Abortion is not bad, rather it is your logic and argumentation that is lacking in ability and understanding. First, you argue that the presence of a beating heart alone necessarily qualifies a fetus as being a living human being that is entitles to a right to life. While on its face this argument may initially appear compelling, it is profoundly lacking in scientific substantiation. A fetus during the first trimester of development may have a small impulse that resembles a heart beat, but it completely lacks both a brain and a central nervous system. In fact, a spider or a fly is much more developed (and has the capacity to feel more pain) than a fetus early on in the second trimester of a pregnancy. Any person who occasionally squashes an insect or eats meat is causing much more pain to living beings than a woman who chooses to terminate her pregnancy. If the presence of a heart-beat is the relevant issue concerning early abortion, then we would surely be hypocritical to continue to kill animals (like cows, pigs, and chickens) who have hearts that are much more developed than that of a young fetus. Without a brain or a nervous system, a fetus is little more than a lump of cells that cannot yet function together. Indeed, a fetus is little more than an individual egg or even an individual spermwhile there is certainly the potential for life, life has not yet developedthoughts cannot occur, pain cannot be feltFrom a purely biological standpoint, your argument is unfounded.A beating heart is something that all mammalian fetuses develop as they grow within their mothers womb. However, a beating heart does not qualify a fetus as being an independent living creature whose existence takes precedence over the physical and emotional health of the women (in whose womb it temporarily resides). To give the mere preservation of a fetus precedence over the physical and emotional health of the woman is both narrow minded and cruel. To den...
