Tyrion Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 I got a question for you ET ,are you happy with your life ? And if so, are you glad that you were born ? I know where you're going with that, and it really irks me. Sure, ET wouldn't exist if his parents had killed him when he was a fetus. But if his parents had used birth control, he wouldn't exist either. Does that mean we should ban birth control, hell should we ban being asexual(the proper term escapes me), after all even if the woman doesn't want the child, she could always give him up to adoption. They might be slightly different arguments, but they both end up with the same result: the potential human never becoming self-aware of it's own existance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Yes it never became self aware ,but it existed none the less. Im in fact thinking of an orginization in which women are paid the money to have the baby instead of aborting it and then would give it up for adoption ,but if they ever came to want the child ,the foster parents would have to give it back . Please stop attributing self awareness to constitue living or humanhood it makes no sense whatsoever. Yes, if his parents used birth control he wouldnt have been concieved ,but birth control as I said before ,stops a child from being concieved ,whereas abortion snuffs an already concieved childs life out ,they are two totally opposite ends of the spectrum in regards to life or death of the child. God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by reelguy227 Please stop attributing self awareness to constitue living or humanhood it makes no sense whatsoever. but that's what living is, and it makes perfect sense, you just don't like your opinions challenged. then again, I suppose noone does... *shrugs* I got a solution, keep your beliefs out of the government, you don't like abortions, fine don't get one. But just because YOU believe it's murder, doesn't mean others do, and doesn't make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by Tyrion I know where you're going with that, and it really irks me. Sure, ET wouldn't exist if his parents had killed him when he was a fetus. See ,you say that he "was a fetus" ,so in essence that was him in the womb and no other person. What I was getting at with that argument was not to say that he wouldnt exist but to say that he had the chance to live his life ,so why not give all fetuses the chance to live there life ,why say that its ok to snuff their lives out but not ours while we were growing . If you were given the chance to live your life than let others get a chance to live theirs . Just because the fetus is attached to the woman during gestation , doesnt mean it is her property ,it has its own DNA ,and its own body already growing inside of her ,and to say that it is her possession makes no sense . You say that the fetus is like a parasite ,well then if there is a parasite in our body ,does that mean we own it ? God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Please stop attributing self awareness to constitue living or humanhood it makes no sense whatsoever. Actually it only makes sense. Sense is all it makes. Reason. Logic. Religion has no place among these things. What is the difference between stopping an egg from being fertilized, and aborting a foetus without higher brain function? Nothing scientific. Nothing reasonable. There is no difference. Not to ET warrior. He'd still be non-existent either way. Be open and specific Reel. What you believe is that a zygote has a soul. An egg that's just been zonked by a sperm, has a soul. Right? Right. So what you're doing is applying your religion to the world around you. You have no care for reason or logic, you merely want the world to revolve around the dogma set out by your preferred church. You have no care for morality based upon experience of the world and logic concerning the world, you obtained your stock version of morality from your parents, your teachers, your minister and your bible. And you do not question. I can't imagine anything more sinful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by InsaneSith but that's what living is, and it makes perfect sense, you just don't like your opinions challenged. then again, I suppose noone does... *shrugs* I got a solution, keep your beliefs out of the government, you don't like abortions, fine don't get one. But just because YOU believe it's murder, doesn't mean others do, and doesn't make it so. Ok ,according to you its not a human right ? So in your point of view ,its a human at birth ,whats to say it is not a human 2 hours before birth or ,2 days before birth ,or even 2 months before birth ? What changes the human hood of it in your eyes ,just because its attached to the mother means its not a human worthy of a living life ? God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by Spider AL Actually it only makes sense. Sense is all it makes. Reason. Logic. Religion has no place among these things. What is the difference between stopping an egg from being fertilized, and aborting a foetus without higher brain function? Nothing scientific. Nothing reasonable. There is no difference. Not to ET warrior. He'd still be non-existent either way. Be open and specific Reel. What you believe is that a zygote has a soul. An egg that's just been zonked by a sperm, has a soul. Right? Right. So what you're doing is applying your religion to the world around you. You have no care for reason or logic, you merely want the world to revolve around the dogma set out by your preferred church. You have no care for morality based upon experience of the world and logic concerning the world, you obtained your stock version of morality from your parents, your teachers, your minister and your bible. And you do not question. I can't imagine anything more sinful. When did I ever mention a soul in this thread at all ? Im not imposing that its wrong to kill it because it has a soul ,the soul is forever in my eyes ,so death really has no bearing on the soul . Im saying that its wrong to kill it because its a human ,not because it has a soul . And for our government to legalize the murder of the most innocent of lives is outrageous. God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 When did I ever mention a soul in this thread at all ?You don't have to mention it. It's behind everything you're expounding. You just haven't used the word because you're trying to conduct your argument in a way that will appeal to reason, without having any reasonable foundation for your argument. An arm is not a human, nor a disembodied leg. A brain is not "a human" unless it lives. An entire body is not a man unless it lives. How then can you say that an embryo that cannot think, perform basic vital functions on its own or possess anything that we'd characterise as human faculties, is human? It's no more a fully-formed person than the sperm or the egg. We can debate the STAGE at which an embryo becomes a person, but the fact that it is not a person at the moment the egg is fertilized is indisputable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Shouldn't this be decided by women for women? I mean it is their baby afterall, it is their womb. What I don't understand is how can males actually question abortion. They don't exactly know how a mother feels when she gets an abortion or gives her kid to adoption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Shouldn't this be decided by women for women? I mean it is their baby afterall, it is their womb. Feeling? Does feeling and emotional involvement enter into the debate over whether a foetus is a whole, functioning person after one stage of its development? I think not. I'm not sure what you're driving at at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by Spider AL How then can you say that an embryo that cannot think, perform basic vital functions on its own or possess anything that we'd characterise as human faculties, is human? It's no more a fully-formed person than the sperm or the egg. We can debate the STAGE at which an embryo becomes a person, but the fact that it is not a person at the moment the egg is fertilized is indisputable. Heres my story ,I was born 7 months premature , my lungs did not work ,I couldnt breathe on my own ,otherwise I would have died . I needed a ventillator to breathe for me while my body grew to full capacity ,so in essence that ventilator kept me alive . It did the same as the mothers body does ,it gave me oxygen so my lungs could distribute it through out my body ,the same thing a mother does . So if you go by my view ,I wasnt living and by your standards was something that could just be killed at will . God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by Spider AL Feeling? Does feeling and emotional involvement enter into the debate over whether a foetus is a whole, functioning person after one stage of its development? I think not. I'm not sure what you're driving at at all. I'm not sure myself...now that I think about it... >.< reelguy- But you were born already. Have you read the other posts about this? I would also point out that your situation is way different then a mother wanting an abortion. How can being premature be compared with abortion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 and by your standards was something that could just be killed at will.You could fertilize an egg in a test tube, and grow the embryo outside of the mother's womb. Being in the womb, or out of it, doesn't alter the stage at which you develop cognitive functions. It doesn't alter the stage at which you can be considered a person. And it doesn't alter the stage at which you can be legally aborted. I don't care whether you were eight-and-a-half months premature and popped out singing "god save our queen", it doesn't change a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reelguy227 Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 But according to your standards I wasnt living ? So if we have dominion over our children when in the womb ,than shouldnt it be legal to have dominion over them outside of the womb ? What defines living in your eyes and why ? God Bless, Reelguy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 But according to your standards I wasnt living ?You're the only person who's used the word "living", and if it's your best attempt to twist my words, I gotta say... it's lacking. According to my standards, a foetus before the stage at which it can legally be aborted, does not possess sufficient cognitive or self-sustaining qualities for it to be called "a person", and therefore it can be destroyed without moral overtones, just as sperm can be flushed down the toilet. It's that simple. The law defines the stage at which abortion can occur, and I'm perfectly amenable to debating the merits of one stage over another. What I am NOT amenable to, is listening to dogmatically charged nonsense from people not unlike yourself, about how an egg that's just had a sperm slam into it is "a person" while the sperm and egg by themselves are not as sacred, for some reason. So if we have dominion over our children when in the womb ,than shouldnt it be legal to have dominion over them outside of the womb ?Frankly, yes it should. If a two-week old zygote pops out, it's no more a person than if it had remained within the womb. Being in the womb or not doesn't change the state of the embryo's development, and therefore doesn't change whether it's a person or not. Again, clear cut and simple. Logic often is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Maybe you should actually pay attention to what we're saying Reelguy, instead of just jumping to conclusions. We have NEVER, at ANY point, said that a human fetus is not living. We are aware it's just as alive is the sperm and the egg that made it. We are saying it's not a HUMAN yet. We are saying it requires a certain level of cognitive functionality and the ability to be self-aware to make it a human. And yes, I do like living, and i'm glad that I'm alive. But you know, I wouldn't have KNOWN that I wanted to be alive had I been aborted, so it would have been moot. I wouldn't know and the world would have gone on without me. Stop refering to it has having dominion over our children please, because that's not the issue. It's about being able to terminate a group of non-sentient cells, NOT a child. Edit - and it appears I've been beaten to the punch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 WAIT! your argument is that the unborn feutus is not alive yet in the first place? What IS living and whas not? I say, if it can be killed, it is ALIVE! ITS GROWING! Rather it can see, feel, or think or NOT!!!! Understand??? after and only AFTER you kill it it is considered dead! (you cant kill it if its already dead!) Before you kill it, its ALIVE!! HERE IS THE DIFFERENCE between life and death: A feutus that is growing is alive! (you can kill it!) a fetus that is NOT growing is NOT alive! (you can't kill it becuase it's already dead!) who CARES if its not consius yet? who CARES if it can feel pain? if its growing and you can kill it, its alive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 OH! the baby IS human! Just a tiny version of one! may not have shape yet, May not have Consiosness yet, but its HUMAN and ALIVE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Kipper. READ the thread before you reply. originally posted by ET Warrior Maybe you should actually pay attention to what we're saying Reelguy, instead of just jumping to conclusions. We have NEVER, at ANY point, said that a human fetus is not living. We are aware it's just as alive is the sperm and the egg that made it. We are saying it's not a HUMAN yet. the baby IS human! Just a tiny version of one! may not have shape yet, May not have Consiosness yet, but its HUMAN and ALIVE! And if you had read the thread you would have already seen that while it may have the DNA of human, it is not really a human. Our humanity basically boils down to our awareness. The fact that we recognize we are a person. An unborn fetus has no awareness. And unborn fetus has no NERVOUS system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 And if you had read the thread you would have already seen that while it may have the DNA of human, it is not really a human. Our humanity basically boils down to our awareness. The fact that we recognize we are a person. An unborn fetus has no awareness. And unborn fetus has no NERVOUS system. If it has human DNA, it IS human! not a PART of a human EITHER! In the big scheme of things, YOU are not that significant EITHER! YOU are just a speck of DUST on the face of the planet! should it be leagal to kill YOU??? of course not! you dont legalize killing someone because its small! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 If I cut off my finger you can test my finger and it will have human DNA. Is my finger a human? Is it wrong to let my finger die? Should we preserve it in a jar? Sure a fetus will EVENTUALLY grow into a human, just as my sperm would EVENTUALLY fertilize and egg and become a human as well, assuming I offer them the proper conditions. And of COURSE i'm insignificant. There was NO point in this where ANYONE said it's okay to kill a fetus just because it's small Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by reelguy227 So in your point of view ,its a human at birth. no according to my point of view it's not a human until 4 - 5 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 4, 2004 Share Posted November 4, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog If it has human DNA, it IS human! ... my spleen has human DNA, does that mean I shouldn't remove it because it's a human? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 On a side note, you shouldn't remove your spleen because it's a vital lymphatic mass, assisting in the processing of antibodies and fluid transportation. I'm always amazed that people whip it out at the slightest provocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted November 5, 2004 Share Posted November 5, 2004 indeed. But seriously if having human DNA makes one human, and thus removing it's life line then I guess amputation is murder too, along with removing ones appendix should it need removing. I personally think after 3 months abortion should pretty much be out of the question, unless danger presents itself. Be it the mothers safety, or the life quality of the child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.