[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Opeth: “What kind of person doesn’t believe that abortion is murder?”
Magick: “The kind that doesn’t believe that a first-trimester fetus, which is little more than a collection of cells, constitutes a human being.”
There. Do we all understand each other now?[/quote]
Thanks for that, Varqanir. Much better.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…you might just decide that they have the correct view and change your mind. eiEither way, Varq’s previous post was correct.
[/quote]
Many are changing their mind. It’s because they are coming to the realization that indeed the idea behind Varq’s post is and was correct.[/quote]
I might be one of those changing his mind. I haven’t yet, but I haven’t put much thought into the issue until recently, and it has never really been a big issue for me one way or the other.
I will say red flags go off for me anytime I see a well-oiled, mostly religious political machine driving an agenda and instructing its flock to stick to carefully crafted talking points designed to control the paradigm of the debate. That doesn’t mean that said political machine is automatically on the wrong side of the issue, it just makes me more cautious and skeptical that the debate has been properly framed.
Also, my gut is telling me the rights of a two-celled, yet-to-be-sentiant zigote don’t trump a women’s right to do what she wants with her body, including removing a two-celled non-sentient zigote. My gut isn’t always right but I can’t just ignore it, even though I concede there are forceful arguments on the pro-life side of the debate, including difficult personhood-line-drawing problems if the line isn’t drawn at conception.
I’m also not sure I want to help pay for the extra 3,000,000 likely welfare recipients each year if the pro-lifer’s win by a landslide, in the same way I’m not sure I want open borders, even though it is hard for me to justify condemning innocent people to a life of misery and maybe even death by telling them they can’t pursue a better life here because they were randomly and through no fault of their own born a few feet on the other side of an imaginary line. In a lot of ways, I think it would respect life as much or more to let 3,000,000 more Mexican refugees in each year than it would to let in the 3,000,000 extra aborted fetuses.
It is also hard to ignore Varq’s map.
So I’m still considering the issue and appreciate the discussion.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
…you might just decide that they have the correct view and change your mind. eiEither way, Varq’s previous post was correct.
[/quote]
Many are changing their mind. It’s because they are coming to the realization that indeed the idea behind Varq’s post is and was correct.[/quote]
I might be one of those changing his mind. I haven’t yet, but I haven’t put much thought into the issue until recently, and it has never really been a big issue for me one way or the other.
I will say red flags go off for me anytime I see a well-oiled, mostly religious political machine driving an agenda and instructing its flock to stick to carefully crafted talking points designed to control the paradigm of the debate. That doesn’t mean that said political machine is automatically on the wrong side of the issue, it just makes me more cautious and skeptical that the debate has been properly framed.
Also, my gut is telling me the rights of a two-celled, yet-to-be-sentiant zigote don’t trump a women’s right to do what she wants with her body, including removing a two-celled non-sentient zigote. My gut isn’t always right but I can’t just ignore it, even though I concede there are forceful arguments on the pro-life side of the debate, including difficult personhood-line-drawing problems if the line isn’t drawn at conception.
I’m also not sure I want to help pay for the extra 3,000,000 likely welfare recipients each year if the pro-lifer’s win by a landslide, in the same way I’m not sure I want open borders, even though it is hard for me to justify condemning innocent people to a life of misery and maybe even death by telling them they can’t pursue a better life here because they were randomly and through no fault of their own born a few feet on the other side of an imaginary line. In a lot of ways, I think it would respect life as much or more to let 3,000,000 more Mexican refugees in each year than it would to let in the 3,000,000 extra aborted fetuses.
It is also hard to ignore Varq’s map.
So I’m still considering the issue and appreciate the discussion. [/quote]
Thoughtful post. I have often struggled with almost exactly the same ideas. Particularly the zygote problem. My reaction to abortion at ~6 weeks and beyond has been automatic since I first learned of the issue, but the earlier stuff requires thought.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Magick, you are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to try to prove that a living human fetus is either not human or not living. Is it an adult? No. Is it exactly the same as a child? Technically, no, any more than a baby chick three days before it hatches from the egg is exactly the same as the same chick three days after hatching. You may decide against counting a chicken before it hatches, but your objection does not invalidate the fact that it is a living individual of the species Gallus domesticus.[/quote]
I agree he is fighting an up hill battle , Not only is the clump of cells (they are referring to human) but also he is fighting the Notorious CJS . They are right about every stand they take . If you dare disagree with them then you are an Idiot or Naive or drinking the Kool aid . They can not fathom that there are many opinions that are just as valid as theirs . They feel because they are passionate and hold the numbers in their favor that they aqre indisputably right . Welcome to PWI @ T Nation
Oh I forgot , you are grasping at straws , digging holes .
Smoking pot 
[quote]magick wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Correct.
And you can offer absolutely nothing to refute that.
[/quote]
you’re right. I can’t. I gave it thought for most of the night and morning today and I can’t come up with any reasonable explanation why abortion should be allowed without accepting the reality that the fetus’s right is not relevant.
That + this comic (Subjective life - Adam4d.com) has made me seriously question why I believe in legalizing abortion, and I plan on doing more research into the pro-abortion camp and seeing why they believe in it and decide something.
Thus,
[quote]
That doesn’t matter to the Magick’s of this world. Any straw that can be grasped at…will. No matter how tenuous. No matter how unscientific. No matter how illogical.
It’s sheer desperation.[/quote]
I find this incredibly painful. DO NOT lump me with mindless idiots.[/quote]
divide and conquer every one that disagrees is an idiot , don’t you get it
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Magick, you are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to try to prove that a living human fetus is either not human or not living. Is it an adult? No. Is it exactly the same as a child? Technically, no, any more than a baby chick three days before it hatches from the egg is exactly the same as the same chick three days after hatching. You may decide against counting a chicken before it hatches, but your objection does not invalidate the fact that it is a living individual of the species Gallus domesticus.[/quote]
I agree he is fighting an up hill battle , Not only is the clump of cells (they are referring to human) but also he is fighting the Notorious CJS . They are right about every stand they take . If you dare disagree with them then you are an Idiot or Naive or drinking the Kool aid . They can not fathom that there are many opinions that are just as valid as theirs . They feel because they are passionate and hold the numbers in their favor that they aqre indisputably right . Welcome to PWI @ T Nation
[/quote]
Pitt, one of the principles I’ve tried to follow throughout my tenure here on T-Nation is that some things are true no matter who agrees with them, or what the social or political ramifications of their truth might be. I’ve defended some pretty unpopular positions on this forum, not necessarily just to be contrary (although I have done that, for the fun of playing Devil’s Advocate), but because a preponderance of evidence supports the position. The point of this thread was not necessarily to align myself in the pro-life camp, but to show that the crux of their position is correct: that a living human fetus is by definition human and alive.
This is an undeniable fact. You might try to deny it, but if you are intellectually honest, you cannot.
Similarly, if you believe that a human life, whether it belongs to a newborn infant or a ninety-year-old woman, is valuable, and concede that a human fetus regardless of its sentience or viability outside the womb, is a human life, then intellectually you must concede that it too has equivalent value to its counterparts outside the birth canal.
This concession is entirely independent of whatever legal, moral or religious arguments about the “sacredness” of life, or the morality of homicide, or the constitutional rights of the unborn, or even the political and ecological consequences of overpopulation.
A fetus is human, it is alive, and it has equivalent value, by virtue of its being alive and human, to a baby, a child, or an adult.
Agree or disagree, that is a fact.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
A fetus is human (fact by definition), it is alive (fact by definition), and it has equivalent value, by virtue of its being alive and human, to a baby, a child, or an adult (value judgment by definition).
[/quote]
There are lots of good reasons to support the value judgment referenced above, but it is a value judgment and not a “fact” nonetheless.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Magick, you are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to try to prove that a living human fetus is either not human or not living. Is it an adult? No. Is it exactly the same as a child? Technically, no, any more than a baby chick three days before it hatches from the egg is exactly the same as the same chick three days after hatching. You may decide against counting a chicken before it hatches, but your objection does not invalidate the fact that it is a living individual of the species Gallus domesticus.[/quote]
I agree he is fighting an up hill battle , Not only is the clump of cells (they are referring to human) but also he is fighting the Notorious CJS . They are right about every stand they take . If you dare disagree with them then you are an Idiot or Naive or drinking the Kool aid . They can not fathom that there are many opinions that are just as valid as theirs . They feel because they are passionate and hold the numbers in their favor that they aqre indisputably right . Welcome to PWI @ T Nation
[/quote]
Pitt, one of the principles I’ve tried to follow throughout my tenure here on T-Nation is that some things are true no matter who agrees with them, or what the social or political ramifications of their truth might be. I’ve defended some pretty unpopular positions on this forum, not necessarily just to be contrary (although I have done that, for the fun of playing Devil’s Advocate), but because a preponderance of evidence supports the position. The point of this thread was not necessarily to align myself in the pro-life camp, but to show that the crux of their position is correct: that a living human fetus is by definition human and alive.
This is an undeniable fact. You might try to deny it, but if you are intellectually honest, you cannot.
Similarly, if you believe that a human life, whether it belongs to a newborn infant or a ninety-year-old woman, is valuable, and concede that a human fetus regardless of its sentience or viability outside the womb, is a human life, then intellectually you must concede that it too has equivalent value to its counterparts outside the birth canal.
This concession is entirely independent of whatever legal, moral or religious arguments about the “sacredness” of life, or the morality of homicide, or the constitutional rights of the unborn, or even the political and ecological consequences of overpopulation.
A fetus is human, it is alive, and it has equivalent value, by virtue of its being alive and human, to a baby, a child, or an adult.
Agree or disagree, that is a fact. [/quote]
I agree that a fetus is human life , I would also call a human sperm alive. My point on this discussion was not to win . It was to point out there is a viable argument to the contrary . I must admit your credentials far supersede mine and if I had your talent I could better argue my point . But my lack of education does not invalidate my opinion . And as I pointed out earlier this is a legal discussion I have conceded that a zygote is a human life but you must admit that a human sperm is alive and it is human
[quote]pushharder wrote:
In fact, it was codified that he was 3/5 of a human being. We know that now. We may not have known it then but we know it now.
[/quote]
You really, really, really, know better.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Actually, not every country permits abortion. Many countries ban it altogether, and while most will allow exceptions, some do not. In Malta, for example, nobody may have an abortion for any reason, not even to save the life of the mother.
The following are, by the standards of the antiabortion movement, the most enlightened societies of the world, which value the life of the unborn more than we do in the United States, to the degree that thwy make it a criminal offense to ever take its life. I’m sure these societies have much about them that we can and should emulate.
Afghanistan
Andorra
Angola
Antigua & Barbuda
Bangladesh
Bhutan
Brazil
Brunei Darussalam
Central African Rep.
Chile
Congo
CÃ??Ã?´te d’Ivoire
Dem. Rep. of Congo
Dominica
Dominican Republic
Egypt
El Salvador
Gabon
Guatemala Guinea-Bissau
Haiti
Honduras
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Kiribati
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritania Mauritius
Mexico
Micronesia
Myanmar
Nicaragua
Nigeria
Oman
Palau
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Philippines
San Marino
Sao Tome & Principe
Senegal
Soloman Islands
Somalia
South Sudan
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname Syria
Tanzania Timor-Leste
Tonga
Tuvalu
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
Venezuela
West Bank & Gaza Strip
Yemen[/quote]
That’s a interesting list. While it should be obvious that a ban on abortion doesn’t necessarily affect the development of a society per se (E: North Korea), it has an inevitable parallel correlation with other traits that do affect. I would like to know what those are. It should be remembered that whatever we undertake, there is always human baggage that affects the results. I tried to point out earlier (on this or in the other thread), that the role of men becomes crucial if abort is to become illegal. Otherwise it will inevitably lead to increased inequality, and that definitely is a trait that is common for the countries on that list.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Magick, you are fighting an uphill battle if you are going to try to prove that a living human fetus is either not human or not living. Is it an adult? No. Is it exactly the same as a child? Technically, no, any more than a baby chick three days before it hatches from the egg is exactly the same as the same chick three days after hatching. You may decide against counting a chicken before it hatches, but your objection does not invalidate the fact that it is a living individual of the species Gallus domesticus.[/quote]
I agree he is fighting an up hill battle , Not only is the clump of cells (they are referring to human) but also he is fighting the Notorious CJS . They are right about every stand they take . If you dare disagree with them then you are an Idiot or Naive or drinking the Kool aid . They can not fathom that there are many opinions that are just as valid as theirs . They feel because they are passionate and hold the numbers in their favor that they aqre indisputably right . Welcome to PWI @ T Nation
[/quote]
Pitt, one of the principles I’ve tried to follow throughout my tenure here on T-Nation is that some things are true no matter who agrees with them, or what the social or political ramifications of their truth might be. I’ve defended some pretty unpopular positions on this forum, not necessarily just to be contrary (although I have done that, for the fun of playing Devil’s Advocate), but because a preponderance of evidence supports the position. The point of this thread was not necessarily to align myself in the pro-life camp, but to show that the crux of their position is correct: that a living human fetus is by definition human and alive.
This is an undeniable fact. You might try to deny it, but if you are intellectually honest, you cannot.
Similarly, if you believe that a human life, whether it belongs to a newborn infant or a ninety-year-old woman, is valuable, and concede that a human fetus regardless of its sentience or viability outside the womb, is a human life, then intellectually you must concede that it too has equivalent value to its counterparts outside the birth canal.
This concession is entirely independent of whatever legal, moral or religious arguments about the “sacredness” of life, or the morality of homicide, or the constitutional rights of the unborn, or even the political and ecological consequences of overpopulation.
A fetus is human, it is alive, and it has equivalent value, by virtue of its being alive and human, to a baby, a child, or an adult.
Agree or disagree, that is a fact. [/quote]
I agree that a fetus is human life , I would also call a human sperm alive. My point on this discussion was not to win . It was to point out there is a viable argument to the contrary . I must admit your credentials far supersede mine and if I had your talent I could better argue my point . But my lack of education does not invalidate my opinion . And as I pointed out earlier this is a legal discussion I have conceded that a zygote is a human life but you must admit that a human sperm is alive and it is human [/quote]
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.
[quote]pat wrote:
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.[/quote]
Sperm is produced by the human body, bacteria is not. Poor analogy. Sperm is different from everything else a male body produces, at least at the stage when the master commands it to leave it’s home. It leaves the body and it has a purpose (or goal). But on the other hand is that much different from white cells, that have a purpose and goals, too. They don’t leave the body, though. Hmm.
E: and that brings up the point that pro-lifers bring. It’s basically a voluntary action and it is up to the master if it is to bring result or not. It’s a moral question. On a societal level it is moot, though. You have to take in consideration what we really are, all of us together. Not just the ones that are like minded and feel responsibility. On a societal level you have to think what works and brings the best compromise. Unless you are waiting for the rapture of course and you don’t give a fuck about anything else but a clean slate on your part.
[quote]pat wrote:
admit that a human sperm is alive and it is human [/quote]
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.[/quote]
No, a sperm that is human , is human and if it is alive , it is alive .\
A fetus is human but it is not a child.