Did you know: until the early 80s, the religious position was that life began at birth, and specifically with the newborn's first (unaided) breath.

It wasn't until the Right realized that the sexual revolution wasn't just a phase and needed a new way to limit the sexual agency and freedom of people who weren't cis men that the current "life begins at conception" rhetoric settled in.

@noelle

Christianity will be a "Right" thing, when "Right" people will live as Christians, sharing all they own, as Christians do at
https://www.nomadelfia.it/eng/

Also, I think life begins at conception by basic logic, given the genome is already complete there.

#Abortion is a #murder.
But I don't blame the mother, but the society. It's a collective murder. It's acceptable only if you accept people are things, production tools.

Abortion is an #oppressive social-control tool.

@Shamar @noelle
Well, life begins, but is it a life of a person?

We don't call it a murder, when you kill a chicken, or a worm. We only call it a murder when you kill another person.

So, is an embryo already a person? or is it just an animal?

@Wolf480pl @noelle

What make it less than a person?

@Shamar @noelle dunno, maybe being unable to pass a turing test?
What makes it more of a person than a fly?

@Wolf480pl @noelle

The genome.

@Shamar @noelle
Would that mean that:
- if another species was equally intelligent to humans, but its DNA was very different from that of a human, it wouldn't be a person?
- if a non-biological creature, eg. an electronic one, was as intelligent as humans, it wouldn't be a person?
- if you uploaded your mind to a computer, the copy of your mind wouldn't be a person?

@Wolf480pl @noelle

Assuming common meaning of #person (from Latin, "per se unum", that is a well defined single entity holding human rights)

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.

Now we could grant human #rights to #intelligent aliens, non biological intelligences and even software simulators if we like (with some issues for human beings... but you know... with propaganda... 😉)

But we could not make these human, even if we call them "person".

A human #embryo, instead IS a #human.

@Wolf480pl @noelle

The mention of #Turing test to identify humans shows how deep penetrated #Capitalism #propaganda.

Humans are not #things!
We are not #tools!

Every single human on Earth could fail the Turing test. After a tongue- or brain-demaging incident, for example.

If a #human cannot STOP being a human, why the hell should it "become" a human at a certain point in life?

So if the life begin at #conception, it's already a human #life.

It's simply #logic, IMHO.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
The ugly truth is that a human can indeed become something that is no longer truly a person.
The even uglier is that a fetus can have genetic defects that would just cause them and/or others suffering. If you can detect these defects soon after conception then it is acceptable to choose not to bring such a child into the world.
1/2

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

These not truths, they are opinions. Not particularly rooted in science I would add, since several physicians I know (including my wife) say that a fetus does not survive if it's genes are so defective to be incompatible with life.

Obviously there are exceptions, but even so they are still human.

To me it's not accepable to kill a human, just because he cannot produce and consume.

This is true for a paralized adult and for a Down child. ..

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

because I refuse to treat humans like things.

Whatever human.

Child, adult, male, female, trans, black, white, killer, saint... whatever.

They are not things we can throw away.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle I believe this views are based on the fact that humans are very expensive to produce. It takes ~20 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to grow a self-sustaining and contributing individual in western countries. I suppose this could change some day, if we could create or copy human beings at will. This would also make murder less of a crime and more like a minor inconvenience.

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Honestly I think that, at some point, these internalisations of #oppressive #capitalism propaganda that make people accept #abortion instead of fighting for the right of women to reproduce and even to grow their children in a sane and supporting environment, will become a Darwinian selective pressure.

Personally I gain nothing from explaining people this (on the contrary!).

But consider the chance I'm right, if your #materialism is not a free ...

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle this is a nonsense. Abortion and other forms of birth control are a technical progression, not capitalist per se. They simply replace the previously-widespread (and pre-capitalist) practice of infanticide with something tidier.

As for the rest, you're imposing a duty to reproduce, not protecting a right to. Reproductive choice is enhanced by technology, but more so by the end of notions like you or I deciding whether someone must bear a child