DentArthurDent wrote:
You stated that birth was merely a change in location. By describing it so you are dismissing the major change that has just occurred, one from being a foetus to an independent living human baby. This suggests that you regard a foetus as a fully viable human which it clearly is not. I am not making innuendo i am merely reading what you have written
It is your occasional choice of adjective that grates me, but I do realize my own responsibility for possibly trying to hear them less offensively. And along with that, I do apologize for occasionally confusing things at times by making statements that might really convey nothing beyond my general ignorance of all the related terms and their most-proper or -accurate usages.
A foetus is certainly not a "fully-viable human", yet "it" nevertheless is one ... and it is in that light that I say the mother's eventual deliver of "it" is merely a change of location. The fact that the human foetus is circumstantially out-of-sight and that we cannot naturally identify "it" as either a "him" or a "her" while "it" yet remains in the womb does not make "it" anything less than the human foetus "it" actually is.
_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================