Who will be the 47th President of the United States of America?


  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
dude, thats still the fucking same by definition
No. You are confusing an action and a function.

A parasite will FUNCTION through parasiting, it's the only way it can survive.
A baby is not a parasiting anything if the mother is willingly giving them ressources. On the other hand, they will do the ACTION of paraziting if there is no consent.

Again : Function =/= Action.

In this context. Abortion is legitimate.
 
A baby is not a parasiting anything if the mother is willingly giving them ressources. On the other hand, they will do the ACTION of paraziting if there is no consent.

Again : Function =/= Action.

In this context. Abortion is legitimate.
abortion is legitimate alright, but the unborn being is still from the species human, therefore cant be a parasite or be parasitizing the host (mother). . .
 
is still from the species human, therefore cant be a parasite or be parasitizing the host (mother). . .
Of course it can. If the baby is unwanted. The foetus is literally parasiting the ressources and body of the mother. It's literally what it does when there is no consent. No matter if it could become a human being.
 
Again. I'm not talking about the function but the ACTION of parasiting.

Action =/= Function/nature

A foetus is not a parasite but when unwanted it ACTS like a parasite in the body of a woman by borrowing the ressources and the space inside the body without consent.



Start reasonning.
What you are doing is moving goalposts. Except there's no ground to move them to.
Fetus = not a parasite, whether unwanted or wanted
 
What you are doing is moving goalposts. Except there's no ground to move them to.
Fetus = not a parasite, whether unwanted or wanted
No.I'm simply explaning what happens in reality, something you refuse to aknowledge.

Indeed, a foetus is not a parasite, it's not its nature or its survival function BUT - when UNWANTED (and stop clearly on this notion) - he ACTS by parasiting the body's space and ressources WITHOUT CONSENT.

Action =/= Function
 
No.I'm simply explaning what happens in reality, something you refuse to aknowledge.

Indeed, a foetus is not a parasite, it's not its nature or its survival function BUT - when UNWANTED (and stop clearly on this notion) - he ACTS by parasiting the body's space and ressources WITHOUT CONSENT.

Action =/= Function
Again, it doesn't act in any different way than when it is wanted. You're making up fluff to characterize something without a character
 
See this is the problem with you and your twisted sense of rationale. With people thinking like this damns this world for their own selfish morals.
The one acting without selfish moral here is you.

You are priviledging the HYPOTHESIS of a human being (A foetus that doesn't feel and doesn't think) OVER the real life and choices of a woman.

The one who is a problem is not me here.


Again, it doesn't act in any different way than when it is wanted.
What you don't understand is that the act of parasitizing comes socially with the notion of the lack of consent when we are talking about the action.

So yes. When unwanted, the foetus acts (from the point of view of the bearer) as a parazite. It's LITERALY what it is from their point of you.

But I get that you don't care about that since you take the point of view of women into account in this situation.
 

AL sama

Red Haired
Biological Differences:
  1. Species Relationship: A parasite is typically a different species from its host. A fetus, however, shares the same genetic material and is part of the same species as its mother.
  2. Purpose and Function: A parasite does not serve a purpose beneficial to the host, whereas a fetus is the offspring of the host and part of a natural reproductive process. While a fetus relies on the mother for survival during pregnancy, the relationship is not inherently detrimental in the evolutionary sense; it is crucial for the continuation of the species.
  3. Outcome: In most cases, a parasitic relationship leads to harm or death of the host if left unchecked. In contrast, pregnancy usually leads to the birth of a new individual, which is typically not harmful to the mother under normal conditions.
Ethical and Social Considerations:
  1. Ethical Implications: The comparison is controversial from an ethical and social perspective, as it may imply a negative or hostile relationship between the mother and fetus. This is a sensitive issue, especially in discussions about reproductive rights and abortion, and can influence how society views pregnancy.
  2. Cultural and Emotional Aspects: Many cultures and individuals view pregnancy and the maternal-fetal bond in positive terms, making the comparison with a parasite not only scientifically inaccurate but also emotionally and socially insensitive.
Complications in Pregnancy:
In some cases, like severe medical conditions (e.g., preeclampsia), pregnancy can harm the mother. However, this does not change the fundamental biological and species differences between a fetus and a parasite.
In summary, while there may be superficial similarities in dependency, a fetus cannot be accurately classified as a parasite from a biological, ethical, or social standpoint.

In summary, while there may be superficial similarities in dependency, a fetus cannot be accurately classified as a parasite from a biological, ethical, or social standpoint.
 
Again. I'm not talking about the function but the ACTION of parasiting.

Action =/= Function/nature

A foetus is not a parasite but, when unwanted, it ACTS like a parasite in the body of a woman by taking the ressources and the space inside the body without consent.



Start reasonning.
sure, its taking ressources, but it simply isnt a parasite and cant be, since both beings in this scenario are human.
Post automatically merged:

What you don't understand is that the act of parasitizing comes socially with the notion of the lack of consent when we are talking about the action.

So yes. When unwanted, the foetus acts (from the point of view of the bearer) as a parazite. It's LITERALY what it is from their point of you.

But I get that you don't care about that since you take the point of view of women into account in this situation.
only in this case your supposed parasite is literally built by the body that is hosting it. its simply not at all comparable if you actually care about what the word parasite really means, which you obviously dont. . . .
 
You're the one patronizing women by talking for them and how they view fetuses as if you have a vagina.
I'm only repeating the words of actual feminist women mate (and A LOT of them). Don't assume things and listen to women for once especially those who have to face abortion.

:kata:
the relationship is not inherently detrimental in the evolutionary sense
This for example. Is not true in the case of all unwanted pregnancy since the simple fact of being unwanted can influence both the life of the mother AND the life of the potential baby.

Outcome: In most cases, a parasitic relationship leads to harm or death of the host if left unchecked. In contrast, pregnancy usually leads to the birth of a new individual, which is typically not harmful to the mother under normal conditions.
I don't know where the F you found this information but to say that the birth of a new individual is not harmfull to the mother is complete nonsense and I propose that you tell any women who gave birth that giving birth is not harmfull to see their reaction.

The comparison is controversial from an ethical and social perspective, as it may imply a negative or hostile relationship between the mother and fetus.
Yes. Hostile. Which is exactly how a LOT of women will see an unwanted foetus they can't abort.

It's only controversial for men who can't accept the choices of women. For those who have to live with a growing potential baby inside of their womb, it's a very real thing.

sure, its taking ressources, but it simply isnt a parasite and cant be, since both beings in this scenario are human.
Yes. That's what I said. It's not a parasite, it only ACTS like a parasite and is SEEN like one by the mother when it is unwanted (and only in this case)

a fetus cannot be accurately classified as a parasite from a biological
Indeed. it's not a parasite it ACTS like a parasite.

Again. You guyz need to understand the difference between an action VS a function/nature/classification.

Also.

Listen to women
 
Top