bounty44
Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wayward5oul
Just my two cents about the whole 'parasite' thing...
It took me a long time to get pregnant, and I wanted that child more than anything. But I had a very difficult pregnancy, very sick the whole time, nearly hospitalized several times, always at risk of miscarriage. I stayed so sick that I actually weighed less being 10 months pregnant than I did before I got pregnant.
I had to go to a specialist in high risk pregnancy every single week, starting at the end of my first trimester. My body was wasting away, but the baby was growing fine. I was always concerned about the baby's health, because if I was losing weight and couldn't keep food down, then surely that would affect the baby. But week by week, the doctor assured me that the baby was fine, and frankly they were more concerned about the toll it was taking on me physically than they were the baby. They said this was because technically, the baby was a parasite, and while I was losing weight and physically suffering throughout, it was apparent that the baby was leeching everything it needed from me to thrive. They said that were my condition any more severe, then my body would be so drained that I more than likely would lose the baby. But as long as he seemed to be developing and gaining weight as expected, then they were more concerned about my health than his.
Full term pregnancy that ended with the birth of a completely healthy baby. Hours after I gave birth I stopped being sick and started gaining weight again.
there is an excellent response to that here (though some of this has already been directly said or otherwise strongly alluded to):
quote:
Yes and no. In the strictest biological sense babies–whether preborn or not–cannot be parasites because, first, they are of the same species as their parents. Tapeworms or hookworms or leeches can all be parasites as they are not of the same species as the animals they infest. In that literal biological sense, human fetuses are not parasites.
Second, no textbook in embryology or fetology categorizes the human fetus as a parasitic organism.
Third, parasitic organisms are categorized as such regardless of their stage of development, but it would be an overreach to universally label as “parasites” all humans beings throughout their lifespan. If they start as parasites in the womb, they’d need to be parasites even out of the womb and on to adulthood.
Fourth, it is presumed that young members of any given species are liable to be deeply dependent on their parents or community.
Fifth, the mammalian mother, in particular, is physically and psychologically built to nurture a gestating child which shares half her DNA. The relation, then, is intrinsic being within the family and, for what it’s worth, “natural.” The human race could not survive without this relation, meanwhile no such hosts in the rest of the animal kingdom need their respective parasites to this degree.
Sixth, with the interpersonal dynamic of mother to child, that relationship is more symbiotic than parasitic. Parasites, on the other hand exploit incidental features of their hosts with no interpersonal relation while typically harming the host. Such a host might have warmth and nutrition for a parasite, but it’s a difficult case to parallel that with the mother’s fantastically fine tune environment for the developing child inside her.
Seventh, the child-in-utero is not necessarily or normally a mortal threat to the mother, meanwhile the normal or “natural” disposition of parasites means harm and often mortal danger to the host. Some pregnancies incur medical complications putting the mothers health or life at risk, but–unlike parasitic relations–these dangerous pregnancies are not the normal, necessary, or intrinsic relation of child to mother....
The “parasite” affiliation runs the risk of a “loaded word” fallacy, proving nothing in directly logical terms but instead slandering the preborn child with connotations of “weed,” “unwanted,” “harmful,” and “deadly.” To justify killing a human being, something more than “parasite” would need to be established, such as “deadly assailant” or “murderer” or “rapist.” That case can be made if the child represents an distinct medical threat to the mother’s life, such as with tubal pregnancies. The baby is instrumentally threatening the mothers life, and so it would not be a loaded word but an apt description to call that preborn child–instrumentally deadly. That is an unfortunate but real scenario, yet when it occurs, that child’s presence threatens the life of the mother, and might be justifiably aborted on the grounds of self-defense. Those sorts of cases are widely admitted justifications for killing a human being, but apart from tubal pregnancies (and similar cases) the death penalty just doesn’t apply....
The “parasite” affiliation is also a non-sequitur. It “does not follow” logically into a pro-choice position especially since all human beings go through a stage where they are similar to parasites. If parasites should be destroyed, then–following the logic to it’s absurd ends–it seems all human beings should be destroyed. Even if one admits that parasites are also unwanted, and many children in utero are wanted, that does not change the fact that lots of brothers-in-law sleeping on the couch are “unwanted” guests. Why are they allowed to live there? Because it’s one’s family duty, or it’s the charitable thing to do, or he could really use some help right now after his divorce. In short, overriding family responsibilities–at least in that case–contradict the notion that unwanted dependents can rightly be expelled from one’s domain eventuating their death...
Lastly, it can be admitted that children, in utero or ex utero, are very dependent human beings, desperately needing the their parents. But just as puppies and kittens need extra love and care, so do baby humans. Their dependence is just cause for loving them tenderly and caring for them selflessly. Their dependence hardly excuses neglecting and killing them, as implied by this pro-choice lingo.
https://abortionhistorymuseum.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/are-human-fetuses-parasites/
< Message edited by bounty44 -- 1/31/2016 10:18:38 AM >
|
RE: Planned Parenthood Cleared in Texas....BUT - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread