This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The latest trend in pro-abortion thinking

#141JIC XPosted 2/20/2013 7:29:33 PM(edited)
“but each sperm or egg might join therefore it is a human at an early stage of development”. The big difference between might be and is. It is like saying a hospice patient might be dead in a few weeks therefore we should treat him as such.

An acorn will become an oak tree if you plant it. Does that mean it is an oak tree?

In my opinion, it borders on arbitrary to treat a zygote as a member of the civil/moral community notwithstanding that it possesses virtually none of the characteristics associated with "people" (or, for that matter, vertebrates) simply because it might develop these characteristics if left alone.

Anyway, that's never really been my position on the issue.
One person doesn't have the right to be in another person's body without permission. It's as simple as that.

Whose body is it, anyway?
The woman's or the state's?
---
And that is why the age of magic is at an end. {WoT}, Emeritus
#142hunter_gohanPosted 2/20/2013 7:54:01 PM(edited)
Aristotle16807 posted...
Do you not know what is wrong with killing humans?


Human what? Human beings? We're sapient, I've told you multiple times. Do you know why it's perfectly cool to commit genocide against the bacteria living on your skin every time you take a shower? Because they aren't sapient.

Being able to distinguish between one twin and the other merely by observation does not admit a recognition of unique DNA not being a person. It is supposed to be a fundamental way to display that the one human exists and another human exists. To be more fundamental you could examine the womb and discover two individual embryos. Or in the case of conjoined twins a partially split embryo.


Yeah it does. The only way to distinguish these people and conclude both identical twins and conjoined fraternal twins are 2 people while a Chimera with 3 separate unique strands of DNA within him is only one is by going by how many working brains they have.

Here take the case of a conjoined twin. There is only one brain present, but that person has a living unique DNAed fraternal twin attached to them that is surviving off their internal organs, but again has no brain. Is it murder to separate them? Are they still two people? You yourself already realize the brain equals the person you just refuse to admit it because it destroys your line in the sand.

You still have not explained why a brain denotes personhood.


Tell me how you can say identical twins are 2 people, conjoined fraternal twins with 2 workings brains are two people, Chimera's with 3 unique DNA strands in them with only 1 brain is one person, and how a conjoined fraternal twin where the second has no brain is only 1 without going by that criteria. Or how an encephalitic baby with no brain isn't and will never be a person. How is a normal 3 year old a person while an encephalitic 3 year old isn't a person?

We can also talk about cases where an embryo was absorbed by another in the womb. Involuntary manslaughter?

Please I really would like to hear if there is any other criteria besides the development of the brain that can be consistently applied throughout all these examples in my last two answers(including sperm, unfertilized and fertilized eggs) without resorting to ad hoc bull answers that aren't applicable to all cases.

You have arbitrarily drawn the line between human and person; your person is capable of having passive preference to live. He or she is a person because they have a brain, but you don’t know why a brain denotes personhood. How could you even begin to draw this conclusion unless you could at least try to explain why the brain is important?


There's nothing arbitrary about it. Is my finger a person? Did it suddenly stop being a human finger? I've explained it; you've ignored it, yet continue to use it as your own guideline as well in every other situation save the fertilized egg.

A sperm and an ovum of a human separately is no more a human than the sperm and ovum of bovine are cows in an early stage of development.


Just like a fertilized human egg is no more a person than a fertilized cow egg is a cow being, than an acorn is a tree, or silk a dress.

http://pigroll.com/img/abortion_not_a_difficult_concept.jpg

Them joining is nothing but an arbitrary spot.
---
The food that stands on his [Odin's] table he gives to two wolves of his called Geri and Freki. He himself needs no food; wine is for him both drink and meat.
#143hunter_gohanPosted 2/20/2013 8:03:33 PM(edited)
A zygote is a determinate being, the big difference between them and the sperm/egg is that they will (without intervention) become almost exactly like us.


Incorrect. There's this whole actual person it is attached to called a woman. If she does not intervene by say not eating or drinking it will die. If someone told me all about the murder they just committed while they're staying at my house for a bit and I do nothing to intervene with the police that is accessory after the fact and illegal. Just because something may be without intervention doesn't mean it is or should be the right, legal, or forced thing to do.

A sperm alone does not become like us, an egg alone does not become like us no matter how long you wait around for it to happen. That is, essentially, how you tell the difference.


But neither does a fertilized egg alone become like us. You guys keep forgetting it sorta requires the internal organs of a person. Not an incubation machine; not an artificial womb, but a person. A person with rights over their own body.

“but each sperm or egg might join therefore it is a human at an early stage of development”. The big difference between might be and is. It is like saying a hospice patient might be dead in a few weeks therefore we should treat him as such.


And if we don't abort the fertilized egg it might make it to birth. You act like all conceptions end in a healthy birth 100% of the time. I'm saying that the fertilized egg which I grew from required that specific egg and sperm that combined. If it was a different egg and/or sperm, I would not be here. There is no reason to accept the fertilized egg as a person than there is to accept sperm and unfertilized eggs as people.

You are saying that a fetus is another organ in a woman’s body before they have a brain?


It's another organism that is using her internal organs to stay alive. I don't have the right to force you to let me use your internal organs, why should a non-sapient single celled life have that right? I can't even force that on a corpse. Where'd this right to life go when I'm laying in a hospital bed dying of kidney failure? "single celled organism requires government to force women to let it use their internal organs" = right to life "Actual person requires government to force a corpse to let it use thier internal organs" = .......right to life not found.

So… not a person, 1/8 a person, ¼ a person, 3/8 a person, ½ a person, 5/8 a person, ¾ a person, 1/1 A PERSON.


Sorta I guess, but I wouldn't really call something that doesn't meet the criteria a person at all.....so actually I guess in that way it is sorta binary. Though it doesn't go from 0 to 1, but 0 to. 0.001 to 0.002 etc. We can easily see 0.5 and below are not people and 0.75 and above are people. Between that though is really anybodies guess.

Please explain what features leading up to thalamic brain activity add to the container to make a person.

Mainly forming the shell and starting on the brain. Not much to do with the person yet.

There are a few notable additions to speak of: heart, brain, limbs, fingers, brain waves, four appendages etc etc.

That's nice, my dog has all of those. Is she a person? (Note: person doesn't necessarilly equal human being as I'm using it. A human being is merely a human person. A Vulcan or Twi'lek would be just as much people as human beings so saying "it's not human" doesn't mean anything)
---
The food that stands on his [Odin's] table he gives to two wolves of his called Geri and Freki. He himself needs no food; wine is for him both drink and meat.
#144hunter_gohanPosted 2/20/2013 8:09:04 PM(edited)
Now according to you thalamic brain activity is not the end all be all for denoting personhood but that it is a “process”. Let’s find a veteran missing all of his limbs and is currently on bypass. Without these necessary additions to the human container does that mean the veteran is not a person? Is your theory seeming more arbitrary or is it just me?


Umm, I'm not exactly sure what you mean by him being on bypass, but no arms and legs do not make a person at all. That is merely part of the locomotion and i/o systems of the shell. Just you, my stance has been clear and consistent with nothing decided on by whim or emotion, and I don't require ad hoc excuses for various different cases like you do.

If a beliefs ground is secular than it is not religious.


That's why I keep saying 'like'! Argh, is a belief based on faith with no supporting evidence better wording for you guys?

You know you have put Gohan in a corner when he starts throwing out unwarranted and misplaced informal fallacy accusations. The best thing to do is ignore it and drive on with his babble.


Unwarranted my ass dude. I've been in many abortion debates, appeals to emotion are the only thing pro-lifers can bring up that can't be summarily smacked down. The last thread I was in was started and ended and contained all in between absolutely nothing but appeals to emotion.
---
The food that stands on his [Odin's] table he gives to two wolves of his called Geri and Freki. He himself needs no food; wine is for him both drink and meat.
#145Aristotle16807(Topic Creator)Posted 2/21/2013 12:56:27 PM
Why is killing us wrong? I will begin speculating if you don’t.
By the way children, sleeping people, comatose patients are not sapient (having wisdom). Hell, you could even say stupid people are not sapient, or mentally challenged or neurotic people.
Yeah it does. The only way to distinguish these people and conclude both identical twins and conjoined fraternal twins are 2 people while a Chimera with 3 separate unique strands of DNA within him is only one is by going by how many working brains they have.

That is incorrect. As I have said multiple times examine the womb. You are playing stupid…again.
There's nothing arbitrary about it. Is my finger a person? Did it suddenly stop being a human finger? I've explained it; you've ignored it, yet continue to use it as your own guideline as well in every other situation save the fertilized egg.

It is arbitrary. You said a human requires a brain to be a person and you don’t know why.
#146Aristotle16807(Topic Creator)Posted 2/21/2013 12:57:12 PM
Just like a fertilized human egg is no more a person than a fertilized cow egg is a cow being, than an acorn is a tree, or silk a dress.

A fact that you continue to ignore is that although an acorn is not far enough in its development to be a tree it is still the same species. Just like a human embryo is still the same species as a human adult. But you believe that an embryo is an organ and that an acorn is an organ.
Incorrect. There's this whole actual person it is attached to called a woman. If she does not intervene by say not eating or drinking it will die. If someone told me all about the murder they just committed while they're staying at my house for a bit and I do nothing to intervene with the police that is accessory after the fact and illegal. Just because something may be without intervention doesn't mean it is or should be the right, legal, or forced thing to do.

A parent can stop giving formula to their infant and she will die. You are missing the point, a zygote without intervention will become more like us. Well, that comes down to what we are already discussing, whether or not a zygote has just as much value as an adult.
#147Aristotle16807(Topic Creator)Posted 2/21/2013 12:57:49 PM
But neither does a fertilized egg alone become like us. You guys keep forgetting it sorta requires the internal organs of a person. Not an incubation machine; not an artificial womb, but a person. A person with rights over their own body.

By that logic you could say that an infant or a toddler does not become like us without nurturing. You can apply those parameters all the way up the human developmental ladder.
And if we don't abort the fertilized egg it might make it to birth.

And if we feed a child with cerebral palsy it might make it to 30.
It's another organism that is using her internal organs to stay alive.

To clarify, you believe that a fetus is an organ?
#148Aristotle16807(Topic Creator)Posted 2/21/2013 12:58:44 PM
Sorta I guess, but I wouldn't really call something that doesn't meet the criteria a person at all.....so actually I guess in that way it is sorta binary. Though it doesn't go from 0 to 1, but 0 to. 0.001 to 0.002 etc. We can easily see 0.5 and below are not people and 0.75 and above are people. Between that though is really anybodies guess.

Make a guess.
Mainly forming the shell and starting on the brain. Not much to do with the person yet.

So it is the forming of the brain that leads up to personhood?
That's nice, my dog has all of those. Is she a person? (Note: person doesn't necessarilly equal human being as I'm using it. A human being is merely a human person. A Vulcan or Twi'lek would be just as much people as human beings so saying "it's not human" doesn't mean anything)

I would love to talk Star Trek with you but that is going to have to wait(Data>Spock). You were the one to say that personhood is a process. Didn’t you say that?
#149fudrickPosted 2/21/2013 1:02:50 PM
What happened with that whole "presence of unique human DNA" line of discussion?
---
Best FCs:
GH1: Decontrol | GH2: Jordan, Hangar 18 | GH80s: Because It's Midnite | GH3: One, Soothsayer | RB2: I Ain't Superstitious
#150MasterEchuPosted 2/21/2013 3:19:59 PM
I'd liek to know why I found this on page 2, this topic -cannot- be this popular. Let's get this straight guys.
SENTIENCE AND MORALITY ARE BASED ION PERCEPTION, NOT SCIENCE!.
you can quote science all you want it doesnt make anything sentient, DNA, Cells, brain, they dont make anything sentient, the government can't make a ban because defining when you're taking a life and when you're being intrusive is impossible to find as it is ALL based in a persons PERCEPTION.

so can we stop the argument, it's gone in circles for 15 pages with no way to make a real argument, its all based on personal perception, making this a social issue with your community -not- a political one.
---
Morality is not fleeting, games or alternate realities will not change what is right and wrong if you reallly belive in them.
Yes my spelling stinks, quiet!