Reborn Outcast Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 No razor your missing the point. I'm saying that your killing an individual human being when you have an abortion. I'm not talking about 7 years into your life if your a different person. Science has proven that an individuals life begins at conception which I said and Cjais and I got into a debate about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais Tell me the difference between a fetus growing in a womb, and a group of cancer cells Cancer permanently damages the host, pregnant women recover. Example: I have a blueprint of the car I wish to design. I realize I can't build the car after all, so I throw the blueprint in the bin. Now, do I start crying over all the mileage that car would never run? Do I weep for it because it didn't get the chance to drive on the alps? No. It is just a template, without any emotional value at all. Does the blueprint grow into a car? This whole analogy is flawed. We go thru a complete cell replaced over a period of 7 years or so. Does that mean I'm not the same person that existed 7 years ago? A bunch of cells do not equal a person.Neural cells are not replacement, and that's where our consciousness lies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast And Cjais did you read the quote I posted from http://www.abortionfacts.com? Here is part of it... I read it. And I agree with them. An individual's life does begin at conception. But the point is, there is no individual yet. It takes time for an individual to appear - most importantly it needs a consciousness and a way to think. Otherwise it's mentally, emotionally and spiritually dead. Just as the early beginning of human life were the first single celled organisms, so is the early beginning of the human individual the conception. Cancer permanently damages the host, pregnant women recover. Cancer does not always permanently damage the host, nor do pregnant women not always survive the whole pregnancy. But that is beside the point, as this has nothing to do with the example. Does the blueprint grow into a car? This whole analogy is flawed. Suppose you had the chassis of the car. Would you call that a car yet? How about adding wheels to it, is it now a car? An engine then? Only when the vehicle is capable of moving about in a crude manner would I call it a car. Not yet fully finished, but a car. It can drive now, which is the basic requirement of a car. Similar to the nervous system of the fetus - once it is developed can you begin talking about a human individual. Before that it's just a lump of growing cells. Neural cells are not replacement, and that's where our consciousness lies. So you agree it is our neural cells that makes us human? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Only when the vehicle is capable of moving about in a crude manner would I call it a car.Not yet fully finished, but a car. It can drive now, which is the basic requirement of a car. Similar to the nervous system of the fetus - once it is developed can you begin talking about a human individual. This was my whole Roe v. Wade point earlier. Except that it gains it's human rights once it can be sustained outside the mother's womb (as defined by the Supreme Court). I wonder what the development of artificial wombs would do to abortion rights. So you agree it is our neural cells that makes us human? No, our DNA makes us human. Neural cells just make consciousness possible, and that's where it happens. When knocked unconscious, do you lose your humanity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reborn Outcast Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais But the point is, there is no individual yet. It takes time for an individual to appear - most importantly it needs a consciousness and a way to think. Otherwise it's mentally, emotionally and spiritually dead. Just as the early beginning of human life were the first single celled organisms, so is the early beginning of the human individual the conception. People who are brain dead are mentally, emotionally and spiritually dead people. Their brain is not functioning which is the same as not having one just like an early fetus does. So your saying that brain-dead people who are still alive without their brain, just like fetus', are not living individual people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by matt-windu This was my whole Roe v. Wade point earlier. Except that it gains it's human rights once it can be sustained outside the mother's womb (as defined by the Supreme Court). I wonder what the development of artificial wombs would do to abortion rights. Eh. So you're pro-abortion? Or against it? Or are we just replying to each other's posts? No, our DNA makes us human. Neural cells just make consciousness possible, and that's where it happens. When knocked unconscious, do you lose your humanity? In a sense, yes. Would you call a person who was literally braindead truly human? I mean, he looks like a human, but it's only his body that resembles a human. If DNA is the only thing that makes us human, I wonder what people are going to say once scientists artificially create a the complete human DNA string. They can currently create small bits of it, but the whole thing could make for some very interesting ethical discussions. Problem is, once you get down into genetics, the defining line for what's human becomes blurry. How much are we allowed to genetically alter our DNA before we're no longer "human"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast So your saying that brain-dead people who are still alive without their brain, just like fetus', are not living individual people? Well, yes. If your brain isn't working at all, you're dead already. Which is why the fetus is dead in the same sense. If you had no brain, would you be a living, individual human, or just a piece of braindead flesh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reborn Outcast Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Ok well what if you get knocked out? Your brain is not functioning and you can't move your arms and legs but you are still living. (Cjais I don't think this debate is ever going to end but its a good one so lets keep it going. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonkH8er Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Reborn, as much as it tries to present a little from both sides, that site is clearly anti-abortion. The facts are exhaggerated, the whole page is biased. It's all just a website full of abortion bashing. It's a website designed for pregnant women, in order to get them to not have an abortion. You go into the pro-life section, and it praises you You go into the pro choice section, hoping for good facts about abortion, but it just tells you how wrong you are, and bashes all the pro-choice arguments. It's just plain stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taos Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I think people should always have options. It's because of this I am pro-choice. If it comes down to it....and let's say my gf is pregnant, I don't know what will happen. I do know that it's her choice and not mine....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I don't think it's possible to alter our DNA to the point where we aren't 'human.' We'd just evolve past Homo sapien and into Homo somethingelse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast No razor your missing the point. I'm saying that your killing an individual human being when you have an abortion. I'm not talking about 7 years into your life if your a different person. Science has proven that an individuals life begins at conception which I said and Cjais and I got into a debate about. There is no proof that the fetus has any sort of "human" mental capacity at conception. I believe it was stated that before third trimester, the fetus doesn't have any brain function on the level we consider "human". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast Ok well what if you get knocked out? Your brain is not functioning and you can't move your arms and legs but you are still living. Your brain still functions even when you're knocked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by razorace Your brain still functions even when you're knocked out. Yes, but you can't make a conscious thought, similar to the interactions between neurons of an unborn entity. My new stance is that abortion is wrong after neurons begin to develop and interact, even in the most basic ways...before that it's ok imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonkH8er Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Then neural pathways don't begin to develop until a fair way into the pregnancy. Most abortions happen long before this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by matt-windu Yes, but you can't make a conscious thought, similar to the interactions between neurons of an unborn entity. Well, there's a LOT of crap going on mentally that you can't consciously sense. I'd guess (total ballpark) that 90% of your mental functions are hidden from what you consider "conscious thought". It would be cool to see what goes on in my sub-conscious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darklighter Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 I am very much for Abortion. Considering the significant rise in teenage pregnancies and things like the 'date-rape' drug nowadays, it's becoming increasingly likely for young people to become pregnant by accident. I think that if a woman does make a mistake and becomes pregnant, and does not want the child, then they should have the right to decide if they have it or not. Put it in this context. Say the woman doesn't want to have a baby, but by law is not allowed to have an abortion. Do you really think that the life of that will be okay, even if her mother doesn't want her? I highly doubt it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'jais Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by matt-windu I don't think it's possible to alter our DNA to the point where we aren't 'human.' We'd just evolve past Homo sapien and into Homo somethingelse. It's possible to alter the human DNA. It's very much possible to crudely alter huge chunks of our chromosomes into something so alien you wouldn't see it as human in any way. It wouldn't have human DNA, it wouldn't look human, and it wouldn't behave human. But it originated from a modified human DNA string, so I guess it must be human. If it was possible to alter the human embryo into something that looked like a dog, behaved like a dog and thought like a dog, would you call it a "heavily genetically altered human", or a "dog". The categorization of species is a human construct. It does not exist once you delve into the DNA. Which is exactly why the ideal of upholding human life above all else is silly per definition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reborn Outcast Posted January 12, 2003 Author Share Posted January 12, 2003 Abortion actually has a higher rate of death and harm than if a woman goes ahead with her pregnancy. I just heard a horrible story today about a woman was having an abortion and the doctor pulled out part of her bladder with the tool he was using. She had a hemmorage (sp?) and was rushed to be treated. She had to have multiple surgeries and now can never have a child, cna't have sex and has to pee into a bag hanging from right below her bladder because she is unable to to go to the bathroom correctly... i've never heard of a pregnancy that has done that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt-- Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Cjais It's possible to alter the human DNA. It's very much possible to crudely alter huge chunks of our chromosomes into something so alien you wouldn't see it as human in any way. It wouldn't have human DNA, it wouldn't look human, and it wouldn't behave human. But it originated from a modified human DNA string, so I guess it must be human. If it was possible to alter the human embryo into something that looked like a dog, behaved like a dog and thought like a dog, would you call it a "heavily genetically altered human", or a "dog". From webster: alter - to make different without changing into something else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 12, 2003 Share Posted January 12, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast Abortion actually has a higher rate of death and harm than if a woman goes ahead with her pregnancy. I really doubt that statistic. I suggest you go look it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GonkH8er Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 Originally posted by Reborn Outcast Abortion actually has a higher rate of death and harm than if a woman goes ahead with her pregnancy. I just heard a horrible story today about a woman was having an abortion and the doctor pulled out part of her bladder with the tool he was using. She had a hemmorage (sp?) and was rushed to be treated. She had to have multiple surgeries and now can never have a child, cna't have sex and has to pee into a bag hanging from right below her bladder because she is unable to to go to the bathroom correctly... i've never heard of a pregnancy that has done that. Actually pregnancies can often do much worse. A lot of women die from giving birth, some have to have their uteruses removed post-birth. You hear about it all the time. The story you just mentioned, which I've never heard of before, which is utterly stupid, would only happen on EXTEMELY rare circumstances. If you knew how abortions were performed today, you'd realise it's not possible to pull out a chunk of the bladder. The bladder in women is located down and forward from the uterus. The tool used for most abortions nowadays is not some deadly spiky sharp death claw, but rather, a simple suction tool which just sucks the undeveloped embryo out. There's no scraping or digging or sharp poking of any kind, so my guess is that abortion story is just an urban legend, or some sort of back-alley cheapskate bodgey abortion job. It's a fact that hospital and clinic abortions have a MUCH lower mortality rate than carrying the pregnancy to term, quite contrary to your opinion. It's incredibly safe, and as I said before, has a mortality rate similar to getting a tooth pulled. It's a very professional thing these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy867 Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 I am against Abortion for many reasons, but the one way I explain is imagine this: For those wanting to abort their child, imagine this for a moment. Imagine your parents in the same situation. They could have EASILY and just as much aborted you, but they didn't. So don't you think you should give your child the same opportunity at life as your parents did for you. Sure there are the special circumstances like rape, incest. I feel that only if the woman's life is indeed in danger beyond a shadow of a doubt, then possibly induce labor, because I read somewhere (not sure the validity of the the source), that most complications where the pregnancy is life-threatening to the woman begins in the middle of the third trimester, in which case, most if not all of the fetus has developed, and with induced labor, there is a good chance that both the woman and the child may survive. And I say in cases such as incest and rape, have the baby, and even then if you don't want it, put it up for adoption because there are thousands upon thousands of couples who would love to have a child of their own, but due to medical complications, they are unable to. That's my thoughts on abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razorace Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 For those wanting to abort their child, imagine this for a moment. Imagine your parents in the same situation. They could have EASILY and just as much aborted you, but they didn't. So don't you think you should give your child the same opportunity at life as your parents did for you. I really doubt it. I was a wanted child. My parents tried to have childs for years. Pregnancy isn't a minor issue. It's a huge emotional/physical event. Forcing someone to go thru that for your own personal convictions doesn't seem right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surfnshannon Posted January 13, 2003 Share Posted January 13, 2003 yes i personally hate that bumper sticker slogan as well. Yes, we understand that by our parents "choice" we are alive. Its just like I stated before...its like...telling people it is illegal to drink before they are 21. They are going to do it anyway. People are going to sell it to them knowing they aren't old enough. People do what they want to do regardless of the rules. That is when you have all these...people pulling out bladders by mistake etc. You make abortion illegal...and people are going to do it anyway - using dr's or non doctors who may or may not know what they are doing. It wouldn't be safe anymore and people would just drop babies in dumpsters or not take care of themselves when they are pregnant. I agree with Razor - our parents chose to have us. Yes, it would suck if they didn't...but whether you are religious or not. That's fate...if we weren't here we'd never know the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.