Notice that if you ask "When does life begin?" you get a definition, not a fact. What does this mean for the debate between pro-choicers and pro-lifers, one side defining life to begin at birth, the other at conception? Doesn't it mean that it's a problem without a solution?
But every sperm is sacred!
Damn, I can't find the "like" button.. Where the hell is it..?
It's just a Monty Python reference.
"We are living on the only planet in the whole universe that has life on it as far as we currently know."
Dare I point out... that's science. For a self-professed anti-science person you sure love to use examples from it and quote famous scientists,
Aside from the points that Kris and Rob have already made above me, I just want to add that we are the only species on our planet who willingly have abortions because we are the only species advanced enough to have them. I'm pretty sure every animal species is guilty of neglecting and abandoning their young once they birthed them. It could either be because they didn't feel able to care for the offspring, they thought it was sick and would jeopardize the other members of the group, or they thought it would attract predators, again jeopardizing the group as a whole.
I may sound repetitive with these references to my sugar gliders, but they are the perfect examples. Our sugar gliders procreate about as freqently as rabbits. They can have up to 3 joeys for each pregnancy and can become pregnant about every other month. Plus, the male glider has a double-pronged penis while the female glider has two vaginae and a divided uterus, so she can have two pregnancies occur simultaneously. Now, as many times as our female has gotten pregnant, once they'd grown enough to take up most of her pouch but still needed nutrients (i.e. weren't old enough to be self-reliant), she would kick them out of her pouch and wouldn't even let them sleep in the parents' sleeping pouch that we have for them. There are a few different reasons as to why she would've done that. A.) The joeys were sick in some way B.) She had a pouch infection, which isn't realistic because she would likely be dead by now C.) She thought of me or my boyfriend as predators anytime we went in the room to feed them, or D.) She just isn't capable of caring for her joeys due to some mental or biological issue.
So to say that we are the only creatures who neglect or abandon our young is absurd. It's also absurd to say that because we are more advanced when it comes to intelligence that we have higher value than any other animals. You might as well say, "Sure, we can go ahead and wipe out all other species. They never had much use anyway, being dumb and all." Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it?
My gerbil ate its babies. What a good mother! Those animals sure can teach us a lot about caring for our young!
And in that case, possibly nutrition.
I had a hamster who did the same thing when I was a kid. Our gliders have even done it; pretty sure it was with their very first pair of joeys.
Yeah, in her defense, she was preggo when we got her but we didn't know. We didn't exactly treat her like a pregnant lady, so that might've been traumatic. She was never very nice though. Cute, but mean... murderously mean. ha!
Yeah, our female glider is the same way. Ironically enough, her name is Sweetheart. Haha
Ate it's own babies?!?
Must be an atheist gerbil . . .
So where exactly Does a man have a right in all of this?
He doesn't. Having said that, if you get your long term, trusted, partner pregnant, she will generally be nice and let you influence her decision.
The man should have just as much right in the matter as a women.
I agree, have a look around the site and you should find a few threads on this very matter. Interesting arguments ensued.