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
MyTie
The unborn has heartbeat, memories, DNA, emotions such as fear and happiness, etc.
A zygote doesn't, plenty of the stages of an embryo don't.
Plenty of grown adults dont have memories, after old age sets in. Some psychiatric patients lack certain emotions also. I've even heard of a woman that had two sets of DNA. People that had pacemakers instead of thier own heartbeats. Are these people not people? Perhaps we can throw a medical name on them, like fetuses get, and abort them too.
What exactly makes a human a human, and what makes you or anyone else the deciding factor in when it is ok to choose to end a human life?
Post by
Deepthought
Plenty of grown adults dont have memories, after old age sets in.
I..uh...you realise that old people don't forget everything, right?
Some psychiatric patients lack certain emotions also.
Ok? Would you mind linking this? Sounds interesting.
I've even heard of a woman that had two sets of DNA
Uhhhh...
and people that had pacemakers.
Still not sure what you're leading too.. (pacemaker =/= replacement heart BTW).
What exactly makes a human a human
The four things, heartbeat, memories, DNA, emotions such as fear and happiness,
you mentioned don't make a human, because all four are present in, for instance, sheep too.
Post by
TheMediator
What exactly makes a human a human
I suppose that's what makes this a hot topic. If there was a concrete moment in time that was generally agreed upon when it goes from just being a lump of flesh to being a human being, then there wouldn't be so much controversy. My personal opinion is, its too ambiguous while its growing to determine at what stage it actually becomes a human, so until it is fully born and can experience life on its own, I would say that it is incomplete and therefore not a human. Not that I advise third trimester abortions, just saying that I don't see it as murder.
Post by
MyTie
You agree that it is ambiguous. That much we agree on. The part we disagree on is that I say: Because it is ambiguous, we should treat it as human life. You say: Because it is ambiguous, we don't have to count it as life.
Post by
Deepthought
You agree that it is ambiguous. That much we agree on. The part we disagree on is that I say: Because it is ambiguous, we should treat it as human life. You say: Because it is ambiguous, we don't have to count it as life.
In my opinion, the rights of something we know is human life (the mother) are more important that something we aren't sure is human life (yet).
Edit: And that "yet" ends at:
The current limit of viabilty (50%+ survival chance) is 24 weeks.
Which I agree with.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Now that yesterday's debacle has died down, I'm going to jump in again.
What exactly makes a human a human
I suppose that's what makes this a hot topic. If there was a concrete moment in time that was generally agreed upon when it goes from just being a lump of flesh to being a human being, then there wouldn't be so much controversy. My personal opinion is, its too ambiguous while its growing to determine at what stage it actually becomes a human, so until it is fully born and can experience life on its own, I would say that it is incomplete and therefore not a human. Not that I advise third trimester abortions, just saying that I don't see it as murder.
If you can't determine something shouldn't you usually err on the side of caution?
The current limit of viabilty (50%+ survival chance) is 24 weeks. Shouldn't you at least allow for that in your arbitrary placement of personhood?
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Edit: And that "yet" ends at:
The current limit of viabilty (50%+ survival chance) is 24 weeks.
Which I agree with.
Now, it's great that you acknowledge that; few people do. Now, I'd ask you, what makes 50% suvivabilty the principle of personhood? Shouldn't any chance of survival be enough?
21 weeks and 5 days gestational age has been the earliest survived preterm birth (he's grown up
completely healthy
btw...not that health has anything to do with personhood). Shouldn't we now move your arbitrary point of personhood down to that?
Post by
74311
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
i honestly fail to se whats so wrong about killing something that hasent even been born yet.....
I
honestly fail to se
e
what
'
s so right about killing some
one
that has
e
n't even been born yet.
I can argue like you too
Post by
MyTie
You agree that it is ambiguous. That much we agree on. The part we disagree on is that I say: Because it is ambiguous, we should treat it as human life. You say: Because it is ambiguous, we don't have to count it as life.
In my opinion, the rights of something we know is human life (the mother) are more important that something we aren't sure is human life (yet).I agree. A mother's right to go to choose where she goes overrides the baby's choice to where he/she goes. A mother's right to eat what she wants overrides the baby's choice of his/her food. When the choice is equal, the mother wins every time. However, abortion isn't equal. You are outweighing a mother's desire to not be preganant (which is profound) over the baby's right to LIVE (which is more profound than the former). I don't want to diminish a woman's right to do what she wants with her body.
It is just an entirely different issue than abortion
. Abortion is the decision what to do with the child's body.
Post by
Deepthought
Now, I'd ask you, what makes 50% suvivabilty the principle of personhood?
I support the option for abortion but only if I'm sure that a child(/human) isn't being killed. I realise that there must be a point where one transitions to the other, but I do not have the authority to say where. However, this leaves me with the need of an assumed number, so a 50% survive rate (24 weeks) becomes my arbitary number.
Am I sure that this is the point of transition? No. Am I sure there is one? Yes.
21 weeks and 5 days gestational age has been the earliest survived preterm birth (he's grown up completely healthy btw...not that health has anything to do with personhood). Shouldn't we now move your arbitrary point of personhood down to that?
I would probably not oppose this, I admit.
You are outweighing a mother's desire to not be preganant (which is profound) over the baby's right to LIVE (which is more profound than the former)
You are misunderstanding me, I think. "Baby" implies human. As I have said, I don't think we can yet be sure when foetus becomes human. (This is assuming that one believes there is a transition. If you don't believe there is one, then I completely understand your position.)
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Am I sure there is one ? Yes.
How are you so sure?
And to continue the argument I've been using. So 21 weeks 5 days is the current arbitrary person limit. As such, a 21 week 4 day 23 hour 59 minute old fetus is not a person. Don't you find that a little...strange? Granted we don't have have a scientific example of a baby being born then and surviving, but it still seems strange.
Post by
MyTie
I realise that there must be a point where one transitions to the other, but I do not have the authority to say where.
No one does, and that's the problem. NO ONE is the authority on when abortion is murder...
and yet people still think it is acceptible to abort
. It's like I'm stuck in a bad horror movie.
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
It's like I'm stuck in a bad horror movie.
You want horror, I'll show you
horror
.
Post by
Deepthought
Am I sure there is one ? Yes.
How are you so sure?
Because otherwise I would have to classify sperm cells as human life.
NO ONE is the authority on when abortion is murder
"
Nobody has a good answer on this topic, yet I shall make 2 threads about it! HUZZAH!
"
Post by
Hyperspacerebel
Am I sure there is one ? Yes.
How are you so sure?
Because otherwise I would have to classify sperm cells as human life.
Because sperms are haploid and humans are diploid. I don't see how that is an issue.
Post by
Deepthought
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.
Post by
MyTie
"
Nobody has a good answer on this topic, yet I shall make 2 threads about it! HUZZAH!
"
Could you link the other thread please? Also, what is 'huzzah'?
Post by
Deepthought
"
Nobody has a good answer on this topic, yet I shall make 2 threads about it! HUZZAH!
"
Could you link the other thread please? Also, what is 'huzzah'?
I'm not going to link the topic. You yourself mentioned it in the topic regarding the morality of killing one to save a million, I believe. If I remember correctly, said topic (the abortion one you mentioned) was started by you.
Huzzah (originally huzza, and in North American dialects hurrah) is an English interjection of joy or approbation. According to the Oxford English Dictionary it is "apparently a mere exclamation" without any particular derivation.
Post by
MyTie
"
Nobody has a good answer on this topic, yet I shall make 2 threads about it! HUZZAH!
"
Could you link the other thread please? Also, what is 'huzzah'?
I'm not going to link the topic. You yourself mentioned it in the topic regarding the morality of killing one to save a million, I believe. If I remember correctly, said topic (the abortion one you mentioned) was started by you.
Huzzah (originally huzza, and in North American dialects hurrah) is an English interjection of joy or approbation. According to the Oxford English Dictionary it is "apparently a mere exclamation" without any particular derivation.
Ok, got it. And, so? It's a valid topic. 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. I can't make my brain go through the logic behind that. It just won't work. No, I don't know if this is a living human being, but I think it can be killed if the mother chooses too. It's like two puzzle pieces that don't fit. Well, it's more like trying to put an entire ham into a toaster. It just doesn't work.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.