T. Thibeault: A baby isn't just tissue

If a pregnant woman is murdered in California and the baby also dies within her womb, there would be a trial for two murders. But, ironically, a woman can walk into an abortion facility in California and have her baby legally killed. Isn't that a contradiction?

Apparently, a baby in the womb is a baby if it's wanted. If the baby isn't wanted, then today's society says it is just tissue and can be disposed of like trash.

Think about it. When a woman is pregnant, people ask, "When is your baby due," or, "Is your baby a boy or a girl?" They don't ask, "When is your tissue due," or "Is your tissue a boy or a girl?" Tissue doesn't grow human arms, legs, eyes, nose and ears.

No one has to be a doctor to know that, at conception, essentially, a baby begins the 40-week process to develop. Even after a baby is born, it is not yet fully developed.

Does that make the newborn baby any less a human being compared to a full grown adult?

There's no denying that once a woman becomes pregnant and if the process is not interfered with, the end result will be a human baby. That baby's own DNA is present at conception and, at 18 weeks of age, the baby's fingerprints are already formed. That proves that there is an individual human identity and not the woman's own body tissue.

Tom Thibeault, Turner

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



Jillian Campbell's picture


A fertalized egg is considered a zygote... after 2 weeks, it is considered an embryo. At 10 weeks it is conidered a fetus and remains a fetus until birth. 90% of abortions are done before 13 weeks. If a pregnant woman is killed, it i only considered a double murder if a fetus is past the viable stage, generally around around 22 weeks.

People who are pro life act like women just love to kill babies. I am sure that women do not just have an abortion because they are evil, lazy, etc. They are people who know that they would not be able to give a child a good life. There are so many children in this country in foster care or group homes that have no one to love them. Then there are children abused, neglected and hungry because their parents can't take care of themsekves, never mind another person.

If you feel a certain way about abortion, that is your own right. But put your opinion to use when YOU are the one in that situation. Every persons belief about abortion should apply to themselves only and no one else!!!

Dana Burgess's picture

J Moore

So if someone was murdering you we should mind our own business because you are not related to us. It is okay for you to reveal your thoughts about about Mr Thibeault though.

 's picture


It's not a contradiction. You're comparing apples and oranges.

JOANNE MOORE's picture

Mr Thibeault

What gives you the right to tell a stranger how to manage their life? Because that is just what you are doing.

It is none of your damned business. You may think just because you are male that gives you the right to be paternalistic and domineering over women, but that thinking went out with the hoop skirt.

Unless it is your family, you have no right to decide for anyone in any matter whatsoever if it does no harm to you.

It used to be only little old ladies stuck their noses in where it was not wanted. Now it is men like you who seem to be the busybodies at a hen party. Cluck clucking and tsk tsking over someone else's business.

So stick to your own knitting and let other families make their own decisions about what is best for them.

And don't give me the B.S. about dragging the good old USA down the path of sin and moral turpitude. We reached the end of that path years ago when we decided it was ok to kill millions for oil or other natural resources. We are a country that runs on killing for profit. We make war machines and weaponry but little else. We support huge armies of mercenaries at an astronomical cost to all taxpayers who cannot even afford to send their kids to decent schools.

And yet you and your kind despise anyone who goes on welfare or food stamps because two or three jobs don't earn enough to pay for food, fuel, medicine, shelter and other needs. You know what? When the Navy was stationed here, many were on food stamps just to get by. And the wounded troops left to languish and suffer in horrible conditions after their service because they have been used and spit out by the good old USA.

Why aren't you out on the streets and writing letters to the editor about the millions of young men and women used like so much cannon fodder? Or isn't that sexy enough for you? 'Cause that's all it boils down to. Sex. And by taking away a woman's right to make her own decisions or by calling her a murderer or a slut and worse and demeaning her for her own personal choices is your way to impose your morality on a stranger. Think of it. You have no right to walk into a stranger's house and demand that they live as you do. No right at all. And yet you think you do. How crazy is that?

Keep your thoughts about other people's lives to yourself. And get a life of your own.

 's picture

Old arguments; none too rational

"Isn't that a contradiction" It is. "Does that make the newborn baby any less a human being compared to a full grown adult." "There's no denying that once a woman becomes pregnant and if the process is not interfered with, the end result will be a human baby." And there is the fallacy. If no one interferes there is a chance a probability that the end result might be a human baby.
The issue here is that the potential baby does not have rights that supercede the adult human being carrying the potential baby. The SCOTUS ruled correctly that as the fetus develops over time and becomes viable that its rights begin to come into play. And that counts.The baby's rights do not establish themselves at the moment of conception. A fetus is not a child is not a baby is not a person is not a voter is not a taxpayer.
Laws dealing with the loss of life of a fetus need to take Roe v Wade into account.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

At what point, exactly, does

At what point, exactly, does the 'fetus', as you put it, become a human baby?
"If no one interferes there is a chance a probability that the end result might be a human baby." If the mother miscarries in the 28th week, does that mean it wasn't a baby because of the 'interference' from Mother nature?
..."a probability that the end result MIGHT be a human baby."...
Probability is not a definite term, which leaves possibilities as other options. Does that mean if no one interferes and the 'fetus' is allowed to develop to term that something else might exit the birth canal? Like what? Seagull? Turtle?
Before you start accusing me of stuff, realize that these are your words I'm wrestling with, Jon.

 's picture

I haven't accuse you of anything yet.

A human baby is born. The moment of birth turns a potential baby into a real baby. When its a person is much more ambiguous. Different cultures assign different events/rituals by which children become persons.
The end result is always human, just not always a baby because its not always born alive.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

If I'm reading your post

If I'm reading your post correctly, you're saying that a 'fetus' is not a baby, throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy, until the moment of birth. Therein, I guess, lies the difference between the pro lifers and the abhortionists.

 's picture

Traditional view is that human life has events that demarc

the stages of life. Pro-lifers reject that traditional view because they apparently think there is a single event, conception, which defines all others (because God implants a human soul at the moment of conception although they will not admit this given the separation of church and state it would destroy their argument). There are a number of pre-birth stages and events I just used fetus to simplify the issue. And yes I do think that separates the "pro-lifers" (they are actually anti-life because the life of the mother during pregnancy and the life of the child after birth mean nothing to them.) from the pro-choice (women do have rights all rights and are real persons within the meaning of the Constitution). The whole fabric of the "pro-life" argument was invented out of whole cloth in the 1840's when Doctors tried to suppress the practice of mid-wifery.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

If a mother abhorts at the 20

If a mother abhorts at the 20 week stage for any reason other than rape, or there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the baby would lead its life in a vegetative state were the pregnancy carried to term, abhorting that 20 week old baby is murder. I have a child who came within 3 days of having been abhorted for no reason other than mother's choice. She was born and is one of the most wonderful persons in my life. What a sin it would have been for the mother to have had that abhortion.
You have the right to your opinion and your beliefs, but there is nothing you or anyone else can ever say or do to alter my thinking on this subject. But, it's always good to know what the other side is thinking.

 's picture

I will give you the point.

A mother's choice is not just "some reason". Calling it murder because you value the child that was born is no different than saying that you have a veto over what anyone else may decide about anything else when your feelings are different. You have no authority over that woman and under normal circumstances you should not. That said. I have never found anyone who favors abortion. I think every pro-choice view is that we would love to avoid it, but we have no right to interfere. Someone must choose and the only one to choose is the mother. Until we as a society guarantee that every baby born will have a full and complete oppotunity to satisfy their need, we have no right to interfere. I am happy you have taken responsibility for this child. Until we take responsibility for all children we will leave mothers with very difficult choices.

Zack Lenhert's picture

If a mother dies from

If a mother dies from complications of pregnancy or birth, can the newborn be charged with manslaughter? or the father?
Could a mother claim "self-defense" for aborting a pregnancy that could potentially kill her?

Zack Lenhert's picture

If a mother dies from

If a mother dies from complications from complications of pregnancy or birth, can the newborn be charged with manslaughter? or the father?
Could a mother claim "self-defense" for aborting a pregnancy that could potentially kill her?

Tina Clukey's picture


The comments on here are very intresting??? and as far as Ronald goes, man you can say some pretty messed up things sometimes on here, are you a angry person or just like to say rude things?? I hope I never run into you out in public you must be such a joy to be around!I understand EVERYONE has an voice and that is what makes this country great but sometime people really should think before they open there mouths, this topic is a very touchy one for many I myself am prolife but for me to judge someone for making the CHOICE to term a life is that person's choice and who am I to say other, Im sure it's not a easy choice to make but again it's THERE choice, so to go ahead and say mean things and comment as harsh as some do on here is pretty sad and goes to show this blogging is all you may have in your life, just sayin :)

Jason Theriault's picture

It's all about viability

Your not allowed to kill people.
Be it in anger with a gun or in a hospital room.
You are, however, allowed to let people die, such as when you remove a feeding tube and life support. That is the cut off. Just like when someone suffers a traumatic head injury. They are a person. But there is no right to be forced to live.

I am pro life. I think we should protect the life of unborn children, but I also think Republican go about it in the worst way possible. I also accept that my feelings on the matter need to be balanced with what is fair and where the line should be.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Great letter, Mr. Thibeault.

Great letter, Mr. Thibeault. Ironically, the same folks who would terminate the life of an unborn child, are against the death penalty for heinous criminals.

Jason Theriault's picture

I'm against both.

I'm against both, but that's also not a fair comparison. That's like saying "Viagra is covered by health insurance, why isn't the pill?"

The reason I'm against the death penalty has nothing to do why I'm against abortion. The death penalty is final. You cannot un-execute someone if later they are found to be innocent. So if the system was 100% right every time, I wouldn't have an issue. Also, because of all the checks involved, it's far more expensive that a life sentence.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

We disagree. Charles Manson

We disagree. Charles Manson is rehabilitable, right?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You know him well, do you?

You know him well, do you?

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You're right, I apologize.

You're right, I apologize. What I shoul've said was, "Perhaps not, but can you deny that he was involved in the murder of Sharon Tate"? Face it, T..he hasn't been in jail this long for non-payment of parking tickets.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

You make sense, However,

You make sense, However, civil law undertook the burden of that responsibility (executing convicted murderers, et al)a long, long time ago.

Jason Theriault's picture


But which is better - locking Manson up in a dark hole to rot, or giving him even more attention through the appeals process. Which serves society better?

And it's not the Mansons I'm worried about. It's the poor bastard who can afford a good lawyer and get railroaded into a needle.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

There are and have been

There are and have been individuals who have done things to other human beings that just do not justify their continuing to remain on this earth, only to be supported for life by the taxpayers.

Jason Theriault's picture


So wait, you want to open a space and/or Moon prison?

AWESOME! Got my vote!

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

I knew the clarity of the

I knew the clarity of the statement would not escape you.

Jason Theriault's picture

Nothing escapes...

Nothing escapes Moon Jail

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

I wasn't gonna do it, but I

I wasn't gonna do it, but I only have so much will power, so here goes: It would be a great place to send some 'moon bats'.

Steve Bulger's picture

It could be named

"Astralia" in keeping with tradition. I'll leave to you to figure out the nickname for its "penizens".

RONALD RIML's picture


How many women have ever got you pregnant, Tom??


Jason Theriault's picture


Hopefully not more than one.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

The parrot sez he's heard a

The parrot sez he's heard a lot of guys on the Ellen Degeneres Show say, "We're pregnant", in reference to their wives or 'fiances' being pregnant.

 's picture

The parrot watches Ellen?!

The parrot watches Ellen?! Please turn in your parrot card immediately.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

I have stated many times, the

I have stated many times, the parrot is a liberal.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...