Ah, so the non-sentient blob being made of human DNA is the magic part, huh? Why, exactly? I'm guessing "special feelings in my tummy", but I could be wrong.
Also, I will add: We men cannot get pregnant. We cannot know what it's like. So why the FUCK do we get to decide what women do to their bodies outside of meaningful discussions if they're our SO? That is the height of conceit.
We can already vacuum out the nucleus of a cell and put in that of another within the same species. So, if we get to sucking out the DNA of a cow zygote and putting human DNA in, and it's viable, is that a human being?
It's far easier to prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum in the uterus than it is to prevent sperm production. That's why we had a female contraceptive pill 70 years ago, but male pills have only recently become workable.
That's an interesting view of life, rooted entirely in geography! Can an infant survive outside the mother's body?
Medical professionals will tell you this exact same thing. There aren’t any women walking into the doctor’s office at 38 weeks saying let’s have an abortion. After a certain number of weeks, all abortions are because of those abnormalities. Which is why it needs to remain legal.
You're offering a definition. Does your definition of life (able to survive outside the mother) include third party assistance or not?
If men can't control everything, how can they feel like masters of the universe, and without that glittering gameshow prize, how can we make them inflict cruelty upon each other in the name of the almighty buck? Without racism, misogyny, toxic masculinity, and a slave-wage underclass, the whole system falls apart. What are ya, a commie?
Then you should be morally against ICE's detention camps: Their lives are at stake, and the children detained aren't there by choice. You should be morally against situations that lead to Breonna Taylor. You should be morally against police violence that have needlessly taken lives such as George Floyd, et al. If you are not, you are NOT pro-life. You are pro-birth. If you are pro-life, you can't pick and choose which lives (fetuses) are to be preserved over others (those that are living). As noted above by @Damar, late term abortions aren't a thing -- it's a propaganda scare tactic. You can be morally against abortions all you like; that's fine. But you cannot dictate what someone else does to their own body. If so, shall I deny you alcohol? You may get drunk. Tobacco? Lip, tongue, or lung cancer. Wouldn't want you hurting yourself -- and hell, booze may cause you to hurt someone else; smoke give someone second hand cancer! (and I know how well Prohibition went and why it was a bad idea)
They always forget that second life, as well as the fact that it takes two people to create that second life in the first place.
Do you have any scientific evidence, beyond unprovable philosophical assumptions (which by definition are not scientific) for any of that, other than number 2?
What scientific evidence do you have (other than unprovable philosophic assumptions) for that definition?
If "the second life", could be grown in a jar without being parasitic off another lifeform, that'd be great. But, we're not there yet, so the rights of born people will have to take priority.
Save the babies!! The white, blue eyed, towheaded babies!! Preferably ones walled off in the safety of the suburbs created by red-lining. Walled away from...y'know...THOSE neighborhoods.
If you’re talking about another human being seeing to the needs of the baby, then you’re being stupid. I’ve already stated that if the fetus is able to survive on medical equipment such as an incubator, then yes, they are babies. Both my pregnancies that resulted in a live birth required medical assistance.
