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.

Apologies all, nrtft but think I've completely missed the whole point of the thread!

And? I don't r ally see what your point is. Women continue to either have illegal abortions or travel to have them when abortion is banned. So the ban doesn't stop abortion.

This is simply not true. The ban in Chile worked super well. Abortions fell and maternal health improved!

I keep on debunking "the bodily autonomy" argument and then you all repeat the same things. People think it's all okay to kill the fetus in utero, but then it wouldn't be okay to a newborn. You can't just leave a child alone in their cot and not feed them because you "don't consent to them living of your body".

The right to control your body stops when it requires the deliberate destruction of another human being who has equal rights. The fetus is not violating the mother’s rights. It's exactly where human biology places it—in the womb of its own mother. That is not “using” her body the way a stranger or rapist would. It is the natural, non-aggressive process of human development.

And the thing about "unwanted children". Do you not think maybe just maybe we should actually help them have a good life? You can't look at a newborn and make a determination as to its whole life. Adopted children do well.

I point you to Chile. I point you to excess live births in US states.

The bodily autonomy argument doesn't need to be debunked, it's your opinion and we can choose not to agree with you.

Again. That is simply not true.

In 2024, 2,775 pregnancy centers across the U.S. provided over $452 million in free medical care, emotional support, education programs, and material goods to women, men, and families. That includes nappies, milk, baby clothes, car seats, and ongoing supplies—not just prenatal care.

Material aid alone jumped 48% to over $116 million, showing centers ramped up long-term family support after Dobbs.

I think self aborting at eight months pregnant should remain a crime. It wouldn't be allowed except for serious medical reasons tnerefore is against the law.

Pro-life cares a great deal about reducing abortion, abortion bans do work, so that’s why they pursue them so doggedly.

Some will travel abroad or find ways to get pills via mail or through underground networks, but most won’t and will either just take preventative action or go ahead and have the baby in bad circumstances.

It helps to know how a specific policy affects unintended pregnancies. We don’t have good data in many places but I think we will have a wealth of data in the aftermath of Roe, which will be nice to have

The issue is that single parenthood itself is associated with all sorts of long-term problems, no matter how much money you throw at the problem … there it is.

(I know you’ll be all like, it’s still not worth killing babies over, but it’s better to just look the other way while they do what they gotta do)

You point me to a country where illegal abortions still place under the ban? Ok

Notwithstanding the penal code provisions, an astounding number of women every year risk illegal and therefore generally unsafe abortions, reflecting a general inability of women to control their fertility by other means. Indeed, surveys suggest that a very high proportion of pregnancies in Chile are not desired. About 35 percent terminate in abortions, corresponding to approximately 160,000 abortions per year, 64,000 of them by girls under eighteen.

They don't work though, studies of almost every country where it's banned shoe illegal abortions take place. They're just not safe or illegal. Why are you spreading misinformation?

I dont think you know what the term de-bunking means

It refers to facts, not opinions. The right to bodily autonomy is an opinion. Sadly, it is not a fact. This is clearly demonstrated by the laws regarding what someone may or may not do to or with their body.

You cannot debunk a belief or opinion. You disagree with it.

Unless you are saying that you are so arrogant that you think your beliefs are facts.

You haven't debunked the argument, you've just decided that - in your opinion - foetuses should have more rights than every other human on the planet.

If someone hooked Person A up to a Person B while they were unconscious, and when both awoke they were told that if Person A removed the connection from Person B before 9 months were up, he would die, Person A would still be legally entitled to unhook himself. So no. The right to control your body is absolute, when it comes to people who are impinging on your body.

You've also brought out crackpot arguments about biology that could just as easily be leveraged in favour of both rape (human biology doesn't care about consent, just reproduction), and cancer (it's exactly where human biology places it, and it has no ill intent), as though 'biology' is somehow the arbiter of all that must happen on the planet.

And it's cute that you think unwanted children are adopted out at birth to loving parents, instead of the more common reality, which is growing up with their biological parents poorly parented, neglected, sometimes abused, and often in poverty.

Your arguments are both naive, and display a disturbing lack of recognition that women are human, with rights.

I think the fact 4.5 million has had to be spent on families who don't have enough money to pay for the basics of having a baby but also can't choose if they go to not gi ahead with the pregnancy is pretty shocking.
It's like saying food banks are great, well yes they are but there was a time that we didn't them.

Of course some will still take place. Just because something will still happen doesn't mean we should make it legal.

We don't legalise murder for born individuals because it happens.

I definitely think my beliefs are correct.

Like in the 1800s many people had the "opinion" that slavery was immoral. That opinion was initially unpopular but ultimately became the common belief and then law.

Shocking that people are stepping in to help families?

We claim equal rights to life for every human being, born or unborn. The right to life is the foundation of all other rights. Without it, bodily autonomy is meaningless because dead people have zero autonomy. You concede the fetus is a human, yet insist the mother can revoke “consent” and kill it.

In 99%+ of elective abortions, the mother and father chose the sex act that foreseeably created a new human being who needs her for nine months. That’s not “being hooked up by strangers”— it’s the natural consequence of your own action.

Again we should help all children to achieve their best in life.

1–2 million couples are actively waiting to adopt healthy infants in the U.S.

Longitudinal research (including a 2024 review by experts David Brodzinsky and Jesus Palacios) shows most adoptees are within normal developmental ranges for attachment, cognitive growth, and emotional health. Their outcomes are stable into adulthood.

Equal rights for all humans—from conception to natural death—is the only consistent, non-discriminatory position.

We do regularly make things legal or decriminalised where criminalising it can be fatal, as illegal abortion can. You prolifers are always pro life until that foetus is a grown woman aren't you?

Without it, bodily autonomy is meaningless because dead people have zero autonomy.
Just not true though is it? You can't take a dead person's organs to save multiple life's unless they've consented. They have more bodily autonomy than you approve of living women having. Your posts read as very naive about the real world. The people you talk about so disdainfully are often parents themselves and are making a decision based on the wellbeing of their living kids. When you and your prolife buddies actually achieve a world where you're gonna provide all the financial help required to bring every single pregnancy into the world then you can go back to lecturing people on your morals. Have you adopted or provided financial support to a mother who planned to abort her child? You really could and it would be a better use of your time rather than sharing your sixth form level ethics to grown ups.

They’ll be waiting a long time because those who carry an unplanned pregnancy to term will usually just raise the child however they can. There has been some disgusting behavior from couples hoping to adopt in the US and betrays their entitlement to other people’s children

The days of pressuring teen moms to give up their children is thankfully over.