Abortion or not?

[sputnik]

Originally posted by J-hop
But what I'm saying is don't look at the argument at the surface level. Drill down and define why a fertilized egg has more right to life than a fully conscious cow. Figure out for yourself what exactly it is that defines the difference for you.

All of humanity will agree with it is better to kill an animal than a human (without getting into who the human is or how special the animal is to another human).

At the same time we would ALL be horrified if people were killing their newborn babies that they didn't want anymore. People would also likely be horrified if we rounded up everyone who was mentally handicapped, blind, deaf, deformed, autistic, allergic to peanuts, impoverished etc. and executed them under the belief that it would be better for them not to have to suffer with such an affliction for a lifetime.

So we are all of the belief that generally speaking human life is sacred while the lives of animals are not.

The difference lies in when is a human actually considered to be a human with a right to live and THIS SINGLE ISSUE is where this ENTIRE debate lies.

Some will believe at conception, some at the time of birth and some at X weeks prior to birth.

To debate anything else is pointless.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by HiTempguy1


[IMG]http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/]

Haha, I agree with you. I don't think anyone truly knows what that means. I have my definition, and I do not accept people like deepak chopra that think atoms are conscious.

We could take the arguement further back and try to define consciousness. That could be part of the problem. Those using the idea of conscious at conception have a very different definition of conscious than I do. But then they need to define why a human is conscious at conception and a cow isn't. That is essentially the same argument that I'm proposing.

[J-hop]

Originally posted by sputnik


All of humanity will agree with it is better to kill an animal than a human (without getting into who the human is or how special the animal is to another human).

At the same time we would ALL be horrified if people were killing their newborn babies that they didn't want anymore. People would also likely be horrified if we rounded up everyone who was mentally handicapped, blind, deaf, deformed, autistic, allergic to peanuts, impoverished etc. and executed them under the belief that it would be better for them not to have to suffer with such an affliction for a lifetime.

So we are all of the belief that generally speaking human life is sacred while the lives of animals are not.

The difference lies in when is a human actually considered to be a human with a right to live and THIS SINGLE ISSUE is where this ENTIRE debate lies.

Some will believe at conception, some at the time of birth and some at X weeks prior to birth.

To debate anything else is pointless.

Ok but I think you are missing the point, what mental leap is being made that says humans are sacred and animals aren't.

Define why a fertilized cow egg is different than a fertilized human egg without using any reference to humans being sacred (or popular belief).

I think we are all taking a very surface level view of an arguement with very deep complex roots

[Gestalt]

Originally posted by sputnik


Do you consider animals and humans to be equal?

No.

Of course you don't.

So why base an argument assuming that anyone does?

Humans are animals in a sense. But animals (as we know them) are not humans.

I think even the most hardcore pro-choice advocate would admit that there is a fairly large ethical difference between killing a human compared to killing an animal.

He seems irrational. He is making chickens equal to children, and trying to do the same eith his death penalty absurdness equating deathrow murderers convicted by jury, judge law or whatever they are with innocent unborn disposed of at the whim of an irresponsible mother.

[MalibuStacy]

Originally posted by J-hop



Ok but I think you are missing the point, what mental leap is being made that says humans are sacred and animals aren't.

Define why a fertilized cow egg is different than a fertilized human egg without using any reference to humans being sacred (or popular belief).

I think we are all taking a very surface level view of an arguement with very deep complex roots

Careful now...you disagree with some people therefore your view is wrong.

I am clearly joking and I agree that many people drag beliefs in to something which is science when discussing consciousness...

[J-hop]

Originally posted by Gestalt


He seems irrational. He is making chickens equal to children, and trying to do the same eith his death penalty absurdness equating deathrow murderers convicted by jury, judge law or whatever they are with innocent unborn disposed of at the whim of an irresponsible mother.

Actually no, I'm not a vegan, will never be. I agree that killing animals is way different than killing a human. I understand I'm making mental gymnastics and I am fully aware I am not morally sound at all (from a logical perspective).

But very strict prolifers act like logic is completely on their side and thus they can claim the higher moral ground. Which it isn't and I'm just attempting to point that out

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by sputnik
The difference lies in when is a human actually considered to be a human with a right to live and THIS SINGLE ISSUE is where this ENTIRE debate lies.

Some will believe at conception, some at the time of birth and some at X weeks prior to birth.

To debate anything else is pointless.

Let's get philosophical, does anyone have memory when you were in the womb? Or if they do how do we prove it? Is conciseness tied with memory?

Do we consider heart beat as life? Or brain activities?

[Swank]

Originally posted by J-hop
To add some fuel to the fire...Are you all vegan?

Don't get me started on the vegan that swatted the mosquito

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by Xtrema


Let's get philosophical, does anyone have memory when you were in the womb? Or if they do how do we prove it? Is conciseness tied with memory?

Do we consider heart beat as life? Or brain activities?

Technically, one could argue you die every night. There is a lapse in consciousness between when you fall asleep and when you wake up. So we can kill people as long as they are sleeping? Modelexis already covered this however.

Cows, chickens, animals etc have shown zero signs of consciousness on a level humans can detect.

That is my point though. The absurd defacto go to is essentially not conscious until popping out. Which is crazy.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Xtrema
Do we consider heart beat as life? Or brain activities?

I would say heart beat, which is 3-4 weeks but it's up for debate. I don't have any solid facts to base that view on.

[HuMz]

Originally posted by Modelexis

I would say heart beat, which is 3-4 weeks but it's up for debate. I don't have any solid facts to base that view on.

A beating heart (or lack thereof) is usually the standard of when someone dies. It doesn't seem unreasonable to apply that when the heart starts beating to being alive. Scientifically there is no question that the unborn is alive from conception. However, a beating heart would seem to be a rather common sense approach.

[tirebob]

I thank Christ, Odin, Spaghetti Monster, Lucky Stars or whatever you want to call it every day that I am not a woman and have to make this choice or live with the decision every day of my life... Unless you have had to choose or have made that choice, not a single one of you will truly get it no matter what your current stance or opinion is.

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by tirebob
Unless you have had to choose or have made that choice, not a single one of you will truly get it no matter what your current stance or opinion is.

Not a valid argument, just because we can never fully experience a given situation doesn't mean we cannot apply a moral philosophy standard to it and judge it by this standard.

This also suggests that men are not emotionally affected by an abortion, it also suggests that all women are emotionally affected by an abortion to a high degree. People handle life situations differently, some cold hearted and some deeply, and being incapable of birth doesn't exclude you from these two emotional situations.

I will never know what it's like to live with having murdered someone in cold blood, but that doesn't mean I can't make a valid moral judgement about such action.

[tirebob]

Originally posted by Modelexis

Not a valid argument, just because we can never fully experience a given situation doesn't mean we cannot apply a moral philosophy standard to it and judge it by this standard.

This also suggests that men are not emotionally affected by an abortion, it also suggests that all women are emotionally affected by an abortion to a high degree. People handle life situations differently, some cold hearted and some deeply, and being incapable of birth doesn't exclude you from these two emotional situations.

I will never know what it's like to live with having murdered someone in cold blood, but that doesn't mean I can't make a valid moral judgement about such action.

I never made an argument... only an observation

[duaner]

One question and one question alone settles the matter: What is the unborn?

If the unborn is a living human person, then unjustifiably killing the unborn is murder. Period. If the unborn isn't a living human person, then whatever, do what you like.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by duaner
One question and one question alone settles the matter: What is the unborn?

If the unborn is a living human person, then unjustifiably killing the unborn is murder. Period.

So you're saying there exists a justifiable reason to kill a fetus?

I would say this is justified:

"Killing" isn't by necessity, a bad thing. In the specific regard to abortion, would it be ok for a woman to abort a fetus that has no limbs and no cerebral cortex?

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by duaner
One question and one question alone settles the matter: What is the unborn?

If the unborn is a living human person, then unjustifiably killing the unborn is murder. Period. If the unborn isn't a living human person, then whatever, do what you like.

You're playing with words, a massive part of the debate is how do you define life or alive or conscious etc. Just adding in a word 'born' to mean a living being offers nothing for clarity sake it just adds more words for the same problem.

As stated before, a heart beat is one medical measurement to determine a living being from a dead one, so in that context a fetus with a heart beat would in fact be living.

A baby can be born but not alive, it's called a stillbirth, the word born means nothing in the context of this debate.

[kertejud2]

Originally posted by HuMz
Scientifically there is no question that the unborn is alive from conception.

Scientifically the debate on how to define life has been an ongoing one for decades, so there is absolutely question about it.

In a persons later years you can question their life based on the scientific definition (an elderly woman in a coma hooked up to life support may have a heartbeat but wouldn't be showing growth, response to stimuli, have the ability to reproduce, or perform basic functions we consider part of 'living.' So scientifically you could say the debate on 'right to die' for such individuals is moot because they're already dead.

Similarly, there is a good stretch of time that a fetus can't independently show many of the checkboxes of 'life' so it is certainly up to question of just how many traits does something need to show be considered 'living' with such a broad and loose definition.

[LadyLuck]

Originally posted by tirebob
I thank Christ, Odin, Spaghetti Monster, Lucky Stars or whatever you want to call it every day that I am not a woman and have to make this choice or live with the decision every day of my life... Unless you have had to choose or have made that choice, not a single one of you will truly get it no matter what your current stance or opinion is.

The gals on beyond are just hanging out in the background watching you guys argue about something you will never truly understand or have to experience.

Carry on...

[MalibuStacy]

Originally posted by tirebob
I thank Christ, Odin, Spaghetti Monster, Lucky Stars or whatever you want to call it every day that I am not a woman and have to make this choice or live with the decision every day of my life... Unless you have had to choose or have made that choice, not a single one of you will truly get it no matter what your current stance or opinion is.