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 20 of 26
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
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.
I'm very glad we can be cordial in all this, then.
Quote:
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.
Thank you. So, as I understand, the point is really that you don't think it's appropriate to grant the developing embryo a different status than that of the placenta tissue that stems from the same fertilized egg, correct?
I'd just neutrally like to know your exact opinion. It's an emotionally charged subject and it's easy to get stuck arguing about particulars without ever even respectfully aknowledging other people's positions. I'm as guilty of that as anyone.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:One of the problems with discussing this issue is inaccurate terminology. Of course the placenta is "alive" (It's not dead in utero). But is it an organism? If you think not, then perhaps that is fundamental to your definition of "human".
Alive? Really? Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:And insane people think they're the only sane ones. (BTW not saying you're insane, just that I'm pretty sure everyone no matter how idealistic could say "I'm being a realist").
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I think I'm really a realist. I suspect Finn does to.
Quote:It occurs that you might stand to learn something if you listened to the other side instead of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "It's baby murder, you blow up trains, baby murderers, genocidal baby murderers all".
Sure it's potential.
Here's the crater in the typical argument:
If a train is headed for the station at 7:29, then you blow it up, and someone accuses you of blowing up the 7:29 train, you say you're innocent because it isn't the 7:29 train yet.
BTW you're analogy is total crap. It's more like you accusing me of blowing up the 7.29 train because I shut down the factory that was going to build it.
There's nothing pro-death about pro-choice, but since we're going down that road I guess you are all for freedom of speech and choice. People are free to say think and do what you want them to.
Quote:Since when do parrots talk? Please spare me, they mimic sounds they hear, they don't talk. That's like saying someone who traces the Mona Lisa is a great artist. But if you think there's a smaller difference between a ball of cells that can't survive outside the Womb and a new born than there is between a new born and a two year old then this is an exercise in pointlessness because that position is delusional.
A six week old child has nothing in its head at all, far less than a mouse. even at a year, a baby has less going on than an average monkey. On a general scale, these early humans are no more human than a fetus. The brain, physically, isn't fully grown yet, and won't be until the child is two. Mentally it may take the child another year to be fully aware. Sure, some kids show awareness before that, but so do animals. Some even talk. Is a parrot human?
Quote:As opposed to the Conservative "the lower classes are worthless cannon fodder" position. No wonder conservatives want more babies born, more meat for the war machine. Oh and the Paedophile network always needs topping up.
I'm not sure either, but I have my suspicions. My gut feeling is that the liberal pro-big-govt establishment has a vested interest in lowering the birth rate among the lower classes which it sees as a high welfare burder and lower tax base.
knee-jerk is two words
labour has a 'U' in it
Brazil has a capital 'B'
Judeo, Christian and Tunisian have capitals.
Burden ends with an 'n' not an 'r'
Indians should have a capital 'I'.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:One of the problems with discussing this issue is inaccurate terminology. Of course the placenta is "alive" (It's not dead in utero). But is it an organism? If you think not, then perhaps that is fundamental to your definition of "human".
Alive? Really? Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:
Alive? Really? Wikipedia informs unknowledgable me that the placenta is a temporary organ, consisting of both fetal and maternal DNA.
One of the problems with discussing this issue is inaccurate terminology. Of course the placenta is "alive" (It's not dead in utero). But is it an organism? If you think not, then perhaps that is fundamental to your definition of "human".
I agree, the diffeent meanings attached to even the word "human" alone cause unnecessary conflict.
Human in terms of genetic origin? Human in terms of human being? Of person? Similar with "alive". Depending on how many factors and facing what prospects of development?
I also agree that, to me, something to the effect of "organism" seems vital to the idea of a human being, though I'm not committing 100%, being shakey with the exact definitions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
savemessage.asp failed my arse.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Most people who commit violent crimes have something screwed up with their brains: "... almost all vicious criminals have some combination of (1) a childhood of abuse and/or neglect, (2) brain injuries through accident or abuse, and (3) psychotic symptoms, especially paranoia."
We keep coming back to the idea of "murder." Finn and Dream call abortion murder and think they've won the argument. I gotta wonder if any of these so-called pro-lifers have ever known any murderers. I have. I'm related to one. They're scary folk. Something really missing. Something seriously wrong with their empathy. One minute it's there, the next minute, gone: people are just mindless machines in the way.
I've also known a good many women who've had abortions and ya know what? Not a psychopath in the bunch.
Dream and Finn are talking about criminalizing abortion as murder. What I want to know from these guys is what kind of murder, abortion should be. First degree? Second? Man-slaughter? If abortion really is murder, do they think women who have abortions should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law? If not, why not?
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I don’t think I can give you any answers to these questions, since what I actually believe and what you have spuriously attributed to me don’t seem to coincide. Perhaps you can show me where it is that I said that abortion is murder?
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
We keep coming back to the idea of "murder." Finn and Dream call abortion murder and think they've won the argument. I gotta wonder if any of these so-called pro-lifers have ever known any murderers. I have. I'm related to one. They're scary folk. Something really missing. Something seriously wrong with their empathy. One minute it's there, the next minute, gone: people are just mindless machines in the way.
I've also known a good many women who've had abortions and ya know what? Not a psychopath in the bunch.
Dream and Finn are talking about criminalizing abortion as murder. What I want to know from these guys is what kind of murder, abortion should be. First degree? Second? Man-slaughter? If abortion really is murder, do they think women who have abortions should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law? If not, why not?
A point to consider while you’re doing that, the only people in this thread that have talked about winning any argument is Rue and maybe Signym, I don’t remember, but certainly Rue, and definitely not me. I have not, nor would I ever claim to have won this argument since I don’t think it can be won.
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
Finn,
"the only people in this thread that have talked about winning any argument is Rue ... certainly Rue"
I have NEVER talked about winning an argument in this thread. Please feel free to quote me and prove your point, or be considered a liar.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Agent,
"... you don't think it's appropriate to grant the developing embryo a different status than that of the placenta tissue that stems from the same fertilized egg ..."
I personally think it make sense to draw the line further along - at brain activity. But at the very least it is inconsistent to say a fertilized egg is human, but that if an embryo fails to develop it becomes non-human. Because then you have to question what imbues a fertilized egg with its 'humanity' that disappears later on.
If you say the potential to become human is what is lost when the embryo fails to develop, then you've assigned the fertilized egg to merely a potentiality rather than an actuality. And you've moved the line to somewhere else than fertilization.
BTW, that is the argument Finn is desperately avoiding by refusing to answer the placenta question.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME