Abortion

Science would say that there are two separate organisms because 1. They both have unique DNA separate from each other and 2. Both show signs of life and therefore are living. Thus, scientifically, we are dealing with two separate organisms. That typically isnt even debated in abortion arguments. It is understood there are two different organisms, but the question is whether both are human beings. "Women should be allowed to choose..." This is where I bang my head against the wall. This statement is used again again. This is the equivalent of saying that the mother has the choice to determine whether the fetus is human being or not. That means a human being is subjective and up to personal opinion. Here is why. Let us take two pregnant women, both at four weeks. One says the fetus is her child and doesnt get an abortion. However, the other girl says the child is merely a fetus and receives an abortion. How can two fetus', identical in age and development, both be a human being and then not a human being. Defies the law of non contradiction so that argument can be thrown out that the mother can choose whether to get an abortion (aka whether the fetus should be considered a human being or not. This argument also then should mean that women should have the choice to get an abortion at any point in her pregnancy because it is "her choice." If she wishes, and women really were "allowed to choose," then the women should be allowed to choose that the baby before full body birth is still just a fetus, and she can even kill the baby while half way out of the birth canal since it is her choice. But that makes no sense so once again the argument that the mother has the right to decide if the fetus is a human being or not should be thrown out. Now the other argument you might bring up is that, since you gave a time frame, a human being is determined by development. At 24 weeks then the fetus is developed enough to be considered human would probably be an argument you would use. And now here is what is wrong with that: What it means to be human being is contingent upon development. If that statement were true, then I could make the augment, since an adult is more developed towards full human potential then a young child, the the adult is more of a human being then the young child. We would both agree they are both human beings, but then if that argument were true, people can start arguing that someone more developed than you or I are more human than you or I. And that is the issue I have with development determining a human being. Either you are always a human being 100% or never. It is either A or B. Only two options from the moment of conception. And for these reasons it makes sense that the fetus is a human being from conception because using development to isolate human beings is both illogical and unfair. And once again, does being financially unstable mean you should be killed in the name of mercy? No. There are taxable ways to support these people in order to prevent, or at least hinder the likelihood of abortions. That is not what I am saying. I am saying just because a law is in place does not make it just. Laws should be allowed to be subject to scrutiny, debate and change at any time just like abortion. And if a law is shown to be wrong, it should be changed. That goes for any law. Once again you are arguing that it is the womans choice whether the fetus is a human being or not. Lets look at this more closely: Law of Double Murder. You cannot murder a cat, or dog, or non human. Murder is specifically a crime for the taking of another human being's life. So if a pregnant woman at four weeks pregnant is killed, it is understood two human beings are being murdered because why? Because the mother and fetus are both human beings. But then abortion comes along and contradicts logic and reality in this way: The same woman also four weeks pregnant doesn't get murdered but gets an abortion because why? Because the fetus is not a human being??? It makes no logical sense!!! The fetus' are both the same! Nothing can be both human being and not human being at the same time. No one has the choice to make subjective conclusions about objective reality aka the woman shouldn't be allowed to say the fetus is not a human being because that is her opinion. Opinions aren't enough to make me a cat or dog or human being. Either I am something or I am not something. Hence why I still argue for the Law of Double Murder as making so much more sense then abortion and for multiple reasons os the accurate law.