XPost: alt.abortion, talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.republicans   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics   
   From: JW@jw.com   
      
   On 8/27/2024 6:05 PM, Josh Rosenbluth wrote:   
   > On 8/27/2024 2:11 PM, Just Wondering wrote:   
   >> On 8/27/2024 2:03 PM, Attila wrote:   
   >>> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 12:35:03 -0600, Just Wondering wrote:   
   >   
   > {snip} (snipped the reality that full-ass grown up human abortion survivors   
   exist.)   
   >   
   >>>>>> The fact that any of them even exists shows that fetuses   
   >>>>>> are unborn humans.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> No one questions the species involved - simple DNA proves   
   >>>>> that.  The issue is at what point an individual human being   
   >>>>> comes into existence.  Historically it has never been prior   
   >>>>> to live birth.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> Historically you are wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> The laws involving a fetus and a born child prove you wrong.   
   >>> After birth a child can inherit, be a tax deduction, be   
   >>> counted in a census, own property, be a citizen under the   
   >>> proper laws, and need a passport, again under certain laws   
   >>> in certain locations among other things.  None of this can   
   >>> apply to a fetus.   
   >>>   
   >> There's your problem.  You write of statutes.  I speak of   
   >> biological reality.   
   >   
   > There is no "biological reality" about whether a fetus is a person. And   
   > personhood, not "human life" or "unborn human" is the debate.   
      
   Please try to keep up, this thread is and has always been about   
   the biological reality of unborn humans, NOT the legal fiction   
   of "personhood".   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)