This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Abortion Scenerio
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Because sperms are haploid and humans are diploid. I don't see how that is an issue.
You have completely missed my point and I think you know it.
Well, I thought I nailed your point in the ass. A sperm/egg is not a human because neither has enough chromosomes to constitute a human. As Aristotle said, the matter must be disposed to the form.
What about your point did I miss?
Who are you to say that the creation of a fertilized egg isn't one and the same with the creation of a human? I'm not saying that you have to agree that it is, I'm saying you can't deny it as a possibility.
Post by
Deepthought
So far, it appears that most people agree on this stuff:
No clear definition of what makes a human a human
No clear definition of when that happens
So, some draw the conclusion that it is ok to go ahead with the abortion, without being able to know the facts.
Because we cannot be sure when the embryo is in a state where it would have rights(in this case, human), but we know that the mother always has them in this scenario.
From that list you posted, it seems that you:
Believe there is a tranistion.
Would be neutral (not accepting?) to abortion if we could identify when this tranistion was.
Am I correct?
A sperm/egg is not a human because neither has enough chromosomes to constitute a human.
Number of chromosomes is by itself a non-sequiter when we are discussing what makes a human. Some people have more chromosomes than others. Does this make them any more or less human?
Who are you to say that the creation of a fertilized egg isn't one and the same with the creation of a human? I'm not saying that you have to agree that it is, I'm saying you can't deny it as a possibility.
You are correct. I cannot in good faith say it is false, only that I believe it is. The same reason I cannot say in good faith that I am not a computer simulation.
Post by
MyTie
So far, it appears that most people agree on this stuff:
No clear definition of what makes a human a human
No clear definition of when that happens
So, some draw the conclusion that it is ok to go ahead with the abortion, without being able to know the facts.
Because we cannot be sure when the embryo is in a state where it would have rights(in this case, human), but we know that the mother always has them in this scenario.
From that list you posted, it seems that you:
Believe there is a tranistion.
Would be neutral (not accepting?) to abortion if we could identify when this tranistion was.
Am I correct?
1) I accept the possibility that there is a transition. I accept the possibillity that there is not a transition. I beleive that there is though. I have no scientific facts to go either way though, just like everyone else.
2) If science could prove that abortion were no ending a human life, I would be neutral to it, I accept that. I would still want to discuss the ending of a future life, but I wouldn't be nearly as opposed to abortion as I am now, which is complete and total opposition.
Post by
Deepthought
I beleive that there is though.
Well, since we've established this, if you do* put a time to it, when do you beleive it occurs?
*Clarification: I am not saying you have to or do, just asking if you do and if so when.
Post by
MyTie
I beleive that there is though.
Well, since we've established this, if you do* put a time to it, when do you beleive it occurs?
*Clarification: I am not saying you have to or do, just if you do and if so when.
I believe it is possible at any moment from the time the sperm meets the egg, until the moment the baby's head pops out. I do not know when. Since I do not know when, I could not, in good conscience, condone the ability for someone to choose to abort. Furthermore, I question the humility, empathy, and charchater of anyone who could.
This is the crux of my arguement against abortion.
Post by
Deepthought
This is the crux of my arguement against abortion.
As I have said. I value the unquestionable human rights of the mother over a possible human within her.
In my opinion, to not do so would require us to reign in abortions to a large degree, and since we don't know when the possiblity of a human becomes an actual human within the span of a pregnancy, we would almost certainlty reign in the time to before the tranistion occurs.
This means we would be stepping on the rights of the mother to her body for something that is not human, which would be unacceptable.
Post by
327953
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
This is the crux of my arguement against abortion.
As I have said. I value the unquestionable human rights of the mother over a possible human within her.
In my opinion, to not do so would require us to reign in abortions to a large degree, and since we don't know when the possiblity of a human becomes an actual human within the span of a pregnancy, we would almost certainlty reign in the time to before the tranistion occurs.
This means we would be stepping on the rights of the mother to her body for something that is not human, which would be unacceptable.
It is not as if the two are facing equal dilemmas. One is facing pregnancy, and one is facing death. Dude... it's death. DEATH. I don't understand how one could weigh abortion as an acceptible alternative to preganacy, even if the pregnancy is unwanted. If you don't want your baby, you shouldn't be able to kill it. Period. If you want an abortion, prove to me you aren't killing a baby.
There is an act, which quite possibly is killing babies. I don't get it. It's beyond my comprehension. I can't prove beyond a resonable doubt that that act is NOT killing babies, but it's ok because.... (everything after this blows my mind). It makes me really sad inside to even hear people rationalizing abortion. Abortions themselves overwhelm me with grief.
Abortion is the single act that makes me wish I was not human. It is the most repulsive and detestible of acts that makes me question humanity as a whole. It makes me sick at the core of my being. What I loathe more than abortion, is the disingenuine rationalizations that people illogially throw at the situation. Rationalize ANYTHING you want, but that. Taxes, I don't like them, but fine. Communism even, fine. Public schools, have it your way.... But
abortion
? We might be killing babies, but that's ok because...
I'm literally sick to my stomach. I ache inside.
I'm done with this topic for today. What else can we debate? I tried bringing up a global warming thread. Anyone else have any ideas?
Post by
42080
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Furthermore, I question the humility, empathy, and
charchater
character
of anyone who could.
I question the character of someone who is as stubborn as you. You demand that a fetus has rights because you cannot say when it becomes a human baby, yet you disregard the rights of the mother outright.
I can picture you as being the father in your little scenario because you are the type to choose whose rights to respect and whose to trample on because of how you feel.
How about having some empathy for the mother? You cannot say she somehow deserves less than the fetus because she can express her opinion at the time and the fetus can't.
My wife faced the possibility of death due to a pregnancy she had. She and I both bravely chose not to abort. She faced death, and had a miscarriage anyway. I lost a family member, and could have lost my wife, too.
You know
nothing
about me. Stick to the topic, discuss the morality of the other side, or leave. Do not make pointed references to individuals.
Post by
Deepthought
I'll respect your decision to stop debating this thread for now, MyTie.
What else can we debate? I tried bringing up a global warming thread. Anyone else have any ideas?
Abolishment of the Senate maybe? Although I'm not sure it would be such a "hot topic" as this thread.
Post by
MyTie
Seems that you have to be born to eventually die.Tell that to my son, Jacob. He wasn't born, and he is dead.
Post by
MyTie
I'll respect your decision to stop debating this thread for now, MyTie.
What else can we debate? I tried bringing up a global warming thread. Anyone else have any ideas?
Abolishment of the Senate maybe? Although I'm not sure it would be such a "hot topic" as this thread.
I don't understand how that would work. You'd have to come up with a theory for how government would work without it. Make a thread. I'll be there.
Post by
Deepthought
I'll respect your decision to stop debating this thread for now, MyTie.
What else can we debate? I tried bringing up a global warming thread. Anyone else have any ideas?
Abolishment of the Senate maybe? Although I'm not sure it would be such a "hot topic" as this thread.
I don't understand how that would work. You'd have to come up with a theory for how government would work without it. Make a thread. I'll be there.
Might take a while, but I should get round to it eventually. Not promising it'll be much though.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Seems that you have to be born to eventually die.Tell that to my son, Jacob. He wasn't born, and he is dead.
Isn't that ironic. My mother miscarried my younger brother whose name was Jacob too.
You have my sympathies.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
A sperm/egg is not a human because neither has enough chromosomes to constitute a human.
Number of chromosomes is by itself a non-sequiter when we are discussing what makes a human. Some people have more chromosomes than others. Does this make them any more or less human?
It's not about being more or less human. It's about being human or not. Slight variations in chromosomal make-up aren't enough to constitute a non-human. However, a haploid is a completely different organism from a diploid.
You are correct. I cannot in good faith say it is false, only that I believe it is.
So are you retracting your previous statement that you're
sure
there is a point of transition? That's the only point I'm trying to clarify.
Post by
327953
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
334295
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
264711
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Wow, I spelled it wrong. I don't care.
So, back to the thing about 'being morally wrong' to abduct someone, no matter what the ends are, they
don't
justify the means. I believe that is what you are saying. Well then, you must be very much
opposed
to abortion, if the ends don't justify the means.
In that case, I agree with you on all counts. And thanks for correcting my spelling, again. You are a true contribution to the english language.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.