[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
usmccds423, if you looked at any entries in respectable dictionaries like Oxford or Webster, you would see that a parasite is not exclusively a creature of another species. Intraspecific parasitism happens all the time in the animal kingdom, usually among egg-laying species where an animal will lay an egg in the nest of another animal of its own species, so that the mother must care for another animal’s young.
A parasite is any animal that takes advantage of its host, regardless of species, gaining resources at the host’s expense. Before the word was used in a biological sense, it referred exclusively to humans: a parasite was simply a freeloader, literally one who ate at another man’s table, contributing little or nothing to his host in return.
We may not like to refer to an unborn child as a parasite, because of the but essentially that is what it is: during gestation it receives nutrients from its host (the mother), decreasing her fitness and causing her to require more nutrients and other resources to support both her and it.
Technically speaking, for the gestational period, it would be an endoparasite (like a tapeworm), because it is inside the mother’s body, and after birth it would be an ectoparasite, like a tick, that lives outside of the host’s body.
This is not to say that babies are tapeworms or ticks. Babies are cute and fuzzy, whereas ticks typically are not. But the gestation and raising of a child involves an implicit acceptance of the parasite-host relationship on the part of the mother.
And the abortion issue is essentially whether the host, who does not agree to the terms of such a relationship has the right to eject a freeloader from her table, with the knowledge that the freeloader will starve to death if she does. [/quote]
Oh brother. Okay, so by that definition, infants are parasites, really old people, children of any age really and a whole load of grown people who are dependant on others for their existence, and suck the life out of them and don’t return the favor.
If you want to broaden the definition, then fine. That will include a lot of people.
So I guess, if you are a organism that depends on another organism for it’s survival we’ve expounded that definition to just about most people. [/quote]
If you are an organism that depends for your survival on another organism, without appreciably contributing anything to that organism in return, then yes, you are a parasite. If you are not a freeloading piece of shit, then you probably don’t fit that description.
Most people do not, in fact, fit this definition. Most people have a symbiotic relationship with others. Many partnerships may not be entirely equal, but the essence of symbiosis is “you do something for me, I do something for you”. The essence of parasitism is “you do something for me, I do nothing for you”.
Pregnancy and child-rearing is a voluntary (in the majority of cases) parasite-host relationship, with the implicit understanding that the relationship will be a temporary one, and in fact that the roles may very well reverse at a later time, when a grown child may play host for its enfeebled parent.
[/quote]
So this is your way of trying to back out of the slippery slope you introduced? So by this take on the definition, something that returns a benefit to it’s host is not a parasite because it has a symbiotic relationship to it’s host. Therefore, if said pregnancy returns a benefit to it’s mother, say clearing up acne or fixing a nagging stomach problem she has had for years, then it’s a symbiotic relationship and not a parasitic one.
So if you get, what most doctors and biologists would agree is a parasite, like tape worm. But you are fat and the tapeworm has caused you to lose weight, then you have a symbiotic relationship with the tapeworm because you received some reciprocal benefit. Likewise if your are supporting your sister, who drains you dry and gives nothing in return that bitch is a parasite.
Yeah, you are no better off than before.
Yes, words mean things, and if you apply them to situations that are not technically valid, you introduce a slippery slope.