• NathA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’re not in fetus territory, here. A premature baby born at 28 weeks has an 80-90% chance of surviving and is unlikely to have any health issues.

    The article doesn’t say why they waited so long to reach this decision, but on the face of it this case starts to blur the line between abortion and murder.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      A baby born at 28 weeks is absolutely likely to have health issues. What the fuck are you talking about? That would be extremely premature.

      A healthy fetus has a good chance of surviving, sure. But what if she found out that the fetus had a severe medical issue that would not see it live long outside the womb? That is significantly different. The article does not give detail on that.

      The face of it does not provide detail. I agree that this blurs the line but the line is blurry because of the lack of information.

    • hotdaniel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t matter what the age of the child is. Abortion at any age is not murder, because no one has the right to use someone else’s body without their consent (until Republicans succeed at allowing this). You’re arguing that a fetus has no right to someone’s body, until it grows up and reaches a magical “goldilocks zone” where it’s not too old, not too young, but juuust right. Then you say, “can’t abort, it’s alive, it has a right to use someone’s body without their consent!” and, then, once it’s born, it loses that right! The entire situation you’ve been manipulated into agreeing to, makes a complete mockery of the very pro-life values it’s supposed to espouse.