AIBU to think a foetus is alive before birth?

[Mmmchocolatebuttons]

I had a discussion with someone, who believes that a foetus is not alive, until the point they are born. They also asserted that this was not an uncommon view. I have a hard time believing this so I'm putting it to the AIBU poll.

To be clear, I'm pro choice, but I do believe that, for example, a 30 week foetus is factually, scientifically considered to be alive.

Surely, even if you're pro-choice all the way up until birth, you accept that the foetus is alive?

YABU = A foetus is not alive, until birth.
YANBU = A foetus is alive in the womb.

Of course an embryo and a fetus are both alive. It's just very different from being granted the same rights as a person out of the womb. Life and personhood are very differebt things.

A sperm is alive. But masturbation is not mass murder.

Being a legal definition does not mean something is un controversial.

Don’t worry, a stem cell isn’t an organism!

I think I’ll just stick to saying that yes, a foetus is alive…

I'm not sure what your point is? A foetus can't survive with any kind of intervention outside the womb until a certain point. It is, however, alive. I'm not sure why you find this contentious. Many people with severe disabilities can't live without some kind of intervention. They are, however, alive. Are you concerned about my support for choice in the matter of abortion? That's a different issue. But a foetus is, biologically, alive.

I'm surprised why you advocate for allowing other people to terminate this life given you agree it's alive.

many lives get terminated
think of cows and other animals we eat
the question OP asked us to consider was is a foetus alive
this requires us to define living (and perhaps it would also be helpful to define dead, and not alive)
by raising the question of TOP you are assuming but not stating that there is something unique about a human foetus- beyond it being alive

that's a whole different argument

Is masturbation genocide?

Lives that get terminated:

• bacteria on meat when cooked
• Mildew on shower curtain when bleached
• Weeds when gardening

Genuinely not understanding other posters. Life/alive does not equate with having rights.

Of course not. It's a lazy straw man

Sperm are haploid reproductive cells—half a genome, no developmental capacity on their own, produced and discarded by the male body in the billions over a lifetime.

Human life as a distinct organism begins at fertilization, not in gametes. This is not opinion; it is the overwhelming consensus of embryology.

I think MAID in Canada is going to challenge these ideas as well. I think it should be available but very strictly controlled. Recently a case where a husband likely coerced his ill wife to be euthanized, and pushed the medical staff to do so urgently even though they noted he suffered from ‘burnout’

If you oppose abortion in all circumstances, then you have very extreme views and are anti-woman. I would never push a woman to an abortion; I would never force a woman to continue with her pregnancy. I believe it is the right of the woman to chose.

This doesn't alter the fact that a foetus is alive, unless it has died, in which case it's dead and the pregnancy won't continue. What is the argument here? Sheesh.

Which had the effect of making the woman carrying it a second class citizen to the foetus.

This is a HUGE thing in the US. Based on conversations I had while I lived there, it really started to seem like every conservative extremely pro-life woman I’d met had an abortion of her own around age 19-20, and then, once they’d done what they felt was necessary to keep their life on track, they don’t want anyone else to be able to do it. I mean, sure, an optimist would say they feel a lot of emotional pain from their abortions and want to save other women from that. I’m not an optimist, so I think they’re just hypocrites of the worst degree.

But as always, the greatest zealot is the convert. It’s true now, it’s always been true, and it will continue to be true.

Don't be ridiculous. Of course bacteria are alive. You wouldn't be able to kill them if they weren't.

Oh, you definitely CAN find out. But it would involve following and testing during attempts at conception or extremely invasive science that’s usually considered unnecessary after conception, if it’s a healthy pregnancy. But if we weren’t ABLE to determine it even with extremely careful monitoring, then how do we have science that says if implantation occurs after day 11 of your cycle, the risk of miscarriage is much higher (and it would be like they did in the study that determined this - “The time of implantation was defined by the appearance of chorionic gonadotropin in maternal urine” which can determine implantation within a 24-48 hour window).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10362823/

Maybe the person confused bacteria and viruses?

Mother's life exception obviously. Why should a woman be allowed to terminate the life of another human being (the foetus)?

That's implantation, not conception though which is when PP said life begins.

Why should a woman be forced to take the health risks and pain of pregnancy and birth? Why is the woman's life and wellbeing worth less than that of the foetus? Why do men always get to walk away with zero consequences? Why do anti abortion people always trot out 'don't have sex then' when it isn't that simple?

Where do you stand on birth defects incompatible with life?

So are we disagreeing or are we both disagreeing with a PP? 😂 Anyway, not agreeing with science is that PP’s problem. Implantation marks the official “beginning” of pregnancy. There will be eggs that get fertilized and don’t implant (listed as high as 40-50% of fertilized eggs don’t implant^), which is why fertilization cannot be considered the beginning of pregnancy.

^https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8287936/

In Malta they don't allow abortion even if woman's life is at stake because Catholic church says you're doing the murder with abortion so it's better to do nothing. Yes, they let women die.

I'm pretty sure some of pro-lifers don't agree with that stance, but saying goes - if you give them a finger, they take the whole hand.

No, it's because you can't know if you're carrying a child/foetus without implantation.

"Human life" you're referring is just a concept. Human life started 300 000 years when we first walked the Earth. Of course embryology will agree with you, but that's because they are in business helping with infertility and helping with baby making.

Hey sorry, but this comment made no sense to me.

There's no way of telling you're pregnant without egg making hormone when it implants. That study just assumes bunch of stuff.