This is What's Wrong With Abortion

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
301

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

…what is a full-fledged human? It starts with sentience. Now, in an earlier post i clarified i’m not pro-abortion, and why i’m not. So, play nice and don’t be a dick…
[/quote]

…are you sentient, pat? There, that’s a measurement. When the brain hasn’t developed enough to exibit it’s higher functions, you could say that person isn’t a fully fledged person yet. We’ve already been over this…
[/quote]

You cannot know that. You may think it, but you don’t know.

So is the definition of a person having necessarily higher level brain function? Sounds like a stretch to me. There is more to person hood then that.[/quote]

…your objections are noted. Now, can we leave it at that?

302

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

OK, allow me to rephrase. What constitutes a person being a full-fledge human, past the 23 week gestation mark. Or are you saying that age is the only determinant factor of what make a human a human?

Good dodge-job by the way…[/quote]

…thank you, you taught me well (: How about sentience?[/quote]

Ha!
I dodged nothing. No offense intended, but why can’t you answer the question?
Despite the stance you hold, you have to be prepared to explain it; and be right. I am less interested in you sharing my stance as I am interested in hearing pure honesty based on something solid.
Put anything I have conversed with you about to the test, I don’t give a fuck because I’ll pass.

Look if you want to be a pro-abortionist or atheist go ahead, but be good at it. There are weaknesses in my arguments and there is nothing I can do about them; you haven’t found them. Find them and lets discuss them. But don’t be evasive, you have put great effort into these discussions, see it through.[/quote]

…what is a full-fledged human? It starts with sentience. Now, in an earlier post i clarified i’m not pro-abortion, and why i’m not. So, play nice and don’t be a dick…
[/quote]

BTW, I honestly wasn’t trying to be a dick. If I came off that way, I apologize.

303

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

OK, allow me to rephrase. What constitutes a person being a full-fledge human, past the 23 week gestation mark. Or are you saying that age is the only determinant factor of what make a human a human?

Good dodge-job by the way…[/quote]

…thank you, you taught me well (: How about sentience?[/quote]

Ha!
I dodged nothing. No offense intended, but why can’t you answer the question?
Despite the stance you hold, you have to be prepared to explain it; and be right. I am less interested in you sharing my stance as I am interested in hearing pure honesty based on something solid.
Put anything I have conversed with you about to the test, I don’t give a fuck because I’ll pass.

Look if you want to be a pro-abortionist or atheist go ahead, but be good at it. There are weaknesses in my arguments and there is nothing I can do about them; you haven’t found them. Find them and lets discuss them. But don’t be evasive, you have put great effort into these discussions, see it through.[/quote]

…what is a full-fledged human? It starts with sentience. Now, in an earlier post i clarified i’m not pro-abortion, and why i’m not. So, play nice and don’t be a dick…
[/quote]

BTW, I honestly wasn’t trying to be a dick. If I came off that way, I apologize.[/quote]

…thank you…

304

Theorists disagree on whether and to what extent we can infer unobservable thoughts from observed behavior (Newcombe). Right now they use a mirror to determine this behavior. What makes that the right time? So should we be allowed to kill anyone who isn’t “self aware?”

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…within a limited legal timeframe the fetus’ rights can’t supercede the women’s right to selfdetermination. I wouldn’t mind if that legal timeframe is lowered to 16 weeks instead of 23 weeks, but within those first four months what happens to the fetus is up to the woman, and the woman alone…

…at 16 weeks the fetus can’t survive outside the womb, and as such it’s brain is insuffiently formed to be [self] aware. This cut-off point is arbitrary, and just to make sure you understand; i’m not pro-abortion but pro-choice. After the first 16 weeks, barring valid medical reasons, the mother can’t abort the pregnancy…

…i’m not going to go over this again tbh. How i feel about this issue is all in this thread…
[/quote]

305

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
â??theorists disagree on whether and to what extent we can infer unobservable thoughts from observed behavior (Newcombe).â?? Right now they use a mirror to determine this behavior. What makes that the right time? So should we be allowed to kill anyone who isn’t “self aware?”

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…within a limited legal timeframe the fetus’ rights can’t supercede the women’s right to selfdetermination. I wouldn’t mind if that legal timeframe is lowered to 16 weeks instead of 23 weeks, but within those first four months what happens to the fetus is up to the woman, and the woman alone…

…at 16 weeks the fetus can’t survive outside the womb, and as such it’s brain is insuffiently formed to be [self] aware. This cut-off point is arbitrary, and just to make sure you understand; i’m not pro-abortion but pro-choice. After the first 16 weeks, barring valid medical reasons, the mother can’t abort the pregnancy…

…i’m not going to go over this again tbh. How i feel about this issue is all in this thread…
[/quote]
[/quote]

Well, ephrem said he is not pro-abortion. So I guess this his view on when the life becomehuman, but not as excuse to terminate it prior to that.

306

Ephrem - I read through the last few pages of this thread, 8 pages actually. The arguments don’t change.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . . Is it really better to let unwanted children be born in a reality where they have no hope for a proper future, where they will be unloved and forced to grow up in poverty and crime . . . . [/quote]

So now you KNOW how people are going to turn out and contribute to the world? My Grandfather was an orphan. He was NOT wanted by his parents. He left the orphanage at the age of 13 and made his way in the world. Mind you this was during the WWII. No one had a job let alone any spare money. Yet he made his own way.

Now jump forward 40 years, he has a family of 7, still happily married and he owns his own house. Oh yeah I forgot to mention he started a golf course, thought to be one of the best public courses in the NW. So who would have predicted that future?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…we’re talking opinion here . . . . perfectly fine to assume authority over what happens to a woman’s body . . . . life of poverty on the offchance that it finds a way out of that misery… [/quote]

Again you assume to know how people will turn out. So that gives you the right to kill ‘poor people?’ Because you define them as having a miserable existence? Wasn’t that the thinking of the Germans in regards to the Jews? Or how about the southerners during times of slavery?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…but inspite of this, the remedy is worse than the illness, imo… [/quote]

YOUR OPINION. And who gave you the right to kill anyone you deemed necessary?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…a fetus is not a person, so that does not constitute killing… [/quote]

Go to ANY medical textbook and look at how they determine a fetus. We’ll go with Wikipedia because that is readily available on the internet. “A fetus is a developing mammal . . . . after the embryonic stage and before birth.”

Nowhere does it state the fetus is different, other than the Size, Location, the Environment and the Development of the child. Those characteristics define EVERY SINGLE person walking this earth today! The unborn are in no way different, other than the characteristics listed.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . .no real interest in searching for the best way of dealing with sensitive issues like abortion… [/quote]

I never realized murder was a topic with fuzzy lines.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . . but causes a number of other problems that have a greater detrimental influence on society than abortion has . . . .[/quote]

Again you KNOW the future of all the people in the world who live their life? It is ALWAYS better to let people decide for themselves.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . . no hope for a proper future, where they will be unloved and forced to grow up in poverty and crime . . . . [/quote]

Pigeon holing people is dangerous territory. You are giving them NO HOPE! Why will they turn out just as you predict? How about we let them decide their own future, huh? Right now abortion is legal in the US, that will change for the RIGHT to life!!

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . . killing a homeless person is murder, abortion is not . . . . [/quote]

Ronald Reagan - “abortion-on-demand is not a right granted by the Constitution.” Disagree?

This is my favorite part! I was in a severe motorcycle accident on May 1, 2005, I was 25 at the time. I spent six weeks in a coma. Three of those weeks in a total vegetative state. If I had been taken off life support, my life would have ended.

Doctors proceeded to tell my parents that the longer I was in that state, the likely hood of me gaining any kind of function as an adult would drop to almost zero. I’m glad my parents didn’t use YOUR definition of a coma.

[quote]ephrem wrote:
. . . . a person in a deep, irreversable coma with little to no brain activity will die if taken of life support. I do not consider that being ‘alive’ . . . .[/quote]

As I type this, the keys respond well. Pretty sure I’m alive. Again I was in the worst class, a ‘severe coma.’

Instead of trying to quote every part of a conversation, lets shorten this up, a little. No a TON -

define the unborn: The unborn are no different to any other person walking this earth, other then Size, Location, Environment, Development (see above list). They are a person none the less.

307

Didn’t realize abortion had a fence you could sit on? Crazy!! Doesn’t mean he can justify murder. Yet he will try ; )

[quote]pat wrote:
Well, ephrem said he is not pro-abortion. So I guess this his view on when the life becomehuman, but not as excuse to terminate it prior to that. [/quote]

308

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Didn’t realize abortion had a fence you could sit on? Crazy!! Doesn’t mean he can justify murder. Yet he will try ; )

[quote]pat wrote:
Well, ephrem said he is not pro-abortion. So I guess this his view on when the life becomehuman, but not as excuse to terminate it prior to that. [/quote]
[/quote]

…i won’t go point-for-point-back-'n-forth with you kneedragger, i’ve explained my position and if you disagree, then that’s fine with me…

309

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Theorists disagree on whether and to what extent we can infer unobservable thoughts from observed behavior (Newcombe). Right now they use a mirror to determine this behavior. What makes that the right time? So should we be allowed to kill anyone who isn’t “self aware?”
[/quote]

…no, obviously that is not what i was suggesting, but who is there to be self-aware [in any shape of form] without [much of] a brain?

310

Define “with out a brain.” Did you read my entire post? At one time I was completely ‘brain dead’ and the doctors thought I would never walk this earth. Kinda proved their point wrong.

Self-aware definitions will change as scientists discover more and more about the complexities of life and its beginning stages. New understanding comes as the mystery of how life, begins the process is revealed. The process does NOT become more complex as we gain understanding, scientists just discover new ways of describing the process. Do you disagree with anything I posted here in the last 3 lines?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…no, obviously that is not what i was suggesting, but who is there to be self-aware [in any shape of form] without [much of] a brain?
[/quote]

311

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Define “with out a brain.” Did you read my entire previous post? At one time I was completely ‘brain dead’ and the doctors thought I would never walk this earth. Kinda proved their point wrong.

Self-aware definitions will change as scientists discover more and more about the complexities of life and its beginning stages. New understanding comes as the mystery of how life, begins the process is revealed. The process does NOT become more complex as we gain understanding, scientists just discover new ways of describing the process. Do you disagree with anything I posted here in the last 3 lines?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…no, obviously that is not what i was suggesting, but who is there to be self-aware [in any shape of form] without [much of] a brain?
[/quote]

Or, simply define the unborn shrug
[/quote]

…why are you comparing a full grown brain with the vestigial brain of a [<16 week old] fetus as if that’s relevant to what i was talking about?

312

you are going back over my posts like you complained about doing the first time, yet you still don’t read the entire post?

Let’s keep this rather short and easy:

define the unborn -

see above answer for my interpretation

313

unâ??born
â??â??/Ê?nË?bÉ?rn/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [uhn-bawrn] Show IPA
â??adjective

  1. not yet born; yet to come; future: unborn generations.
  2. not yet delivered; still existing in the mother’s womb: an unborn baby.
  3. existing without birth or beginning.
314

So I will assume you don’t disagree with any part of your own definition? When I assume, that can make someone an ass ; ) That is why I ask : )

By your above posts, you think a baby doesn’t gain it’s “person hood” until after 16 weeks. What characteristic is it that you believe brings the person into existence?

I believe you can tell when I believe a person to come into existence and you don’t have to assume ; )

315

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So I will assume you don’t disagree with any part of your own definition? When I assume, that can make someone an ass ; ) That is why I ask : )

By your above posts, you think a baby doesn’t gain it’s “person hood” until after 16 weeks. What characteristic is it that you believe brings the person into existence?

I believe you can tell when I believe a person to come into existence and you don’t have to assume ; )[/quote]

…that characteristic would be a brain that is developed enough. At 16 weeks the brain is not yet developed enough for it to gain consciousness…

316

Ephrem, you need to stick to one argument. Sometimes you talk about how some people’s lives aren’t perfect and abortion is the lesser of evils. Next you try to justify abortion as the removal of unwanted cells not correlating to human life.

Even you have to see how these arguments are at least mildly contradictory. If abortion is better for the child than letting it live, you donâ??t need justification of “it isnâ??t a human yet”. If it isn’t a human life there is no need for sad hard life stories.

Honestly I think you believe it is a necessary evil. All this talk of what constitutes killing and when consciousness happens is an effort to convince yourself, not others, that it’s okay and you shouldn’t feel bad for thinking it’s necessary. But either way it really has to boil down to one or the other. It cannot be a necessary evil that isnâ??t evil, as you are trying to argue.

317

Good point DD ; ) To Ephrem as well, why choose even ONE evil? Lets look at the history of using embryo’s for stem cell therapy. Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy has NOT helped even a single soul today!! The number of successful cases using adult stem cells is well into the thousands. Why even argue when the numbers are so drastically stacked against esct? Why challenge something that people argue with morals? Doesn’t make any sense to me.

What ‘characteristic’ is that defines the ability to kill the embryo? Saying it ‘isn’t developed enough’ is not answering the question. What trait defines the ability to no longer kill the life? Why is it that stage that is magically develops the trait of consciousness?

[quote]ephrem wrote:
…that characteristic would be a brain that is developed enough. At 16 weeks the brain is not yet developed enough for it to gain consciousness…
[/quote]

318

Fun fact;

Here abortion is illegal. If you are caught having an abortion. They kill you… and they kill the doctor giving the abortion. Period.

319

[quote]StraightEdgeHxC wrote:
Fun fact;

Here abortion is illegal. If you are caught having an abortion. They kill you… and they kill the doctor giving the abortion. Period.
[/quote]

Where is “here”? What is your location?

320

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Ephrem, you need to stick to one argument. Sometimes you talk about how some people’s lives aren’t perfect and abortion is the lesser of evils. Next you try to justify abortion as the removal of unwanted cells not correlating to human life.

Even you have to see how these arguments are at least mildly contradictory. If abortion is better for the child than letting it live, you donâ??t need justification of “it isnâ??t a human yet”. If it isn’t a human life there is no need for sad hard life stories.

Honestly I think you believe it is a necessary evil. All this talk of what constitutes killing and when consciousness happens is an effort to convince yourself, not others, that it’s okay and you shouldn’t feel bad for thinking it’s necessary. But either way it really has to boil down to one or the other. It cannot be a necessary evil that isnâ??t evil, as you are trying to argue.[/quote]

…bullshit, i’m answering questions, nothing more. Please refrain from telling me what i do, or don’t believe. I’ve said on numerous occasions that abortion is a sad affair for everyone involved, and should be avoided if at all possible, but abortion should never be made illegal…