Look, I know it's been overdone - but abortion - yay or nay?
POSTED BY: FLF
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 13:13
VIEWED: 24147
PAGE 19 of 26
No. The fertilized egg has the ability to form EVERYTHING, including the placenta. Sometimes ONLY the placenta forms. So theoretically the placenta meets the definition of a human because it is alive, unique, and with human DNA.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
No. The fertilized egg has the ability to form EVERYTHING, including the placenta. Sometimes ONLY the placenta forms. So theoretically the placenta meets the definition of a human because it is alive, unique, and with human DNA.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
Alive? Really?
Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
An organ, wikipedia informs me further, is a group of tissues performing a specific function. An organ is not a separate organism in the way a collection of organs (or forming organs) can be.
A placenta-only "pregnancy" would appear to be something of a defect, akin to any other solo-organ development that may or may not occur, something that branches off the line of regular human development so early and so dramatically as to leave the end result (as in, no further development) an incomplete collection of parts.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Roe v. Wade definitely seems to be overreaching, as does the whole idea of judicial legislation, and given the way so many on the Pro-abortion side agonize over Roe v. Wade being overturned, it seems reasonable to speculate that even people who support it may believe it is worthy of being overturned.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
But the job of the supreme court is to interpret the constitution, not to draft legislation.
Quote:Rue’s decomposition of my post is more amusing then informative. He took every sentence of my post out of context, applied his own independent meaning to it and then debunked his invented meaning. And that is on top of the spin that he applies to his own arguments. And used all that to call me stupid.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:
53% of ALL adults are pro-choice, only 39% are anti-choice.
According to Zogby 56% are pro-life
And Zogby is not only a respectable pollster, but also is not a conservative.
Quote:That may be, but what does that have to do with a definition of human life? I think it’s a forgone conclusion that life can be killed. I killed a spider in my bathroom last night. But if someone asked me to define what a spider is, I wouldn’t insist that it is defined by its death in my bathroom. It’s not necessarily respect for human life that you’re talking about, but respect for innocent people. However, the guilty people are just as much human as the innocent people.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Capital punishment is inconsistent with pro-life because x% of innocent people will be executed. If you have respect for all human life, you cannot tolerate this level of error, because decent hardworking citizens in a zone of peace, will, by their own govt., be picked up, wrongfully convicted, which happens with a fair degree of regularity.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Agent
You actually went so far as to misrepresent Wiki.
It would have been helpful to provide a link. Instead, you're betting that most people will take your word for it rather than look it up for themselves.
Wrong bet.
I also went to google and found all sorts of information on embryonic development. You could easily do the same if you wanted to learn something instead of just mouthing misquotes. Here is one site: http://hometown.aol.com/sossong/sosweb/fetaldev.htm
What they say is this:
6. 6 days after ovulation:
-a. Implantation begins
--(1) Takes 1 week: done by 14th day
-b. The trophoblast cells
-- (1) Those next to the inner mass cells adhere to the endometrium
-- (2) Form placenta
-- (3) Secrete human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG)
-(a) stimulates corpus luteum to continue producing progesterone & estrogen
-- (4) Form chorion after implantation
7. Embryo (2 weeks to 2 months)
-a. Implantation is complete
-b. Nutrition now comes from mother via placenta
What happens in reality is that the placenta forms from the blastula. It implants itself in the uterine lining. Both embryonic placenta and uterus develop an extensive capillary network in close contact with each other. That is where chemical exchange occurs. But the placenta and uterus do not 'fuse' into a single 'organ'.
None of this detracts from the FACT that the placenta forms from the fertilized egg. And that the cell disk that will later become an embryo forms AFTER placental development. And that about 10% of the time, no embryo differentiates after the placenta forms.
PS You could learn a lot from the people here, if you cared to. There are people on this board who know a lot more than you, and a lot more than the people whose opinions you've adopted. It all depends on whether you want to learn about the world or burrow even harder into ignorance.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn,
I still want to know how you would feel about flushing a placenta down the toilet.
Also, you claim I took your sentences out of context. Here they are again. Please show me WHERE I misrepresented your meaning. 
Quote:
"the notion ..."
Let's start at the beginning. You call the idea a 'notion'. Good wordsmithing on your part. Because liberals can't have thought-out positions, only notions.
"... stems from a legitimate interest in personal freedom alleviating poverty. ... For single women and poor people, childbirth can often be a hardship ..."
Ready for the big BUT ...
"I think encouraging responsibility across the board would help matters much more."
Responsibility. Like a father has for producing a child? Somehow you never got around to mentioning that. To you it's the woman's fault, the womans' responsibility, and the woman's burden.
"But responsibility is difficult and abortion is ... quicker ..."
You got it. Abotion is a picnic. There's nothing difficult about it at all.
"... the pro-abortion argument"
I personally don't know anyone who is pro-abortion. And labelling people as pro-abortion when it's NOT their position is a neat propaganda tactic, but a lie. (Like saying international Jews are the nefariously causing all suffering on earth.)
"... dehumanize the fetus and portray abortion as tantamount to ... an appendectomy"
Now this is where you dodge and weave. This is where you need to step up and answer the question "how would you feel about flushing a placenta down the toilet?" How WOULD you feel about it? Would you feel that you were throwing out the baby with the toilet water? Or would you recognize that though it came from a fertilized egg, it's not a child?
"... Post-Modern Liberalist interest in judicial legislation to by-pass the democratic process ..."
You have no idea what Roe v Wade said, do you?
"... and therefore by-pass the majority of American voters ..."
http://www.pollingreport.com/abortion.htm
53% of ALL adults are pro-choice, only 39% are anti-choice.
"... who are on average more likely to vote Conservative then they are the Pro-Abortion Ultra-left."
Now we know where you hang out, and who you count as 'people'. You are speaking about the majority of republicans, actually.
"This actually seems to explain why some people would want to actually promote abortion ..."
Only in your weird world, not out here, where the rest of us live.
:... because they don’t want ... by extension judicial legislation, look(ed) upon unfavorably."
Now THIS is off the deep end. You really need to read the decision. That way you won't be saying things that make you look : stoopid :
"Of course that’s just speculation ..."
More like libel.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Agent
You actually went so far as to misrepresent Wiki.
It would have been helpful to provide a link. Instead, you're betting that most people will take your word for it rather than look it up for themselves.
Wrong bet.
Gee whiz, must be fun going around thinking of other people only in the form of malevolent intentions.
I apologize for not providing the link, here it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placenta It was an oversight, not an attempt at either misrepresentation or insulting anyone's intelligence.
Quote:
I also went to google and found all sorts of information on embryonic development. You could easily do the same if you wanted to learn something instead of just mouthing misquotes. Here is one site: http://hometown.aol.com/sossong/sosweb/fetaldev.htm
I openly admitted to being unknowledgable and named my source of information as to the definition of "Placenta". (Though, yes, unhelpfully forgetting to provide the link). You're welcome to tell me that wikipedia has it all wrong, which might well be the case. I don't know.
Quote:
What they say is this:
6. 6 days after ovulation:
-a. Implantation begins
--(1) Takes 1 week: done by 14th day
-b. The trophoblast cells
-- (1) Those next to the inner mass cells adhere to the endometrium
-- (2) Form placenta
-- (3) Secrete human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG)
-(a) stimulates corpus luteum to continue producing progesterone & estrogen
-- (4) Form chorion after implantation
7. Embryo (2 weeks to 2 months)
-a. Implantation is complete
-b. Nutrition now comes from mother via placenta
What happens in reality is that the the placenta forms from the blastula. It implants itself in the uterine lining. Both embryonic placenta and uterus develop an extensive capillary network in close contact with each other. That is where chemical exchange occurs. But the placenta and uterus do not 'fuse' into a single 'organ'.
None of this detracts from the FACT that the placenta forms from the fertilized egg. And that the cell disk that will later become an embryo forms AFTER placental development. And that about 10% of the time, no embryo differentiates after the placenta forms.
Did I, anywhere, state that the placenta forms from something other than the fertilized egg? I don't believe I did. Nor did I say anywhere that placenta and uterus fuse. That's nonsense.
I said that the placenta is a temporary organ. If that is wrong, do feel free to contradict me.
Also: This is an exchange of opinions among amateurs. On a website dedicated to a scifi tv show. If you want to debate with experts, this may not be the right place.
Quote:
PS You could learn a lot from the people here, if you cared to.
Though, apparently, not the art of civil discourse without personal attacks and accusations, right?
Quote:
There are people on this board who know a lot more than you, and a lot more than the people whose opinions you've adopted. It all depends on whether you want to learn about the world or burrow even harder into ignorance.
What's with the personal attacks? Did I claim omniscience somewhere further above? Did I call anyone stupid or immoral? And why, exactly, do you assume that my opinions are adopted from someone else?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Agent,
THIS is from Wiki:
The placenta is composed of two parts, one of which is genetically and biologically part of the fetus, the other part of the mother.
THIS is yours:
Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
See the difference? Now, you could have cut and pasted more easily than typing it in yourself. But you chose to type it in - and in the process you misrepresented it. What you painstakingly implied was that the placenta was a mixed DNA single organ, not a separate entity of embryonic human development. And then you left off the link. What would you conclude from an effort like that?
As to the site I happened to pick, there are MANY to chose from - something I was specific about. But feel free, go and do the google search I suggested. I only picked that one b/c it had the most to say in the fewest words. (To quote myself: "I also went to google and found all sorts of information on embryonic development. You could easily do the same if you wanted to learn something instead of just mouthing misquotes misquotes -check. Here is one site: http://hometown.aol.com/sossong/sosweb/fetaldev.htm)
And I wasn't being snide. There are people here who do know a lot. One of the most interesting times of my life was when I met up with a group of brilliant folk and tagged along with them. That's how I got introduced to computers, phone systems, hyperbaric physiology, music, and motorcycles. If you aren't afraid to follow along with people who know more than you, you can learn a lot.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
For cryin' out loud.
That's YOUR opinion and YOUR belief.
It's fine for YOU.
Not for ME.
To terminate a pregnancy...for whatever reason...is not the business of anyone except:
1. The woman.
2. The woman.
3. Anyone that SHE feels has an opinion about it.
If that person isn't YOU...then it's none of your business.
4. The woman.
No disrespect, but this whole "screaming baby" nonsense is ignorant, childish bullshit. But if that's what YOU believe, then that's fine. For YOU.
"Trauma"? Bullshit, "kaneMAN". What an insulting thing to say.
Women have been terminating pregnancies for millenia. Without any psychological damage, thank you very much.
If you care THAT much, you need to go find some suffering children who are already here, and help them.
I have a suggestion, instead of concerning yourself with a woman and her...HER...right to choose what's right for HER, why don't you get to work adopting some orphans. Or raising some unwanted kids in the foster care system.
"Take me, sir. Take me hard." - Zoe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Agent,
THIS is from Wiki:
The placenta is composed of two parts, one of which is genetically and biologically part of the fetus, the other part of the mother.
THIS is yours:
Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
See the difference? Now, you could have cut and pasted more easily than typing it in yourself. But you chose to type it in - and in the process you misrepresented it. What you painstakingly implied was that the placenta was a mixed DNA single organ, not a stage of human development. And then you left off the link. What would you conclude from an effort like that?
That someone is sloppy, not necessarily misrepresenting on purpose.
I agree that I worded it poorly, which resulted in a misrepresentation of the placenta as one homogenic mixed-DNA organ. I apologize for that.
However, the more important part of my point, the one that it is a temporary organ - even in its importance as a stage of development - still remains.
Quote:
And I wasn't being snide. There are people here who do know a lot. One of the most interesting times of my life was when I met up with a group of brilliant folk and tagged along with them. That's how I got introduced to computers, phone systems, hyperbaric physiology, music, and motorcycles. If you aren't afraid to follow along with people who know more than you, you can learn a lot.
I don't doubt that. I have no trouble aknowledging, appreciating and learning from the many many people who are smarter and more experienced than me. But your comment didn't just contain those words. It was an insult, and "I wasn't being snide" is simply not true. But whatever, I have no intention of dwelling on that.
I'm more interested in your opinion on whether "organ" is an acceptable definition and whether you consider that significant at all on your line of questioning.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Agent,
Sorry if we got off on the wrong foot. Even though you're not interested in dwelling on it, I made the exact same comment to another poster and meant it sincerely, even helpfully. There are some thing I know quite a bit about, educationally, professionally, and personally. And I'd be happy to be as much a resource as possible.
Anyway, I'd consider the placenta somewhere between an organ - though a weird one - and a tissue. There are organs of mixed cell types like the brain. There are organs that 'involute' (shrink and /or become non-functional) over time like the thymus. But there are no organs or tissues with dual DNA passports.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME