August 20, 2010
-
The Fetus Photos
During my time on xanga, I have probably written about the abortion issue 30-40 times. I would imagine that since I am pro-life, I tend to slant the discussion in favor of those who are pro-life. It is only natural that you would let some of your personal beliefs filter into the discussion. But I make a special effort to slant the discussion against my own beliefs at times.
So the other day, I posted a photo from Serena’s blog. She called a fetus a “clump of cells.” I borrowed her words and posted them into my post.
What was interesting to me was a few of my pro-life friends were upset that I posted the photo. A few called the photo “deceptive.” The photo just showed cells and people were saying it was not an accurate view of a fetus.
The funny thing is I have posted a photo at least 20 times on xanga of an unborn baby but it is my understanding that the photo is not even a real baby. I just like the photo.
Which photo is a better photo to show for an unborn baby?
A. This photo?
B. Or this photo?
Comments (124)
THAT ONE. *points at second one* omg first.
If you really want to be scientific about it, photo A is not a fetus. It’s a zygote.
The second picture is a better depiction of a fetus. The first picture is a zygote. So I guess in this specific instant the second picture is appropriate.
They both seem apt to me.
Depends on what kind of fanatical guilt you’re trying to inspire, I suppose.
My problem with the use of the first picture was that it doesn’t represent what is actually aborted. I don’t prefer either. I’d just rather we use real terms, real images when discussing real topics.
You must use the one that is most appropriate to the context you are using. Both are equally usable to depict an unborn baby.
I love the second photo, but technically they’re both accurate. Just in different stages and with different names, I believe.
Both are accurate.
Neither is accurate in an abortion debate.
I’m pro-life, and I told you something along these lines previously, but I would prefer if we actually all just stuck to sonograms or something similarly accurate taken around the time when most abortions occur (between 7-12 weeks is what I usually hear, but I’m fine with being corrected)
depends on what kinds of emotions you want to play on
Both are accurate. It depends on the stage of development.
Considering that pro-lifers tend to stand against the morning-after pill, they should start taking all stages of development seriously. A photo of a single embryo should be considered an accurate photo of an unborn baby. Otherwise, I have been greatly deceived about the views of the pro-life community.
Depends on what stage the baby is meant to be at. Something in between probably would have been a better representation than either of those photos. =p
deff has 2 be the second pic 4 me every time
but i do agree the first pic dosent look like it could ever turn into a baby
human life is so amazing
baby fever is coming on strong now. thanks. lol.
The second photo is a beautiful depiction of a developed fetus. The first photo, however, accurately illustrates the phrase “clump of cells.” I don’t think either photo will change anybody’s mind on this issue. If it does, they probably didn’t have much of a conviction one way or the other anyway.
Second. Hands down. It is a fetus. Not a “clump of cells.”
The first one is cell division which occurs so rapidly that it doesn’t stay like the picture very long. By the time a woman finds out she’s pregnant, it looks nothing like the first picture and exactly like a baby, the size depending on weeks.
I think that second picture is by photographer Lennart Nilsson; it’s a real baby. He took lots of pics of babies in the wormb in various stages of development. http://www.lennartnilsson.com/home.html
The first picture is not a zygote, as several commenters have claimed. A zygote is a fertilized egg. This has obviously divided past the single-celled stage and thus I believe the technical term would be “embryo”.
I believe both photos are accurate, but I can see how a pro-life person would prefer the second, more human-looking photo, and a pro-choice person would prefer the first picture, which looks like a science experiment and has no human characteristics. It’s all a matter of perspective, not accuracy.
They’re both accurate, equally. Both are unborn babies.
Depends on the time frame the person is using. If you’re taking about a few days or a couple of weeks, clump of cells. Talking about a few months, yup, that looks like a babby.
Both are still accurate though.
It probably depends on the slant you want to give people before reading the article.
I honestly don’t give a fuck what picture you show me.
If another living creature, be it a zygote, a fetus, a fully-formed human, whatever, is living inside my body without my consent, I will make it no longer inside my body, even if it has to die in the process.
I would consider every moment that that other person is inside of me another moment of being raped. No one has rights to my organs except ME. Sorry if it’s selfish, but I don’t see pro-lifers all out there donating kidneys to every person who needs one to survive. How dare they try to force me to share my uterus, the frakking hypocrites.
@MyJudas - Wow, you consider it rape? Well, if you hate babies and the idea of a part of yourself being combined with another’s genetics to form something new and beautiful, then I’d suggest you get your tubes tied or just not have sex at all.
Please, can we just get back to discussing boobs
It depends. The second picture looks more like a baby than the first one, but the first picture looks like what is way more commonly aborted.
@Celtic_haven - I’m going to assume you just have reading comprehension issues, or accidentally skipped over a few words in your rush to characterize me as a baby-hating psycho…
I added the qualifier “without my consent” for a reason. Babies CAN be a beautiful thing, but ONLY when they are wanted. In the same way, sex, food, et cetera can be beautiful things, but if they’re forced onto you, they’re not so great anymore, are they? If you choose to have sex with someone, at any point you’re allowed to say “stop” and that person has to stop, or they are raping you. Same goes for sharing your body with another person in the context of allowing or not allowing someone to take up residence in your uterus.
they are not both one and the same. first of all the first picture is NOT a zygote, it is a morula. a zygote is the initial fertilized egg, which is only one diploid cell, and once cell division occurs (creating a “clump of cells”) it is then a morula. the second picture more accurately represents a fetus.
@godfatherofgreenbay - Boobies are usually what causes these problems in the first place. Those and Cocky’s favorite Port or Sherry.
This one.
life happens from the moment of conception so both photo’s are good to me!
if it were about accuracy, show them what the baby looks like throughout the whole pregnancy with several pics or a video. not everybody gets an abortion when it’s in the stage the first picture shows. the baby is usually a lot more developed than that when the person kills their child. maybe a picture of the final week in the first trimester since a lot of people here think that’s the best time to abort? but that’s only the 14th week, and people think it’s okay at the 20th week (2nd trimester) to abort — when the gender of the child can be found out via ultrasound. the second picture is pretty close to what it looks like at the 14th week anyway, though.
2nd pic all the way. this took lots of typing for me.
well, the one photo is of an egg, not a fetus..
and the one photo is of a “fetus” !
@decembriel - I’d have to disagree and say that most “of what is aborted” look like little babies, or guppies.
Both are technically accurate. But the zygote could be argued that it isn’t technically a baby either I guess. Either way I’m still pro-choice, however, I do not support anything but first term abortions. After that I have to say no way.
Both are accurate.
@decembriel - that’s not what is way more commonly aborted. those things grow fast as fuck.
@SerenaDante - Both are accurate.
So you’re acknowledging that it’s a baby?
OH, and it IS a real baby!!!!!
two years ago, I had my son, and they gave me a pregnancy magazine, with this baby one the cover!!! It’s an inutero photograph :]
A…because it shows the basics of life.
Does this chick even HAVE any kids?
The second photo is a fetus.
Some people need to go back to school and pay better attention.
people die in war, poverty, murder and life, and one little rejected baby matters? more misery. does anyone want my baby? i’ve been treated so well. it would only continue.
I may be wrong but I do think the 2nd pic. is of a real baby. I’m thinking it was in a book on stages of development I once read. But what do I know. Of course the 2nd pic. is better for publicity.
@Ayliana87 - This.
while both are accurate depictions, the second is of course, the better selling tool. i too am pro-life and will remain that way until the unborn baby can express their choice in the matter! peace, Al
Photo A could be a chimpanzee. So I’ll go with B.
The frist one is only a few hours old. So far as abortion is concerned that one is only accurate for morning after pills. That last one is third trimester, but it is much closer to what a 14 week old so called fetus looks like.
Here we go again!
It’s a bit like asking “Which picture of a leech do you like better?”; it’s a parasite, either way. Just a matter of whether you want it or not that people get all riled up about.
@celtic_haven - thats a very good point hun but to that as it may be she cant get her tubes tied docs wont do that unless you have given birth usually..not having sex at all would be a better option.but not everyone wants children especially if you have been raped and suffered mental problems its something one never gets over..for some people..not everyone is wired for children some just dont want them..my aunt never had children..not everyone can be a mother although carrying a child is the most precious thing you can do..i loved it..
and i have beautiful children
Personally, I think they both accurtely display a fetus it just depends on how you want to use them. The second one is what EVERYONE thinks of when they think “fetus” but the first shows the not-so-cute-sugar-coated version of a fetus. Both are right in their own way because they protray the same exact thing just at different stages. Once again, personal opinion
the clump of cells in the photo is a blastocyst, not a fetus. it does not have a heartbeat, a central nervous system, or detectable brainwaves. a fetus(protected under such laws as the Unborn Victims of Violence Act) possesses all of the aforementioned functions, and thus is a human being with as many rights as those of us who have already been born.
Nothing wrong with photo A, you have a head,two arms,a body, and two legs. They just are in the process of developing….just like everything.Nothing just happens and is all of a sudden fully developed
@Ayliana87 - I WAS THINKING EXACTLY THIS.
The second one is beautiful
The first one is more likely to be chosen by people who are pro-choice, just as the second is more likely to be chosen people who are by pro-life. I don’t care which picture you use personally.
I can’t imagine why anyone got upset at the first photo that you used…sounds like they were LOOKING for something to be upset about…and as far as I am concerned…they are both great photos…I guess it would just be what point you were trying to make in your article !!
they’re both human beings.
Neither one is better than the other. Both photos show a living thing- in different stages of development. Both need food and energy to grow and develop.
Both depict a baby in stages of development, but the second one works better for the abortion debate, IMO.
OH! What this person said!!! –> @SoapAndShampoo
People don’t typically abort fetuses; they abort embryos. They’re distinct stages… neither of the pictures are accurate in terms of the stage abortions usually take place in. The embryo looks more ambiguous than a clump of cells or recognizable child.
@MyJudas - I don’t have reading comprehension issues. I was confused by your comment, because obviously SerenaDante, nor Dan mentioned rape. It was about the right to choose to abort for whatever reason there may be. Rape was never mentioned. You didn’t state in your comment “only instances of rape would I abort.”
It’s okay, though. I misunderstood you comment, because you were thinking and writing passionately in the moment.
@the_evil_tamica - And you know this for a fact, how? I didn’t find out that I was pregnant until I was two months along. By the time I had an ultrasound, it (my now SON) had a formed a recognizable body. It wasn’t an embryo…anyone who chooses to abort their child seriously can’t even comprehend what they are living without. Plus, there are options, like adoption.
yes, second is more “bably” and less clump of cells. But depends on what you are illustrating. How astonishing it remains that the “clump” mysteriously organizes “itself” into a human being! I am grateful to God, and to my belief in God
@Celtic_haven - I never took a stance on abortion. I was merely making a distinction between the terms embryo and fetus. And I know that embryos don’t look like the second photo because I’m majoring in developmental psychology.
If you don’t believe me, here’s a comparison photo. This is an embryo at 12 weeks; this is the latest someone can have an abortion legally: http://sunnysideupper.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/fetus12weeks.jpg
It doesn’t resemble either photo in the entry.
The next time you attack someone, read their comment first.
Depends upon what you’re trying to portray and at what stage, I suppose.
I’m by no means an expert on the subject, but from what little I do know, I don’t think either photo is an accurate representation of what is usually aborted. And frankly, regardless of my own opinion, when a person on either side of an issue utilizes such a convenient misrepresentation, I have to wonder how much they really understand and/or believe in their own stance on it.
depends
@MyJudas - You need to get your tubes tied then.
@SerenaDante - As well as many others have pointed out the simple fact that both are accurate.
I consider them interchangeable.
Duh!
zygote or fetish we all come from the first picture. call it what you may.
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - I’m actually already mostly infertile because of a somewhat hereditary disease that hit me early on in life, but because I do in fact want children someday, I plan to adopt (with my future wife). Regardless, I believe very strongly in the right of every human being to have the last word over who gets to use his or her body. If you don’t, why don’t you move to a country where people don’t have such rights?
Unless they’re experts in embryology, I think they can shut the hell up.
Just make sure you use the right stage of development if you know what it is. Pictures mislead far too easily.
ughh. i’m pro-choice but i’m still a soft person at heart and i’ll have to go with the second one, i think it’s harsh to call that clump of cells an unborn baby. i don’t… really know what those are.
second one – you can fall in love with the infant. The first one you have to have faith to fall in love with the infant. In order to have an abortion you have to shut off your faith or not have it.
If we’re talking things like the morning after pill and stem cell research, the first is accurate. if we’re talking about when most abortions occur, neither is really accurate.
@Drakonskyr - Precisely.
Planet Earth: where everyone with opinions not worth the having to start in turn tries to induce everyone into holding those verysame opinions.
to quote 4chonz, “y’all niggers are postin’ in a troll thread.”
- fin
@luminescent_dragonfly - Excuse me for saying this, but photo A has got to be the ugliest baby I have ever seen.
Wow, when I read the first blog about Serena, I just assumed you were pro choice.
If you really think about it we are all just a big clump of cells walking around…when I saw my ultasound for the first time at 9 weeks it looked nothing like either of those pics of course. The second one is much later in the pregnancy. At 9 weeks or so It looks like a tiny jelly bean. It had a heartbeat of course. It was beautiful.
We know, scientifically speaking, that
they represent a new life
.
That in both photos is a person. But it is clear that the second with the same person in more advanced state, with a greater degree of development, has a greater influence on those dubious about the actual existence of a real person, other than in the womb frommoment of conception.
Thank you SO much for doing this, Dan.
To a point,..I am a “pro-lifer.” I would not defend the “life” of the first picture with any passion. I would try to defend the life of the child in the second picture.
Wow, I was that in my mommy’s tummy? Lol ; crazy I think…That’s just quite amazing…Ahh, life is so amazing..I won’t lie..
Both have merit.
The 2nd one looks exactly like a photo from a book my mom used to tell us about babies when we were little kids. We, being my older brother and me, while she was pregnant with our little brothers. It was in the 70′s, and the book was from the Netherlands, so there were pictures of naked people too. I guess we grew up without some of that puritanical crap. Anyhow, with technology the way it was in the 70′s, a lot of the photos of fetal development were of babies who had been miscarried. My mom didn’t tell me until I was in college that most of those babies had been dead. Still, as sad as their deaths were, they were used to educate.
A baby only looks like the first picture for a short amount of time. A very short amount of time. Then for the rest of the pregnancy it looks more like the second picture. So I think a more accurate picture of an unborn baby would be the second picture, since that’s what it looks like during the vast majority of the pregnancy. (redundant much?
@MyJudas - haha well then you’d be one of those people who would take precautions to PREVENT SUCH RAPE then, wouldn’t you. at least you had better, given that you didn’t, you would be getting raped and then committing murder in “self defense”.
haha. I had to laugh a little bit when I wrote that.
@ohletitbe - Yeah, being pregnant against your will is totally hilarious. Or is rape the funny part? Is it also funny if someone steals your kidney?
I think we need to think about things in a larger context, I guess. I think we need to question why photos or images of *anything* in this debate are very important. If something is wrong because it is wrong, we should not need a picture (especially a doctored one) to reinforce this belief. If we think something is right because it is right, a picture should not have the power to sway us either way. I’m kind of only thinking about this as I go along right now so it’s not well formulated. But I think we need to accept that, yes, at some point in development, a baby could be mistaken for a clump of amoebas and does not have any more intelligence than a clump of amoebas. But then we need to also acknowledge that the debate is not really about development, intelligence or physical appearance, but about how many rights we can afford to give the unborn, and how many rights we can afford to take away from the mother.
@MyJudas - Except that you don’t believe in the rights of unborn children. You also don’t believe in natural rights. I’m patriotic and conservative, and that’s what this country is based on. Why don’t you move to a left wing hellhole since that’s what you are?
@Ambrosius_Augustus_Rex - I’m a leftwing hellhole? Right, anyway, you’ll find that countries more liberal than the US are doing far better than we are. Check out Denmark or Sweden or Iceland for example. More freedoms, less debt. Though I do think it’s funny you think the US is based on conservatism and patriotism, since our nation’s birth was founded on breaking away from the mother country (quite the opposite of patriotism) and then setting up a completely new (and thus, by definition, liberal) type of government.
I do in fact believe in the rights of unborn children. I just don’t believe that the right to live trumps the right to one’s own organs. Just because my neighbor needs a kidney doesn’t mean they have the right to take mine. The government doesn’t have the right to step in and give him my kidney either.
A better idea than forcing women to carry all pregnancies to term would be finding a way to create artificial wombs so that if a woman wants to terminate her pregnancy, her fetus can still live. Then, everyone’s rights are protected, and the fetus has a better chance at survival.
Though, hopefully by then, there will be more people looking to adopt instead of selfishly needing to propogate their own genetic material as if it’s superior to anyone else’s.
Sorry about the long response. I already finished my homework this weekend and don’t have anything better to do right now.
@the_evil_tamica - I thought people could have abortions up to twenty weeks? It might just be my state. Eh, I’m not up-to-date on states’ various abortions laws. Either way, it’s really expensive after twelve weeks, so I am sure most people avoid them after that point anyways.
@MyJudas - Not exactly, I said you should go to a leftwing hellhole because you’re a leftist. I don’t know about you but I’m not in debt. The government is in debt but that’s not my fault and my personal fortunes are not directly tied in with the wealth of the government. Now the reason the government is in debt is because of the backwards economic policies forced on it by left wing politicians like FDR and LBJ (and others, right now Barack Osama is doing a good job jacking things up). Keynsian economics is responsible for a lot of those problems. If the only people you talk to from those countries are liberals then you will get that impression because liberals mindlessly swallow whatever their politicians spew forth without questioning most of the time. Most of those countries have way higher taxes with government controlling more facets of people’s lives, limiting the choices they have. They also have no military’s to speak of and are about get get raped in the anus by Islam. The Netherlands is already irreparably screwed.
As for patriotism and conservativism, you need to read the US Declaration of Independence and you will see the philosophical basis for what the US was founded on. It doesn’t say that “we hold atheism to be self evident, that all men are created equal except for babies and people we don’t like,” or advocate socialism or anything else belonging to liberalism. They were patriotic towards their new homeland, and most of the American colonists of that time had never even been to England. The left is what is always trying to undermine US sovereignty and self ownership.
Artificial wombs are a good idea, but so is sterilization. I don’t think a baby is an invasion, it’s a natural part of human reproduction and essential for us to survive. You’re talking about people taking your kidneys, which would be a bad thing, but you’re also talking about taking away someone’s life, so the analogy doesn’t really cohere.
The majority of abortions take place before 9 weeks (from last missed period, or LMP), and neither photo really does justice to the state of the embryo at that point. It looks a whole lot more “human” than one and a whole lot less than the other. The first photo doesn’t really apply to an abortion discussion (since a pregnancy can’t even be confirmed at that point) and the second would really only apply to a discussion about the ethics of late-second/third trimester abortion, which is generally only performed under very limited (and often very tragic) circumstances.
Or even better, how about an actual sonogram of a baby at say…8 weeks old…. around the time when the baby IS a baby but doesn’t really look like one yet. With it’s over sized forhead and nubs for limbs… You can’t satisfy everyone.
the second one looks delicious
@godfatherofgreenbay - I agree. It benefits the xanga users.
@SoapAndShampoo - *applause*
@MyJudas - I agree compleately. It’s MY body, not the pro-lifers. They can’t tell me I have to keep that ‘baby’ or ‘clump of cells’ (whatever you’d like to call it) in my body.
They can both be considered “unborn babies.” But you should probably show a photo in between those stages that depicts what a fetus typically looks like around the time most abortions take place.
I was surprised at how many people had a problem with your post. It seems like, if you don’t state your opinion, people will create it for you- and usually think your opinion is in opposition to theirs. I had remembered you saying that you were pro-life so it was weird to see many pro-life xangans get angry at you over what you were supposedly implying.
Both!
If this is truly a pro-life vs pro-abortion, then I think the best pics would be those that show the embryo at stages of developement around the time that abortions tend to take place. The second picture is simply beautiful! I love it. It’s of a baby who is pretty close to being ready for birth, thus it’s very unlikely to be aborted. Find pics from about 20 weeks gestation and earlier, and you’ll still find a beautil little creation. And pictures that are a little more appropriate to the topic at hand.
The first picture is still life with a lot of potential, but it looks nothing like a person; and to dehumanize it is the first step in making people feel it’s okay to kill it, so of course pro-abortionists will choose the first.
@smile4iluvya - Sorry, I’ve never heard of a pro-abortionist. Why don’t you stop being an asshole? Maybe you meant pro-CHOICE?
Re the first photo: it’s an embryo, not a foetus. So yeah, it’s not an accurate view of a foetus.
In answer to your question “Which photo is a better photo to show for an unborn baby?”, you would have to define what constitutes ‘better’. That quibble aside, the way you phrased the question “unborn baby” seems to suggest that better would be something that most closely represents a baby, specifically one that is in the womb. Clearly a bunch of cells does not visually resemble a baby much. If you were to show a hundred people a bunch of cells and ask them what it was, “unborn baby” probably isn’t going to top the list. The second photo clearly would. If a woman were to ‘birth’ an embryo it would probably just resemble a period whereas with a foetus it would certainly be a noteworthy event. But then, this really isn’t what this post is about, is it?
If you’re trying to convince people to go pro-choice, picture A. If you want people to go pro-life, picture B. Is this a serious question?????
B
just curios – if the sack is full of water – and the baby as depicted in photo puts his thumb on his/her mouth – doesn’t water goes inside (or whatever fluid is it)
probably the lungs are connected with mother’s lungs or something like that but whateverthis certainly doesn’t look like a work of an accident (no harm intended, no offense to any type of faith holder) – I myself doesn’t claim any religion.
Thats a matter of science nd i know a little bit about science
I choose photo A because there is nothing there.
My mistake. I see it now, I choose photo a because it looks like a black and white photo of a compressed daisy.
In either one their is life so either
neither. i wouldn’t consider the second one a baby yet. but that might just be me.
Thats funny that the abortionists think that it’s just a “Clump of Cells”. Aren’t we, by definition, a clump of cells?
Both are accurate. I would never get an abortion that far along though. Show me a picture of what a fetus looks like at one month.
@smile4iluvya - It’s pro CHOICE. I’m sorry but what I want to do with my body isn’t your business or anybody else’s.
A zygote is not the same thing as a fetus.
the second one of course
The first one. I mean, you said the second one wasn’t even real so…what use is that?
Neither. Both are photos designed to elicit emotional responses from those sitting on the fence. And people still haven’t really decided whether a zygote counts as a baby, right? So even if any of those photos are chosen, they will be, at most, representations defined by sketchy definitions but with a truckload of connotations.
What do those pics have to do with a womans right to privacy? Is that not the real issue here?