Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
That fetus doesn't have the capability to think at that point, never mind make decisions ... its not even a fully formed human. Does a baby have any choice of what happens in its life? No, that responsibility is the parents.
Once you have a child you'll understand how precious the most vulnerable forms of life truly are, but until then you would not understand.
Granted, I don't have a child, but I do really like children, and enjoy my 1 and 2 year old cousins. I was just pointing out a fact, which is that fetus's don't have fully functioning brains.
From an educational standpoint minors don't have fully functioning brains. I think you mean that fetuses are not conscience, which I would argue that within the second month there is discernable brain function and the fetus is responsive to its environment. Nerves and blood vessels form at the same time, which is why they are so intricately overlapped. All nerves originate from the brain - whether it reaches out to the fingers or toes - and so as soon as the nervous system responds to stimuli then its impossible to say that the fetus is not conscious. The nervous system begins almost as soon as the fertilized egg attaches to the mother's womb, because it is then that the circulatory system begins. So almost immediately at conception the groundwork is already 100% laid out for that newly formed conscience, because this initial circulation develops into all of the internal organs that allow it to eventually self-sustain. The fetus is very vulnerable at this point to outside interference. If something interupts the fetus at this point then it will not develop into what we think of as a human being. So interupting this early fetus, even at the moment of conception, is potentially killing a true human being at its most vulnerable moment.
Sure a fetus is not self-sustaining to the point it can live without mom's help, but last time I checked neither was a baby outside the womb. Quite frankly, any baby born after the third trimester has a very good chance of living a normal life if it just gets the care it needs to get over the hump of initial development,,,
Originally posted by: Tab
You're putting a lot of emphasis on "pain" and telling me it's a pre-req. for a human being. Prove it.
The nervous system isn't fully fuctional or wired in any meaningfull way at concepetion. Not for even 3 months after that, and they're illegal at that point anyway.
Originally posted by: MadRat
From an educational standpoint minors don't have fully functioning brains. I think you mean that fetuses are not conscience, which I would argue that within the second month there is discernable brain function and the fetus is responsive to its environment.
So interupting this early fetus, even at the moment of conception, is potentially killing a true human being at its most vulnerable moment.
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
and what about miscarriages? Should we persue legal action against the mother for killing "a true human being at its most vulnerable moment"?
You're assuming a human is a human at the moment of conception, which is a rather large assumption to make. Most people consider a human to be a human when they are born, but like Tab said, in other cultures it took even longer to be considered alive.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
and what about miscarriages? Should we persue legal action against the mother for killing "a true human being at its most vulnerable moment"?
You're assuming a human is a human at the moment of conception, which is a rather large assumption to make. Most people consider a human to be a human when they are born, but like Tab said, in other cultures it took even longer to be considered alive.
1. Who said to punish anyone when a pregnancy goes wrong? I think you read something into an argument that does not exist. Life sometimes doesn't quite work out in textbook fashion. Punishing someone just because a pregnancy failed - that is they would be punished for trying - is not humane and has no place in this topic.
2. An embryo is a human - that is the fertilized egg becomes a true living person at conception. A dog fetus is a dog at its conception. You do not magically have the ability to transform into a dog when you are a human, just as a human fetus cannot transform into a dog fetus.
Some people are so simple-minded and ignorant that it is normal in their opinion to separate people. Calling a defenseless fetus a non-human is no different than calling a black person non-human simply because they have a skin color that is not acceptable. If you cannot protect the most vulnerable of your kind then I cannot believe that you would understand why prejudice and bigotry is also wrong. These choices are inherently linked because they center around dehumanizing a real human victim in order to justify discrimination against that victim. Abortion targets a defenseless life.
Technically I lump conception with implantation which is not correct. My belief is that life is not begun simply by conception, but when that zygote is implanted. Its bad semantics on my part, but I think some religious leaders knowingly try too hard to lump birth control - preventing fertilization AND/OR implantation - with the topic of abortion. Certain forms of birth control have its place, but that is just my opinion. If the pro-Life slogan was "Life begins at the moment of Implantation" then it would make more people comfortable but it doesn't sound as sexy to say.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: Tab
You're putting a lot of emphasis on "pain" and telling me it's a pre-req. for a human being. Prove it.
The nervous system isn't fully fuctional or wired in any meaningfull way at concepetion. Not for even 3 months after that, and they're illegal at that point anyway.
I never mentioned pain. You must be confused what I just said with a previous post or something you've heard elsewhere.
The base functions of the nervous system must develop correctly from the moment of conception or the person will never have normal function in life. You are right that the semantics of "fetus" and "human being" are subjective, but science tells me that life does actually take meaningful shape exactly after conception, that is after the point the fertilized egg attaches to the womb and becomes an embryo. It is at that point a chain reavtion takes place that will likely form a fine concious human being if protected from harm.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
and what about miscarriages? Should we persue legal action against the mother for killing "a true human being at its most vulnerable moment"?
You're assuming a human is a human at the moment of conception, which is a rather large assumption to make. Most people consider a human to be a human when they are born, but like Tab said, in other cultures it took even longer to be considered alive.
1. Who said to punish anyone when a pregnancy goes wrong? I think you read something into an argument that does not exist. Life sometimes doesn't quite work out in textbook fashion. Punishing someone just because a pregnancy failed - that is they would be punished for trying - is not humane and has no place in this topic.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
and what about miscarriages? Should we persue legal action against the mother for killing "a true human being at its most vulnerable moment"?
You're assuming a human is a human at the moment of conception, which is a rather large assumption to make. Most people consider a human to be a human when they are born, but like Tab said, in other cultures it took even longer to be considered alive.
2. An embryo is a human - that is the fertilized egg becomes a true living person at conception. A dog fetus is a dog at its conception. You do not magically have the ability to transform into a dog when you are a human, just as a human fetus cannot transform into a dog fetus.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: CheesePoofs
and what about miscarriages? Should we persue legal action against the mother for killing "a true human being at its most vulnerable moment"?
You're assuming a human is a human at the moment of conception, which is a rather large assumption to make. Most people consider a human to be a human when they are born, but like Tab said, in other cultures it took even longer to be considered alive.
Some people are so simple-minded and ignorant that it is normal in their opinion to separate people. Calling a defenseless fetus a non-human is no different than calling a black person non-human simply because they have a skin color that is not acceptable. If you cannot protect the most vulnerable of your kind then I cannot believe that you would understand why prejudice and bigotry is also wrong. These choices are inherently linked because they center around dehumanizing a real human victim in order to justify discrimination against that victim. Abortion targets a defenseless life.
Technically I lump conception with implantation which is not correct. My belief is that life is not begun simply by conception, but when that zygote is implanted. Its bad semantics on my part, but I think some religious leaders knowingly try too hard to lump birth control - preventing fertilization AND/OR implantation - with the topic of abortion. Certain forms of birth control have its place, but that is just my opinion. If the pro-Life slogan was "Life begins at the moment of Implantation" then it would make more people comfortable but it doesn't sound as sexy to say.
Originally posted by: MadRat
A zygote won't exactly develop without implantation.
Originally posted by: MadRat
A zygote won't exactly develop without implantation.
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
haha!
so you don't see the genetically unique human life that will exist to be of any value?
and if so, do you agree with removing all funding for prenatal care?
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
haha!
so you don't see the genetically unique human life that will exist to be of any value?
and if so, do you agree with removing all funding for prenatal care?
Where was your culture of life when a million people were being slaughtered in Rwanda? How is your "culture of life" now in Sudan where Genocide is taking place? How many sh1ts do you give about 100,000 dead Iraqis?
Your culture of life only seems to apply to unborn life. We have a president people in Texas used to call the "Texacutioner" preaching about life. Please.
How far do you take it? Is it "life" when a zygote is formed? Are you against stem cell research? Abortion is an ugly aspect of life, but that doesn't give you a right to extend the claws of the government into a woman's body. Abortion is a personal issue between the woman, her doctor, and her God. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Originally posted by: Tab
If abortion was murder, then you'd have a leg to stand on.
LUFKIN, Texas - A 19-year-old accused of causing his teenage girlfriend to miscarry two fetuses by stepping on her stomach was convicted Monday of two counts of murder.
Originally posted by: zendari
I support abortion rights, but I also think pro-choice is a leftist terminology. If you support allowing people to have an abortion you are pro-abortion. Simple as that.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: Tab
If abortion was murder, then you'd have a leg to stand on.
Well, many people, including some judges and juries, believe it *is* murder. Did we forget about this so soon?
LUFKIN, Texas - A 19-year-old accused of causing his teenage girlfriend to miscarry two fetuses by stepping on her stomach was convicted Monday of two counts of murder.
Consistency would be a nice start. I'm not sure how this law came to pass or actually be enforced, but it is apparently sticking around.
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: MadRat
A zygote won't exactly develop without implantation.
Neither will an aborted fetus...
No one is asking you to like Abortion MadRat, reguardless of how you feel about it. It doesn't remotely effect your life. You can go ahead of waste your life with a bunch of pro-life activists groups, but I having a feeling Roe Vs. Wade won't change anytime soon.
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: Tab
Originally posted by: MadRat
A zygote won't exactly develop without implantation.
Neither will an aborted fetus...
No one is asking you to like Abortion MadRat, reguardless of how you feel about it. It doesn't remotely effect your life. You can go ahead of waste your life with a bunch of pro-life activists groups, but I having a feeling Roe Vs. Wade won't change anytime soon.
Ah, but you are wrong. The emotional and physical stress an abortion has on the mother is not black and white. It can and does affect (not effect btw) the other people around the person. I've seen a couple of women spiral in their lives until they finally had another. Guilt is a heavy burden to carry for some people. You might be able to carry guilt easily, but the general population does not.
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Where was your culture of life when a million people were being slaughtered in Rwanda? How is your "culture of life" now in Sudan where Genocide is taking place? How many sh1ts do you give about 100,000 dead Iraqis?
Your culture of life only seems to apply to unborn life. We have a president you people in Texas used to call the "Texacutioner" preaching about life. Please.
Originally posted by: jahawkin
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Where was your culture of life when a million people were being slaughtered in Rwanda? How is your "culture of life" now in Sudan where Genocide is taking place? How many sh1ts do you give about 100,000 dead Iraqis?
Your culture of life only seems to apply to unborn life. We have a president you people in Texas used to call the "Texacutioner" preaching about life. Please.
Spot on. Pro-lifers are pro-life until birth, then they couln't give two shiites about your life. No food, no healthcare?? Tough luck, get some personal responsibility. But OMG these poor defenseless fetuses, I'm going to spend by life and define my political identity trying to save them.
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: jahawkin
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Where was your culture of life when a million people were being slaughtered in Rwanda? How is your "culture of life" now in Sudan where Genocide is taking place? How many sh1ts do you give about 100,000 dead Iraqis?
Your culture of life only seems to apply to unborn life. We have a president you people in Texas used to call the "Texacutioner" preaching about life. Please.
Spot on. Pro-lifers are pro-life until birth, then they couln't give two shiites about your life. No food, no healthcare?? Tough luck, get some personal responsibility. But OMG these poor defenseless fetuses, I'm going to spend by life and define my political identity trying to save them.
I don't play the abortion debate game too often, but if you can't see the difference between someone wanting to protect an innocent unborn child and sanctioning a convicted 12x murdering rapist to the gas chamber, then you have your blinders on a bit too tight.
Personal responsibility is a key concept - the mother should have used it when she decided to spread her legs.* Your arguments along these lines are weak, at best.
(*ignoring the rape/incest option - which is quite a difficult situation, obviously, but does not apply to the current discussion.)
Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
I don't play the abortion debate game too often, but if you can't see the difference between someone wanting to protect an innocent unborn child and sanctioning a convicted 12x murdering rapist to the gas chamber, then you have your blinders on a bit too tight.
Funny how it always comes down to sex with you guys isn't it?? This doesn't have anything to do with your desire to control the sex lives of women in society does it?? Groups of men have never been known to do that.Personal responsibility is a key concept - the mother should have used it when she decided to spread her legs.* Your arguments along these lines are weak, at best.
One would think that if personhood begins at conception or implantation or however you define it, that the method of conception shouldn't matter. A baby is a baby is a baby. You gotta save those poor, defenseless babies, rape or not.(*ignoring the rape/incest option - which is quite a difficult situation, obviously, but does not apply to the current discussion.)
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
It's easy for a man to say. Notice the responsibility only falls upon the female. Interesting how the government doesn't try and regulate what a man does with his body. Doublestandard.
What? So unscrupulous abortion doctors are good reasons for abortions? I'm not following your logic. And I'm pretty sure General Practitioners don't perform abortions, only DRs qualified to do such can. (I may very well be wrong.) What kind of DR would voluntarily become an abortion doctor for the sole reason of not performing abortions?Also, you have to look at what happens based on law. There is the law and there is the effect of the law. A ban on partial birth abortions means that a doctor that is personnally anti-abortion can post-pone letting his patient have one until the third trimester when it would be too late.
Now it's "personal responsibility": a slogan that is just as hypocritical as "the culture of life".
How about innocent post-utero children? Like the 11 million without health insurance? Your priorities don't make sense to me and your sense of the powers a government should be granted aren't in line with mine. It is noble to want to protect unborn children, sure. I respect your opinion, but in general, I disagree.
He means it takes two to have a child. If an unwanted conception happens, the fault does not lie only on the women; it's also the man's fault.Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
It's easy for a man to say. Notice the responsibility only falls upon the female. Interesting how the government doesn't try and regulate what a man does with his body. Doublestandard.
What's the double standard? If men had the ability to carry children, I still would be opposed to abortions. That's not the case however. There's nothing I can do about that.