You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Short Attention Span Theater-
 Smiling fetus captured in photograph
2010-10-16
[Geo TV] Britain's Daily Mail reports that a 17-week-old fetus was captured smiling in a sonogram scan. According to the publication, "The scan ... implies that a baby can experience feelings such as happiness and pain much earlier in its development than previously thought."
Or at least that the muscular contractions are more basic in the nervous system than previously thought. It would be interesting to know if the same holds true for other animals, or if this is unique to our species.
The child in the image belongs to Louise and Sam Henry from Swallowfield, Berkshire, who have indicated that they are shocked to see such an image in what is typically a routine scan.

Mr. Henry said, "Your primary concern at that stage is that you have a healthy baby but to see the fetus smiling was absolutely fantastic."
Posted by:Fred

#5  IMO this is one of the stupidest article yet posted, at least top 5
Posted by: Mr. Bill   2010-10-16 23:16  

#4  second that TW
Posted by: bigjim-CA   2010-10-16 22:34  

#3  Let's not have this argument. This site is for other things.
Posted by: trailing wife   2010-10-16 18:03  

#2  3 Easy questions.

1. Is is life?
2. Is it human?
3. Is it innocent?

Biologically speaking, it satisfies all the criteria for life.

Biologically speaking, the DNA say that it is human. Period.

Morally speaking, it has not the capability to harm anyone by deliberate evil action, so it is innocent.

Now if you wish to argue abortion, start with the facts:

If you propose abortion you are proposing to destroy an innocent human life. A defenseless one at that.

You better have some damned good reasons for it. There are good reasons in some cases,

But if you propose to defend elective abortions -- ones that are non-medically necessary, where the life of the mother is not at risk -- then you are making a moral decision to sacrifice an innocent defenseless human life for the convenience of another. Tread carefully over there -- you are advocating the side of Mengele, eugenicists, Pol Pot, and other morally repugnant people, who believe the individual human life is disposable as a means to someone else's goals.
Posted by: OldSpook   2010-10-16 17:09  

#1  How cute...doesn't look promising for his receding hairline when he's older though.
Posted by: Black Charlie Chinemble5313   2010-10-16 11:49  

00:00