In that picture i posted, i don't see a tail, i see arms and legs and a smashed head, how does that look creepy?

What you see in the picture is the point at which most abortions take place. This is about 5-6 weeks in. As for your image it looks a bit over developed. This is 11 weeks.

Still looks human, just saying. Using an argument that it doesn't even look like a human is pointless with that picture.

Still looks human, just saying. Using an argument that it doesn't even look like a human is pointless with that picture.

I get the impression you may have either missed or are intentionally over looking the point being made in that pic. That verse in particular is just demonstrating the ill use of emotional pleas. Of course as it further develops it will begin to look more human like as that's what it's developing into. But it ain't there yet. Even at these stages where it begins to take on a more human appearance there is no real brain activity.
These human features you are toting there is only about a weeks difference between the two when they first begin to appear.

No its not because you than kill one people.

No its not because you than kill one people.

And how are you defining person?

If abortion is so wrong, then why do you allow it that a big part of the pregnancies abort naturally, at different stages?
Why is it so wrong to actively take control of a natural process in order to keep control of ones lives? America, land of the free, and women cannot even decide about their lives?

Still looks human, just saying. Using an argument that it doesn't even look like a human is pointless with that picture.

Why does it make it so special only because it looks human? It's not a fully developed human yet, it's future existence is uncertain. The woman's future however is much more certain, she's a fully developed human and has a right to decide about her body and her life.

I get the impression you may have either missed or are intentionally over looking the point being made in that pic. That verse in particular is just demonstrating the ill use of emotional pleas. Of course as it further develops it will begin to look more human like as that's what it's developing into. But it ain't there yet. Even at these stages where it begins to take on a more human appearance there is no real brain activity.
These human features you are toting there is only about a weeks difference between the two when they first begin to appear.

I was talking about your second picture, the 11 week one. It looked the same as mine, so you are using an argument that when the two babies look exactly alike one is more developed. And you said there are no brainwaves, so, why does that mean it is not living, and what if we can't just detect them?

If abortion is so wrong, then why do you allow it that a big part of the pregnancies abort naturally, at different stages?

I never said there was nothing wrong with natural abortions, just the artificial ones, if you want the world population to go down. you could just stop having sex.

if you want the world population to go down. you could just stop having sex.

You're either extremely naive, or extremely disillusioned and not yet older than 14.

Also, again. Condoms. That's what they're for.

And you said there are no brainwaves, so, why does that mean it is not living, and what if we can't just detect them?

It's not that it is not living, the "no brainwaves" means that it is just an organic lump under development. Until it does have brainwaves, it is literally the same as a tumor, feeding off the body in order to grow.

I've already gone over how "what if" arguments are very bad to use. That goes for this as well. Anyone can turn a "what if" argument around to mean the opposite of what you used it for.

"What if" our current methods are wrong and brainwaves don't start until later? (Not very likely)

I never said there was nothing wrong with natural abortions, just the artificial ones

So you do think there's something wrong with natural abortions?

I don't understand, how come some stupid animal is considered a person, while a human being is not, please enlighten me.

So you do think there's something wrong with natural abortions?

did you listen to what i said, i said there is nothing wrong with natural abortions, just artificial ones.

if you do the math, according to this thread, the percent of the population that believes in abortion could be only 40.2%

I don't understand, how come some stupid animal is considered a person, while a human being is not, please enlighten me.

It's not?

did you listen to what i said, i said there is nothing wrong with natural abortions, just artificial ones.

I did listen to what you said.

"I never said there was nothing wrong with natural abortions, just the artificial ones"

Double negative, you never said nothing was wrong, implying that you think something is wrong with it but never said you did.

if you do the math, according to this thread, the percent of the population that believes in abortion could be only 40.2%

Okay then. They don't have to get an abortion if they get pregnant then.

Why don't you do a poll on the thread seeing how many females posted and what their opinions are vs how many males posted and what their opinions are? I think that would be interesting.

Please respond to these other points as well, you tend to ignore 3/4 of what I say.

"Also, again. Condoms. That's what they're for."

"It's not that it is not living, the "no brainwaves" means that it is just an organic lump under development. Until it does have brainwaves, it is literally the same as a tumor, feeding off the body in order to grow."

"I've already gone over how "what if" arguments are very bad to use. That goes for this as well. Anyone can turn a "what if" argument around to mean the opposite of what you used it for."