• HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I got into an argument once with my dad about abortion. And he told me “You know, you should be totally against abortion. You’d not exist if I managed to convince your mom to abort you.” As an argument to limit abortion access.

    Obviously a fucked up thing to say to your own kid, but also it kind of was like: I wouldn’t give a shit if you had, I wouldn’t exist essentially. Kind of wish you’d convinced her TBH.

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      14 hours ago

      At one point, somehow the topic of abortion came up while my father was visiting me from the other side of the country. I basically said that I have zero tolerance for anti-choice sentiment and he kept trying to argue with me about it, and I told him eventually that that sort of talk wasn’t welcome in my house.

      He tried to “win” me over by saying that I wouldn’t be here if my parents believed in abortion (my mother is actually pro-choice just would never abort herself, but I didn’t get into that). I told him that would be fine. I would never have even known that I didn’t exist.

      I know that is the common response, but it’s true, and it also actually shut him up. That and I think he believed me when I told him that he would not be welcome back in my house if he continued that kind of talk.

      • Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        19 hours ago

        If it was alive and then isn’t, it is dead. That’s what dead means. A fetus that died in the womb is still dead, and died, and there is no other way to define what unborn is than to describe it as a previously living entity; thus dead.

        • robear@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Do people talk about tumors as “alive” and “dead” before and after it’s been removed.

          The problem is defining when human life begins. It’s generally accepted that before 12 weeks, it’s not alive. After that it gets more gray.

      • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        20 hours ago

        A fetus is only a potential person, but it’s still a living organism. After it’s aborted, it’s dead.

          • Instigate@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            16 hours ago

            I don’t think “it can’t continue living on its own” is a good measure of whether or not something is alive or a separate organism. Even after birth a baby human can’t “continue living on its own” without being provided for. A parasitic creature can’t “continue living on its own” without a host. A severely injured person can’t “continue living on its own” without life support. Pretty easy argument for even a stupid forced-birther to deconstruct.

          • Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            19 hours ago

            This does not actually refute the claim that the fetus would be dead. I’m not actually sure if you’re contesting anything.

              • Omnipitaph@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                19 hours ago

                Do you think women are conceiving intern minerals in their womb? What is this question xD I’m going to assume you’re having a laugh, because by every metric a fetus is alive. If those cells are multiplying, consuming various stuff to continue multiplying; the fetus is alive. If the fetus, removed from its source of food, dies; it must be alive. If you removed me from all sources of food, I too would die.

                If you have a compelling argument, I’d love to hear it though.

          • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            20 hours ago

            True, but only due to current technology. With an artificial womb it would eventually develop into a person, unlike, say, an organ.

            • rockerface🇺🇦@lemmy.cafe
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              20 hours ago

              I mean, with cloning technology any cells could develop into a person. Doesn’t mean we should count my hand as a separate living thing.

              • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                20 hours ago

                A fetus is considerably further along than just a random cell. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to make a distinction there.

                • rockerface🇺🇦@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  19 hours ago

                  A hand is also further along than a random cell. I don’t see the distinction as significant, if we’re already handwaving the details to the “future technology”

  • The Mop Lord@moplemmy.fyi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    22 hours ago

    This is like the Batman refusing to kill killers thing but better cause it involves unprotected sex, my favorite kind.