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

Peter Heck video - "The Sound of Abortion"

#81lastheroPosted 1/31/2013 7:43:14 AM(edited)
Suibom posted...
Sperm on its own can become a human?!?

Mind. Blown.

Imagine how many babies get washed down the shower each day!!

I seem to remember from school that an egg was required too. But I graduated 15 years ago... Things must have changed a lot since then.


A meaningless point. Each sperm cell can come in contact with an egg and fertilize it. It has 23 chromosomes. Each sperm cell is potentially a person, the same way that each seed is potentially a tree. You wouldn't say that a seed isn't potentially a tree, simply because it hasn't been planted. By that same token, it doesn't make much sense to say that a sperm isn't potentially a person simply because it hasn't fertilized an egg. Reproduction is the reason sperm exist. Every sperm has the possibility of fertilizing an egg and growing into a human. That is their function. By definition, they are potentially human.

The fact that it's an earlier part of the life cycle doesn't mean it's not a part of the life cycle. When an egg and a sperm meet, it's not like some magical third component comes into play.

And a fertilized egg can't become a human on its own, either, it needs a womb. Do you consider the fertilized egg to no longer be a potential human if it's not in the womb?
---
X-Men: First Class RPG - Welcoming all new players!
[http://s1.zetaboards.com/New_Mutants/index/]
#82IamvegitoPosted 1/31/2013 7:43:07 AM
From: AynRandySavage | #075
Iamvegito posted...
Aww... if only they cared about fetuses after they were born, or their mothers, I'd let them take the label "pro life."


There really are a lot of pro-life people who are in favor of social safety nets and ways of helping children and their families. I was one of them years ago.

Sadly, the establishment ones are not. Anyone who makes this their single issue for voting is being disingenuous.
---
"A day will come when you think yourself safe and happy, and suddenly your joy will turn to ashes in your mouth, and you'll know the debt is paid."
#83AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 8:20:04 AM
lasthero posted...
Suibom posted...
Sperm on its own can become a human?!?

Mind. Blown.

Imagine how many babies get washed down the shower each day!!

I seem to remember from school that an egg was required too. But I graduated 15 years ago... Things must have changed a lot since then.


A meaningless point. Each sperm cell can come in contact with an egg and fertilize it. It has 23 chromosomes. Each sperm cell is potentially a person, the same way that each seed is potentially a tree. You wouldn't say that a seed isn't potentially a tree, simply because it hasn't been planted. By that same token, it doesn't make much sense to say that a sperm isn't potentially a person simply because it hasn't fertilized an egg. Reproduction is the reason sperm exist. Every sperm has the possibility of fertilizing an egg and growing into a human. That is their function. By definition, they are potentially human.

The fact that it's an earlier part of the life cycle doesn't mean it's not a part of the life cycle. When an egg and a sperm meet, it's not like some magical third component comes into play.

And a fertilized egg can't become a human on its own, either, it needs a womb. Do you consider the fertilized egg to no longer be a potential human if it's not in the womb?


I have to agree with Suibom here. A seed is an embyronic plant. It has everything needed to grow into an adult. A sperm does not. The formation of the zygote is the beginning of an organism's life.
#84kts123Posted 1/31/2013 8:21:25 AM
Just saying. You seem to be implying an all or nothing stance on this. Either the fetus should be treated as a full human being with personhood rights, or it should be treated as if it were an inanimate object. I think the truth is somewhere in between.


Nope, I was actually going to include a part about calling it "subhuman" in my last post, but I didn't want to make that jump until you made it yourself. This is generally the crux of the issue with these "necessary evil" folk.

People made this same claim with slaves during the slave trade days. An African American was counted as "half a man" for population purposes. Not too pretty, eh? We run into similar issues with the severely handicap. If, say, someone loses brain function for three days but recovers it, were they still a person before they recovered brain function? During those three days they had the same potential to recover personal identifiers as the fetus. I am sure you may agree, once someone's brain is incapable of recovery, keeping the body alive doesn't really sustain the person anymore.

However in cases to where recovery of brain function is possible, suddenly we elevate their status to that of a person. It's very murky territory when we decide to label something as "subhuman" because it currently lacks certain cognitive functions. If we have elevated the fetus as more than cells and tissue, who is to say it isn't merely someone in a deep, developmentally based coma of sorts?
#85AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 8:30:03 AM
kts123 posted...
<
People made this same claim with slaves during the slave trade days. An African American was counted as "half a man" for population purposes. Not too pretty, eh?


People bring that one example up all the time, but I just don't see the connection. Slavery caused enormous amounts of suffering. Legalized abortion, if anything, greatly reduces it. The fact that slaves were treated as non-persons doesn't demonstrate that abortion is immoral any more than abortion shows that slavery was moral.
#86AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 8:30:41 AM
Iamvegito posted...
From: AynRandySavage | #075
Iamvegito posted...
Aww... if only they cared about fetuses after they were born, or their mothers, I'd let them take the label "pro life."


There really are a lot of pro-life people who are in favor of social safety nets and ways of helping children and their families. I was one of them years ago.

Sadly, the establishment ones are not. Anyone who makes this their single issue for voting is being disingenuous.


That's a fair point, but a very unfortunate one.
#87lastheroPosted 1/31/2013 8:57:44 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
lasthero posted...
Suibom posted...
Sperm on its own can become a human?!?

Mind. Blown.

Imagine how many babies get washed down the shower each day!!

I seem to remember from school that an egg was required too. But I graduated 15 years ago... Things must have changed a lot since then.


A meaningless point. Each sperm cell can come in contact with an egg and fertilize it. It has 23 chromosomes. Each sperm cell is potentially a person, the same way that each seed is potentially a tree. You wouldn't say that a seed isn't potentially a tree, simply because it hasn't been planted. By that same token, it doesn't make much sense to say that a sperm isn't potentially a person simply because it hasn't fertilized an egg. Reproduction is the reason sperm exist. Every sperm has the possibility of fertilizing an egg and growing into a human. That is their function. By definition, they are potentially human.

The fact that it's an earlier part of the life cycle doesn't mean it's not a part of the life cycle. When an egg and a sperm meet, it's not like some magical third component comes into play.

And a fertilized egg can't become a human on its own, either, it needs a womb. Do you consider the fertilized egg to no longer be a potential human if it's not in the womb?


I have to agree with Suibom here. A seed is an embyronic plant. It has everything needed to grow into an adult. A sperm does not. The formation of the zygote is the beginning of an organism's life.


A zygote doesn't have 'everything needed to grow into an adult', though. By itself, it can do nothing.

My point is that, looking at it like this, you're drawing lines in places you can't really draw lines. If given the choice between saving the life of a human child and a tray full of fertilized eggs, just about everyone would choose the human child. Clearly, there's a difference between the value of potential life and actual life. Figuring that out and coming to a consensus on it is where the actual debate should be.
---
X-Men: First Class RPG - Welcoming all new players!
[http://s1.zetaboards.com/New_Mutants/index/]
#88AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 9:10:41 AM
lasthero posted...

A zygote doesn't have 'everything needed to grow into an adult', though. By itself, it can do nothing.


No, but we're not talking about the raw materials that it needs to grow into an adult. We're talking about talking about the process that begins at fertilization and ends at childbirth barring any special intervention from the parent.

My point is that, looking at it like this, you're drawing lines in places you can't really draw lines. If given the choice between saving the life of a human child and a tray full of fertilized eggs, just about everyone would choose the human child. Clearly, there's a difference between the value of potential life and actual life. Figuring that out and coming to a consensus on it is where the actual debate should be.


Oh, well then I agree completely. I gave my formula for how to draw the line as reasonably as possible above, but haven't gotten any feedback on it.
#89kts123Posted 1/31/2013 9:42:17 AM
AynRandySavage posted...
kts123 posted...
<
People made this same claim with slaves during the slave trade days. An African American was counted as "half a man" for population purposes. Not too pretty, eh?


People bring that one example up all the time, but I just don't see the connection. Slavery caused enormous amounts of suffering. Legalized abortion, if anything, greatly reduces it. The fact that slaves were treated as non-persons doesn't demonstrate that abortion is immoral any more than abortion shows that slavery was moral.


The problem, or connection, is that people have a long history of disqualifying people from having full rights. If you had been raised in slave days, you probably wouldn't think much of calling a black person "half a man." Now, I certainly don't consider this as having a direct connection, as much as a connection showing how easily people can condition themselves to consider a life beneath their level. More connected, is the issue of brain dead patients who recover, and the like.
#90AynRandySavagePosted 1/31/2013 9:48:26 AM
kts123 posted...
The problem, or connection, is that people have a long history of disqualifying people from having full rights. If you had been raised in slave days, you probably wouldn't think much of calling a black person "half a man." Now, I certainly don't consider this as having a direct connection, as much as a connection showing how easily people can condition themselves to consider a life beneath their level.


But the question is whether that's necessarily a bad thing or not.

More connected, is the issue of brain dead patients who recover, and the like.


With brain dead people, there's no possibility of recovery. But with people in persistent vegetative states, the optimal situation is to follow the directions of their living will. For example, I'd want the plug pulled if the prognosis was grim. But therein lies the difference between a fetus and a brain-dead person Killing an unconscious personal is immoral, and ought be illegal because it denies that person the ability to satisfy their preferences. A fetus, having no desires whatsoever, is not deprived of anything by being aborted.