Nick Schroer, State Senator in MO and recipient of the Award for Conservative Excellence from CPAC, tweeted:
Please explain to me why babies have separate DNA, fingerprints, etc, from its mom and dad? If the baby and mom had the same body, wouldn’t they have the same DNA and fingerprints? Science.
Link?
Jesse Pinkman had a better grip on science.
I don’t understand what point he is trying to make.
Same. Even making the assumption that he’s an idiot and his point is asinine… I still don’t understand what his point actually is.
To be fair, he did ask for an explanation.
To be fair, he was not going to listen to the explanation.
So, stop crying your Lib tears!!!
Forced birther conference has keynote speakers with close ties to not only far-right extremism, but pro-white supremacist eugenicists as well who note the superior genes of whites and praise Mormons for their successful breeding program. Bonus points for hosting people who tout Replacement Theory (POC will out-breed whites) and other bigoted nonsense.
My take is fetuses (babies) are human beings distinct from the mother.
His point is a retort to “my body, my choice”, since the in-utero baby isn’t their body, as demonstrated by distinct DNA, fingerprints, etc.
If children had the same DNA as their parents, then there would be a baby boom to evade capture for crimes. “No, I wasn’t there that night. My kid was though.” (Although then you could investigate easier when a random place has a birth spike, so that isn’t a slam dunk either.)
Wait, is that guy’s quote trying to doubt or trying to confirm that kid DNA is different? I’m confused now.
It’s not worth thinking about, it’s just the abortion debate jumping more sharks.
Maybe sharks jumping surgically attached violinists?
I suppose he thinks that was terribly clever.
He’s trying to say, “Fetus has fingerprints, therefore abortion bad because baby in tummy”.
Similarly, if I have a mutating growth on my skin I will excise it, because its DNA doesn’t match my body.
To be fair the “my body” argument is kind of bad. At least it’s not great.
DNA based arguments are worse.
Mixing the two is extra-super dumb though.
That’s the trouble with the extremes. It’s just as callous to dismiss a pre-born child as just a growth, as it is to declare that God wants a 9-year-old to carry pervy uncle’s baby to term.
It might have to do with the “my body my choice” slogan for abortion. The reasoning of the counter argument is that there is an additional distinct biological entity involved. The fact we use DNA and fingerprints as distinguishing characteristics between individuals ( fingerprints develop late in pregnancy so that is a weaker addition to the argument) should apply to the question of abortion is the basis of the counter argument.
Ninja’d @NormalDan
I intentionally countered his extremism in that fashion. Obviously abortion is a much more personal and impactful operation, which doesn’t require random stupid men to interject with their thoughts.
But if the argument is that it has separate DNA, my argument is perfectly valid.