So when you are physically attatched to an IV drip and a breathing machine, do they become part of your body? Once more, feel free to provide some credible science that states that the child is part of its mother's body. Since your argument so far has consisted of nothing but logical fallacies, you are not credible enough to be taken at your word.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

Yes there is wolf. We have already been through the whole issue and you clearly lost. Have you forgotten so quickly. If I, through my own actions, put you in a position in which you depend upon me for your very life, and I withdraw my support and you die, then I am a murderer and if someone else puts you in a position in which you depend upon me for your life, I also can't simply withdraw my support unless your presence represents a real immenent threat to my life.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

Still going around in circles Pale, some things never change. Your facts are so far removed from real life it's pathetic. The abortion issue is about a womans rights and all the scientific facts in the world doesn't change that so you're the one that's lost Pale.

The IV drip and the breathing machine don't need me to exist, the fetus does.Maybe someday in the future a human fetus will be able to fully develop outside a woman's body, until that happens, the woman has the womb and therefore control of what is done to it. Credible science? You mean credible to you? The fetus develops inside me, along with the placenta. The placenta is attached to me and the fetus, through which it's blood is oxygenated and it is nourished. The fetus is in MY womb and for it to develop I must carry it. That makes it part of MY body.Say anything you like, nothing at this point in time, changes that. This is not a philisophical argument. This is biological fact.

False analogy sachem. The IV and breathing machine are analogous to the mother, not the unborn. You might need them in order to continue living, but they don't need you to continue their existence exactly as the child needs its mother to continue living but mom doesn't need the child in order to continue her existence.

Another logical fallacy. You beg the question and assume that the child is not a living human being who is entitled to have its basic human rights protected. Simply stating a thing doesn't make it true. You can't simply assume that the child isn't a living human being and expect the argument to stand.

I mean credible. Medical journals, medical textbooks, biolgy texts, etc are credible materials. Since we are talking science here, a credible scientific source is acceptable.

In your own denial that the child is an individual you admit that it is. You admit that it has its own blood and it is nourished as a separate entity from the rest of your body. The placenta by the way, belongs to the child and not one drop of its blood flows through your veins. Being attatched to a thing does not make you a part of that thing.


Sorry, but it isn't part of your body. If it were, you would be able to easily provide some credible science that stated as much. You can't, so you are reduced to arguing that it is because you say it is. Not much of an argument is it?

And I am not making a philosophical argument, I am making a scientific argument. The child is a separate individual. Its DNA identifies it as not part of your body in any way.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

Aristotle or is it Thomas Aquinas? The fetus is not an individual. My blood supplies the placental blood (you are correct that they do not co mingle, I never said they did.) Are you denying that the placenta exists and I need something published in a scientific journal to prove that it does? Are you denying that the fetus grows within a woman's womb? Are you denying that a woman has to carry the fetus inside that womb in order for it to develop? As long as I/my body has that task, what happens to the fetus is my decision. You saying otherwise doesn't make it so.

have you forgotten that I'm not living in your body, nor am I disabling you in any way, shape, or form.
people are not forced to care for others, especially not at their own expense.
you can't compare the two. because a fetus is not like a live, post-uterian human.
this is just another reason why anti-choicers are anti-women

I would imagine from their writings and desire to get to the truth of any matter they explored, had they known then what we know today with regard to developmental biology, thier writings would be quite different.

Of course the placenta exists. It belongs to the child.

And I am denying none of those things. I am saying, however, that because you reside inside of a thing, or depend upon a thing (even for your very life) you are not necessarily a part of that thing. If you want to claim that the child is a part of its mother's body, then you are going to need to substantiate that claim with some credible science.

As far as constitutionality goes, your rights end at the point you become a real and present danger to someone else.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

This goes to the application of philosophical concepts wolf. You can't make the child into something other than what it is by altering your description of it or applying ideas to it. It is what it is and it is a living human being. You do not have the right to kill another human being unless that human being represents a real and immenent threat to your life.

__________________
"It's not alive, It's not alive, It's not alive. Because I said it isnt', there's your proof jerk." ...lexi

I have given scientific proof. If you deny that, fine, that is your right. As for real and present danger, anyone attempting to force me to carry a fetus, is one. You are correct, that just because you reside inside a thing or depend upon a thing, you are not NECESSARILY a part of that thing, but, sometimes you are. A placenta, without me attached, is nothing to that fetus.