Abortion, choice or murder?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-02-2014, 06:07 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 05:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  If a mass of cells without a nervous system is a person, so's a tumor. Thumbsup


**Spew of tea**

dammit Chaz............. stop that. Laughat

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 06:15 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 05:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2014 05:27 PM)Stevil Wrote:  That is the point at which pain could be experienced but whose is to say that this is the requirement for personhood?

If a mass of cells without a nervous system is a person, so's a tumor. Thumbsup

I agree.

[Image: dobie.png]

Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 06:31 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
Quote:according to a study suggesting that new, long-acting contraceptive methods are having a significant impact in reducing unwanted pregnancies.

This explains why the church is suddenly losing its fucking mind about contraception. Afraid that the supply of little kids for them to molest is going to dry up.

[Image: reality.jpg?imgmax=800]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 06:36 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 05:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(04-02-2014 05:27 PM)Stevil Wrote:  That is the point at which pain could be experienced but whose is to say that this is the requirement for personhood?

If a mass of cells without a nervous system is a person, so's a tumor. Thumbsup


The point is that it is an objective criterion from which we can reason.
Does a tumour have its own unique DNA?
Does it have physical and behavioural attributes built into that DNA?
Does it have the potential to become an active participant within society presenting its own unique personality?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 06:58 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?








sorry

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 07:16 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(03-02-2014 08:07 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  But still the point is choice. You don't like abortion, don't have one. But don't tell me that I can't just because you don't like it.

So you think there should be no restrictions? Can the mother wait until her due date, and when the head comes out, ask the doctor to hold up a mirror and say "Damn, I wanted blue eyes. Abort her, please." Or, do you accept that at some point the child changes and is no longer a blob of cells and becomes a living human being who has own right to live distinct from the mother? If so, where do you draw the line? At the point of viability? At the moment of birth? Only after cutting the umbilical cord? Heck, why stop there. Wait not wait until the kid is 16 and starts to rebel to have an abortion.

To me, it's all a gray area. There _IS_, imo, unquestionably some point where the child has his own right to live, and I think that it's just a matter of drawing lines in the sand where that is. Conservatives generally say conception, liberals more likely to say viability. However, US abortion laws are actually very lenient. In many liberal European countries abortion is only allowed up till 3 months.

The thing I hate about abortion, though, are the ridiculous labels. "Pro-life", as though the other side is "anti-life" and just wants to kill babies. And the "pro-choice" is just as hypocritical since most of them are NOT at all pro-choice. If the woman wants to deliver a dangerous pregnancy at home with a midwife, these same liberals say that it's not a woman's choice, and the police need to intervene to protect the baby. Which is actually the same argument the conservatives use if she wants an abortion. And they'll say it's a woman's body, and it's her choice, and government must stay out of her vagina. So I always ask "Well what if she wants to get high shoving heroin up there?" Suddenly they change: "Oh, well that's not an acceptable use of the vagina, send the government in there." So it's not like they're REALLY pro-choice, or they REALLY think women have the right to decide what to do with their own bodies. In fact, they're as "anti-choice" as the conservatives. The only difference is they draw the arbitrary line in the sand where the fetus becomes a separate human being at a different place.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 07:59 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 06:36 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(04-02-2014 05:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  If a mass of cells without a nervous system is a person, so's a tumor. Thumbsup


The point is that it is an objective criterion from which we can reason.
Does a tumour have its own unique DNA?
Does it have physical and behavioural attributes built into that DNA?
Does it have the potential to become an active participant within society presenting its own unique personality?

With cloning technology, every freakin' cell is a potential person.

And unique DNA is of no importance - twins.

Not every fertilized egg implants in the uterus.
Not every fertilized egg that implanted is carried to term, not even close.
Not every fetus carried to term results in a live birth.

So 'potential' is not a reliable criterion.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
04-02-2014, 09:15 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 07:59 PM)Chas Wrote:  With cloning technology, every freakin' cell is a potential person.
That's possibly true. I don't know if they could create another "me" from my toe nail clippings, but for argument's sake lets say that they can.
But the thing is that my toenails are not cell dividing to such a degree that they are developing a human body. A cloning process would need to take the DNA from an existing person and turn it into a new person (possiby a zygote or some earlier stage) so that it starts to cell divide and grow and at that point it then becomes a person (even if it hasn't yet developed a nervous system).
Chas Wrote:And unique DNA is of no importance - twins.
The importance is that when you destroy a fertilised egg, that unique combination of DNA will likely never appear again on Earth. If there are an infinite universes then it will appear somewhere but just not on Earth, unless it is a twin...
But really, that's all that a person is, a unique set of DNA plus its memory of its unique experiences. Twins are different because they have different experiences from each other.
But just because twins exist that doesn't invalidate the specialness of a unique DNA structure. If there are two, that is still a finite set, non recreatable, except for the possibility of cloning.
Chas Wrote:Not every fertilized egg implants in the uterus.
That is unimportant. It would be like saying that not every baby makes it to its first birthday therefore they are not real people. Or saying that not everyone makes it to 100 years old therefore they are not real people. Length of life does not equate to whether someone was a person or not.
Chas Wrote:Not every fertilized egg that implanted is carried to term, not even close.
Not every fetus carried to term results in a live birth.
Same deal as above.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 11:25 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
I fail to see how DNA uniqueness means abortion is bad

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-02-2014, 11:27 PM
RE: Abortion, choice or murder?
(04-02-2014 09:15 PM)Stevil Wrote:  That's possibly true. I don't know if they could create another "me" from my toe nail clippings, but for argument's sake lets say that they can.
But the thing is that my toenails are not cell dividing to such a degree that they are developing a human body. A cloning process would need to take the DNA from an existing person and turn it into a new person (possiby a zygote or some earlier stage) so that it starts to cell divide and grow and at that point it then becomes a person (even if it hasn't yet developed a nervous system).

Why should we care about potential? Why does potential deserve legal protection, or at least even ethical consideration?

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: