A little girls body isn't ready to have a kid, not only that but making a child birth another child is a traumatising experience, especially considering she didn't want or have a choice to create this baby in the first place. I understand if your pro-life but think about if she had this baby, the baby would be given away as she wouldn't be able to care of it thus creating even more psychological trauma for this child to deal with along with the initial rape.
Don’t even try queen, I’ve had this same long argument before using science based evidence as to why this is inhuman and unfair on the child and their response the whole way had been it’s just not right in my opinion and other people should live life as per my opinion. There are fun subbers here that would rather have two kids miserable as long as one kid got the chance to live no matter how statistically fucked the lives of both kids are now gonna be. I’m sick of this same argument though so I’m gonna clock out and pray that those subber’s kid’s aren’t ever in such a terrible situation.
Yes, if you mean just physically then yes. Before puberty the hips haven't widened and the breasts haven't developed. The baby is then forced to try and grow in a very small uterus, thus why most are prem-babies and need a lot of immediate aftercare. It also puts the mother at risk of ripping or damaging her vagina as it's not ready to push a baby out. It's kind of like trying to force a seed to become a tree and produce healthy mature fruit almost as soon as you plant it.
You know why that person shouldnt have a chance? They aren't a person. They don't exist yet. Without sentience, there is no person. Unless you believe in destiny in which case I can't help you. Further, if you believe it could be God's Plan, If God believe's the rape and forced motherhood of a child is whats necessary to get his point across, it doesn't deserve to be god.
If the scenario presents a significant mortal risk to the mother, then that creates a moral grey area where I'm at least okay with abortion not being banned for said scenario.
"Without sentience, there is no person."
This is not in any way a philosophically settled subject.
Also, for the record, I'm a fairly staunch atheist.
I'm of the opinion that abortions, save for medical emergencies, should only happen in the first trimester.
However, late term or post-birth is tantamount to homicide.
If it cant think its not a person. I dont know how thats not settled. Its a sack of organs without the capacity for thought. An organic machine whose only purpose is to keep functioning. Without the capacity to think and feel, its no more a person than the bacteria in your stomach.
If we go off the logic of future potential of being a person, contraception is murder. Masturbation is murder. A woman ovulating without fertilizing is murder because all of those situations could have been a person. The potential of one day being a person does not make a person in the present. The bacteria on your counter may one day develop conscious thought but you clean and sanitize your countertop anyway. Those bacteria are alive, they have functioning organs, they eat and reproduce. What makes them different from your average animal or even a human? Sentience. Conscious thought. Without it life is meaningless and simply happens to exist by happenstance.
Being a touchy subject I'm not one to usually encourage debates like this. However, I do like talking with people who hold different opinions, especially ones I don't completely understand. Without provoking any sort of argument, @garlog, I'm guessing you're pro-life? What's your opinion on abortion and why do you think it's an immoral thing? (you don't have to answer, I'm just curious. I won't bash your point of view but I can't guarantee others won't)
@xdmaniac
"If it cant think its not a person. I dont know how thats not settled."
What makes you think its settled? Do you think everyone holds that same definition and standard of what a person is?
Regardless, I think its immoral to kill a human being, not necessarily a person by your definition, and I think a human is formed at conception.
"What makes them different from your average animal or even a human?"
The difference is they aren't human.
@parisqeen
I just think abortion is immoral because I think it's immoral to kill a human.
They arent human though. A human fetus is nearly identical to any other mammal fetus. Until it develops the human brain it might as well become a dog or horse. A brain dead body with working organs isn't a person because the brain is dead. The person died when the brain did. Even if the brain started functioning again the person is gone because the electrical signals that were them are gone. If theres no brain function, there's no person no matter how sentimental you feel for what that body could be if there were.
"Without sentience, there is no person."
This is not in any way a philosophically settled subject.
Also, for the record, I'm a fairly staunch atheist.
However, late term or post-birth is tantamount to homicide.
"If it cant think its not a person. I dont know how thats not settled."
What makes you think its settled? Do you think everyone holds that same definition and standard of what a person is?
Regardless, I think its immoral to kill a human being, not necessarily a person by your definition, and I think a human is formed at conception.
"What makes them different from your average animal or even a human?"
The difference is they aren't human.
@parisqeen
I just think abortion is immoral because I think it's immoral to kill a human.
I think that serves as an answer to both of you.