “chickens and eggs”.

    Re: Blame Crash, we’re not talking about baby killing. A fetus isn’t a baby (and isn’t a child and isn’t a teenager and isn’t a fully-developed human being).

  8. Ryan Ron 11 May 2012 at 8:03 am

    A fetus is a human being. The fetus of a human mother is a homo sapien, and is therefore a human being. This is simple scientific fact.

    You are simply 100% wrong on this.

  9. Blame Crashon 11 May 2012 at 8:08 am

    It wasn’t a coincidence that a “man’s right to choose” was scorned and shunned.
    Take for example: some young guy makes a big mistake one night and gets a girl from his High School pregnant. If she exercised her choose to have this baby, he, for ever more, would have a feral pack of man hating bureaucrats bitches chasing him down for every last penny he made.
    No equal treatment there now is there.
    So much for your human rights argument too.

  10. Blame Crashon 11 May 2012 at 8:09 am

    “Fully-developed human being”
    You-know-who, said that very thing about you-know-who.
    Eugenics sounds like such a wonderful idea until one finds themselves being bayoneted into the boxcar. Then it’s not such a gas anymore.

  11. Ryan Ron 11 May 2012 at 8:10 am

    At some point during unborn child development (I believe it’s shortly after the first trimester, IIRC), the unborn child has a developed nervous system, brain-wave activity, and the ability to feel pain. Clearly, this is a life. Clearly, this is human life.

  12. climatecriminalon 11 May 2012 at 8:18 am

    if there is no higher power then a human being is whatever we define a human being to be; when does one become a human being, when the cord is cut? when “it” comes out, when “it” breaths on its own? an argument could be made that if “it” can’t breath on its own or if its still attached to the mother then it isn’t a human being yet and can simply be killed and turfed in a trash can since “it” isn’t alive and has no rights;

  13. Ryan Ron 11 May 2012 at 8:26 am

    Also, in my experience, most pregnant mothers think of their unborn child as their “baby” before the baby is born. Are all those pregnant mothers wrong, in your opinion? Would you go up to them and say “No, that’s not a baby, and it’s not a human being.”?

  14. Ryan Ron 11 May 2012 at 8:32 am

    ClimateCriminal – Those are very poor arguments on your part.

    “A human being is whatever we define a human being to be.”

    Do I really need to point out how dangerous this idea is? How such thinking has empowered racist tyrants to treat certain groups of humans as subhumans?

    “An argument could be made that if “it” can’t breath on its own or if its still attached to the mother then it isn’t a human being yet.”

    Many people in hospitals literally can’t breath on their own – They need artificial respiration systems to keep them alive. Do they cease to be a human being simply because they can’t breath? Of course they don’t.

    Some people are born as Siamese twins. Do each of these twins cease to be a human being simply because they’re attached to another person?

  15. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 8:35 am

    Hey Blame Crash. I do believe you just surreptitiously invoked the wrath of Godwin’s law. You lose.

    Re: Ryan R: “The fetus of a human mother is a homo sapien, and is therefore a human being.” If that’s such a “fact”, why do so many people disagree with you? Usually, when we’re dealing with facts, like the Earth is round or 2+2 is 4, you can get unanimous (or at least close-to-unanimous) agreement. Clearly, you need to revisit your assumptions.

    Re: climatecriminal: “if there is no higher power then a human being is whatever we define a human being to be;”

    I suppose I would rephrase it thusly: “There is no higher power. Let’s not be distracted by supernatural silliness. As critically-thinking people, we ought to continue to discuss what defines a human being.”

  16. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 8:43 am

    Hey Ryan, just saw your “how such thinking has empowered racist tyrants to treat certain groups of humans as subhumans?” line. I call Godwin’s law. You lose as well. Cheers.

  17. Ryan Ron 11 May 2012 at 11:31 am

    jnarvey – Some facts are inconvenient truths that some people like to pretend aren’t facts. That’s how people can disagree with them. So my comment on a fetus being a human being is not an assumption whatsoever. It is a simple fact that a fetus within a human woman is a human being – It’s also an inconvenient truth for many people.

    And “Racist tyrants” is very general, and can apply to all sorts of historical figures. Equating it with “Godwin’s Law” is extremely childish.

    You have not dealt substantively with any of the points raised against your stated position. You have not provided any compelling argumentation whatsoever for your stated position.

    If that makes you feel like you’ve “won”, by all means, enjoy your hallow “victory”.

    If you become interested in an actual serious discussion, instead of petty attacks and completely unsupported assertions, then I’d welcome that.

    Otherwise, good day, sir.

  18. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 11:57 am

    It’s “hollow victory”, dude. And yes, I’ll take it — deservedly so.

    I find it hilarious that you keep asking me to provide a “compelling argument” for my position. It’s obvious that a fetus is not a human being, in the same sense that a seed is not a plant, a larvae is not a fly and an egg is not a chicken — an analogy I’ve already put forth several times here, though you’ve carefully ignored it.

  19. the raton 11 May 2012 at 1:50 pm

    What’s a fetus then? When does it stop being a fetus and become human? Tell me that and you win. Until you do you are just bandying words without meaning.

    Right now the law says completely outside the mother’s body = human, one toe still inside = not human. That doesn’t sound terribly reasonable. So how far back do we go? The point of viability outside the womb? That’s a moving target as medicine advances and my money is on us being able to grow fetuses/babies outside the womb soon.

    I’m no pro-life zealot, I can easily differentiate between a fertilized egg, a blostocyst, and a baby. It’s that fetus stage that really bothers me…

    So please, oh wise one, tell me, when do we become human?

  20. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 2:15 pm

    Hey rat re: “What’s a fetus then? When does it stop being a fetus and become human?”

    Why do you think anyone is obligated to give you an easy answer to a question that bio-ethicists will be debating for years to come?

    Your challenge is insincere — akin to suggesting that a “missing link” in the archaeological record disproves the basic thesis of evolution. Or if you’d prefer, when does an agglomeration of star-stuff become a planet? When does a bunch of car parts become a car? At what precise moment does a human being become self-aware (Certainly not at birth and not for some time thereafter)?

    A tree is not a table. A bunch of organic compounds without DNA is not life. And a fetus is not a human being.

  21. Becon 11 May 2012 at 3:28 pm

    A fetus IS a human being to a woman/man/family that treasures it’s mere existence, watches it grow, develop fingerprints at 9 weeks, nurtures the body with health and sustenance, music and dreams.

    A fetus IS NOT a human being to a person who feels none of the above and makes the choice not to welcome someone, should it not be them, with those qualities into THEIR life to give a life.

    I guess we can only summarize that there are some people out there, lucky that they weren’t snuffed out during their gestation and were allowed to become a ‘technical human being’? On the side of luck!
    Digits cleared of the body and airways functioning is the simplistic response it would appear and as well, rather scientifically and emotionally shallow without question.

  22. enkiduon 11 May 2012 at 4:07 pm

    If a fetus is not a human being, can you explain the mechanism by which it becomes a human being? I don’t mean tell me at what point in time you are willing to call it a human, but explain why and how it now is human when before it wasn’t.

    If you can’t answer that, then why do you believe what you believe? If ‘bio-ethicists’, who you imply know more than you do on the subject, do not have definitive answers, on what basis do you take your inflexible stand?

    “A bunch of organic compounds without DNA is not life. ” WTF??? Has anyone said it is? Are you trying to say that a fetus is devoid of DNA? I am pretty darned sure that if you were to send a tissue sample from a fetus to a Lab for analysis they would tell you it contains DNA and that it is human.

    ps As a Cabinetmaker, I can tell you exactly how a tree becomes a table.

  23. jnarveyon 11 May 2012 at 4:10 pm

    enkidu, you seem to lack the word “metaphor” in your vocabulary. I suggest you look it up before you double-down on your stupid remark.

  24. johnon 11 May 2012 at 4:16 pm

    NOTE: This comment has been edited by the blog’s owner for violating ethical commenting codes of conduct. The meaning of the remaining comment may have been slightly altered.

    Jonathon Narvey seems like a really cool, smart dude.

  25. Bryanon 11 May 2012 at 4:51 pm

    When is it a human being then?
    Anything other than at conception is arbitrary.

    You make the classic moron mistake by assuming you have to be Catholic to be pro-life. Just shows how stupid you are.

  26. anon1152on 11 May 2012 at 5:07 pm

    I think focusing on the human/not-human distinction is a red herring. It’s the wrong question. A human fetus is obviously human. What else could it be?

    Of course there might be a difference between “human” and “human being”.

    I think it would be more fruitful to ask whether or not a fetus, or embryo, or fertilized egg, is a “person.” The answer to that question is, I think, obviously, “no.”

    Of course, there may be other good reasons to use the law and the power of the state to “protect” a fetus, or embryo, or fertilized egg. I just can’t think of any that would override a woman’s right to choose.

    But I digress.

    Mr. Narvey: do you think that your position could be changed to “a fetus is not a person”?

  27. Sean Mon 11 May 2012 at 8:53 pm

    IMO a baby is a human being whether it’s in the womb of the human Mother, or outside the womb after delivery. The specious argument that a baby isn’t a baby until the State says so is an “argument” of convenience and group think, where otherwise intelligent people rationalize an extremely violent, consequential act with ideological cliche”s, catch phrases and junk science belying their own intelligence. There is no doubt the subject of abortion is a contentious and divisive one, to say the least, but the issue of abortion, especially as the law now stands in Canada is in need of some serious debate and education. For anyone to declare the debate on abortion is over, and the “science” is settled is the argument of a coward, or someone who is afraid to find out that they may be wrong. The “argument” that a baby is just a fetus and not a baby seems to be derived from the notional intent of absolving any personal responsibility attributed to termination. In my experience, I have known girl friends that I grew up with that made the decision to have abortions when they were in their early 20″s, and I can assure anyone who cares that these two woman were forever changed as a result… profoundly so, and not in a good way. It was a mind opening experience to see two people that I knew very well turn into completely different people. This is a nation that went from one extreme to another, without debate and without education. Trudeau took a very sensitive and divisive moral question and made it worse by absolving society of responsibility, the continuing excuses for that absolving has left a colossal void, replaced with hysterical rhetoric and easy cliche’d answers designed to make people feel better. It’s a difficult, emotional subject, and much too complex to debate in this type of forum, but I for one think it’s well past the time to engage in a serious national debate, and not be held to ransom by the whims and fancy of politicians.

  28. enkiduon 11 May 2012 at 11:06 pm

    I understand metaphor, it does not mean that you get to make a ridiculous statement and pretend it has meaning. Please explain your ‘metaphor’. Then, please give some support for your position regarding the humanity or lack thereof of a human fetus.

  29. sdcon 12 May 2012 at 3:32 am

    I’d be with you, Jonathan; the second the conservative becomes an arm of the theocratic wingnut party (the way the republicans have in the US) is the second I no longer vote conservative. The only person who has any right to make medical decisions for me is ME. Oddly enough, the religious crazies didn’t get their panties in a bunch over this issue until after Napoleon worked out a cozy deal with Pius VII, where the Catholics would be given free run in France, and Napoleon would let him remain pope, while French women continued to pump out kids for the army.

  30. the raton 12 May 2012 at 7:08 am

    “Why do you think anyone is obligated to give you an easy answer to a question that bio-ethicists will be debating for years to come? “

    I think you owe me an answer because you are wholeheartedly advocating the right to terminate a pregnancy but you can’t define what makes a human “human”. You are willing to risk killing a human. You say bioethicists struggle with this question but apparently you do not. That tells me that one is us is an ideological extremist and I’ll give you a hint: It’s not me!

    And for just downright scary let’s talk about this line:

    “At what precise moment does a human being become self-aware (Certainly not at birth and not for some time thereafter)?”

    Is that your definition of human, self-aware? And if you are correct and a baby is not self-aware then it’s not human? Are you seriously implying infanticide is OK because babies aren’t human? And those who are mentally disabled and never become truly self-aware? Is it Ok to “abort” them?

  31. Dollops - Eric Dollon 12 May 2012 at 12:23 pm

    Please consider this argument. A grain of oats is oat, a butterfly puppa is a butterfly, and a fertilised human egg is human – all they need is the right conditions and time to realise their ultimate earthly form and to start the cycle over again. Who is to say that the tadpole is not the intended end, making frog and egg mere stages in its development?

  32. Jeremyon 15 May 2012 at 4:01 pm

    So when is the fetus a human being then – At birth? 1 day earlier and it’s not a human being? You comfortable with that Jonathan?
    Maybe now you’re 99% sure. That’s sure enough to kill the baby – sorry “fetus”?
    Under the nazi’s, it was legal to kill jews because first they were declassified as humans under the law. The population was able to accept that. For the most part, they turned a blind eye to the obvious truth – they sure looked human. A fully developed baby sure looks human to me.

  33. Boognishon 29 May 2012 at 5:49 pm

    I for one am sick of old white men making decisions about women’s bodies. Grow a uterus if you want to join the debate, otherwise you should just be pro-choice.
    Or adopt.
    Please, tell me how many of you have adopted children?

    @jnarvey- I appreciate your conviction.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply