The fetus is a human. You can find it on the first site Lucy posted. The argument of personhood is unconvincing to me for several reasons. If a someone became a person at some specific time t and wasn't before, would it be right to kill that someone at t-1? The argument of physical dependance also does not work because people who are in a coma with lifesupport are less physically capable than a fetus. So I'm not really arguing the potentional human being, a fetus is human being abate undeveloped completely.
What are your views on abortion?
- Thread starter TruthSeeker
- Start date
So, if you can't kill human DNA at t-1... what makes it wrong to allow it to die at t-9 motnhs?
What is stopping all the christian women from spreading their legs? After all, they owe it to their yet to be concieved children. If not, they are killers.
A women has no more responsibility to ensure the survival of her fetus then she does of her eggs and a guy's sperm.
What is stopping all the christian women from spreading their legs? After all, they owe it to their yet to be concieved children. If not, they are killers.
A women has no more responsibility to ensure the survival of her fetus then she does of her eggs and a guy's sperm.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
And with the family's concent life-support can be turned off. If you read all the text in the link the argument is not whether the fetus is a human. The fact that it is a potential human being does not over-ride the woman's right to abort it. He womb, her body, her life, her right. The unborn do not have rights over the living.
So the fetus is now a sentient creature capable of knowing?
quote]
You are making a judgement if you think that the doctors and women should be punished in the legal system. Jesus man at least lose your viginity before deciding on a topic for those who have.
[/quote]
Why do you keep being insulting? I've already told you that I'm anti-social. It affords me a viewpoint free from somethings.
I know what people do to each other. Every experience of life makes someone cherish life more. It's not my right to end someone else's experience of life.
And it is also not your right to dictate to others what you think is 'right' if you have no logical reasons.
And, even using your 'its not my right to end someone elses experience of life'... no evidence exists that the fetus has an 'experience of life'.... not that it matters anyway.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Quote:
I know what people do to each other. Every experience of life makes someone cherish life more.
Since you admit to being "anti-social" how would you know of what people do to each other and someone elses experience of life?
Quote: So the fetus is now a sentient creature capable of knowing?
No I wrote that if you had been aborted you would not have any way of knowing you were being aborted.
Quote: It's not my right to end someone else's experience of life.
We are not speaking of your rights. By the way do you eat meat? Eggs? Fish? Why are you inteferring with another creatures experience of life?
I know what people do to each other. Every experience of life makes someone cherish life more.
Since you admit to being "anti-social" how would you know of what people do to each other and someone elses experience of life?
Quote: So the fetus is now a sentient creature capable of knowing?
No I wrote that if you had been aborted you would not have any way of knowing you were being aborted.
Quote: It's not my right to end someone else's experience of life.
We are not speaking of your rights. By the way do you eat meat? Eggs? Fish? Why are you inteferring with another creatures experience of life?
Well I do occasionally have conversations with people. I used to know a woman who was pregnant and divorced by her husband because of money yet still had the baby. Her entire life is now her cute baby. I declined her invitation(joke I hope) to marry her. I guses that's where the anti-social aspects come in
You are probably aware that you could apply this argument to me, to you and to every adult human being. All your doing is showing us the dangers of not having objective morals. Of course the food we eat are very different in potential of human being. Usually I try not to kill animals except for food though.
Well I do occasionally have conversations with people. I used to know a woman who was pregnant and divorced by her husband because of money yet still had the baby. Her entire life is now her cute baby.
You are probably aware that you could apply this argument to me, to you and to every adult human being. All your doing is showing us the dangers of not having objective morals. Of course the food we eat are very different in potential of human being. Usually I try not to kill animals except for food though.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Quote:Well I do occasionally have conversations with people. I used to know a woman who was pregnant and divorced by her husband because of money yet still had the baby. Her entire life is now her cute baby. I declined her invitation(joke I hope) to marry her. I guses that's where the anti-social aspects come in
We are not discussing those who have chosen to keep their babies we are speaking of those who chose not to. I asked you how much contact you have had with women who have chosen to abort. Not all women who are getting divorced will choose abortion. Like I told you before there are married women who with their partner have chosen to abort.
Quote:
You are probably aware that you could apply this argument to me, to you and to every adult human being. All your doing is showing us the dangers of not having objective morals. Of course the food we eat are very different in potential of human being. Usually I try not to kill animals except for food though.
It was your point that people are denying creatures of an experience of life, your food source was also once alive. No one can make an objective moral judgement...all moral judgements are based on subjective reasoning, knowledge and experience.
We are not discussing those who have chosen to keep their babies we are speaking of those who chose not to. I asked you how much contact you have had with women who have chosen to abort. Not all women who are getting divorced will choose abortion. Like I told you before there are married women who with their partner have chosen to abort.
Quote:
You are probably aware that you could apply this argument to me, to you and to every adult human being. All your doing is showing us the dangers of not having objective morals. Of course the food we eat are very different in potential of human being. Usually I try not to kill animals except for food though.
It was your point that people are denying creatures of an experience of life, your food source was also once alive. No one can make an objective moral judgement...all moral judgements are based on subjective reasoning, knowledge and experience.
I don't know anyone but I don't think it's the type of thing that someone would share.
From context, I meant human life. At some point with any moral scheme there's some amount of illogic involved. This illogic is either construed to God or to someone else. So not having conclusive proof that murder or abortion is wrong does not mean that we should throw out our morals. My gut reaction is that the fetus is human and should be protected.
Let's say that someone created a time machine and could go back into the past. Is it true that if he kills you right now, he would be charged with murder but if he kills you by causing your mother to miscarriage, it's not murder? I think the end result is the same and that's why you have to take a step back. Our morals are based upon the consequences of our actions and if the consequences are the same, shouldn't the judgement be the same? Of course no one has a time machine but it does not follow that aren't a person inside of the womb but are a person outside of the womb. There's no sudden developments from a fetus within the womb to a baby just pulled out of the womb. Basically your differentiating between a person and non-person just by the umbilical cord and that does not make too much sense.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Quote:There's no sudden developments from a fetus within the womb to a baby just pulled out of the womb. Basically your differentiating between a person and non-person just by the umbilical cord and that does not make too much sense.
Yes it does Okinrus. The fetus is inside of the mother, it is a part of the mother, it belongs to the mothers body, it does not exist apart from her, it is not viable without her. This all changes of course once it is born and becomes a separate living entity.
As for the Time-Machine: If the mother had miscarried then the potential for that person to be born would no longer exist and his life would not be in the context of the future. He would have failed to exist and that creates a different future.
Yes it does Okinrus. The fetus is inside of the mother, it is a part of the mother, it belongs to the mothers body, it does not exist apart from her, it is not viable without her. This all changes of course once it is born and becomes a separate living entity.
As for the Time-Machine: If the mother had miscarried then the potential for that person to be born would no longer exist and his life would not be in the context of the future. He would have failed to exist and that creates a different future.
The time travler would still exist, however, the person whom he kills within the womb will not. There should be no paradox unless if the time travler screws up the past enough to mess up him going back into the past.
Many babies need medical attention right after or before birth. If these babies rely physically on the doctors then can the doctors kill?
This is not true. There are times when the mother dies but it is possible to save the baby. It is also possible to give an unborn child the inheritance rights etc. So if an unborn child can have these rights why not give them the right to live. A women who commits abortion makes a deliberate effort to end the life of someone who would naturally live. Therefore it should really be the fetus' choice to live.
I think this will change as medical technology progressess.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Quote:Many babies need medical attention right after or before birth. If these babies rely physically on the doctors then can the doctors kill?
What an absurd example...just as absurd as your time traveling. A fetus is dependent on the mothers body itself. Her body and that of the child are one.
Quote:This is not true. There are times when the mother dies but it is possible to save the baby. It is also possible to give an unborn child the inheritance rights etc. So if an unborn child can have these rights why not give them the right to live. A women who commits abortion makes a deliberate effort to end the life of someone who would naturally live. Therefore it should really be the fetus' choice to live.
How can the fetus have a choice Okinrus? You say a women who commit abortion is deliberately making an effort to end the life...well at least you seem to understand that point. This IS the point of abortion Okinrus. If the mother is dying within the first few months of fetus growth the fetus cannot be saved Okinrus. Most of these cases you mentioned happen during childbirth itself (if anyone can come up with circumstances where this isnt true please let me know). Remember Okinrus women normally have abortions within the first two months. Inheritance rights are issued to babies who are intended to be born...why would a woman who intends to abort issue inheritance rights?
Quote:I think this will change as medical technology progressess.
That will still have no bearing on women who want an abortion.
What an absurd example...just as absurd as your time traveling. A fetus is dependent on the mothers body itself. Her body and that of the child are one.
Quote:This is not true. There are times when the mother dies but it is possible to save the baby. It is also possible to give an unborn child the inheritance rights etc. So if an unborn child can have these rights why not give them the right to live. A women who commits abortion makes a deliberate effort to end the life of someone who would naturally live. Therefore it should really be the fetus' choice to live.
How can the fetus have a choice Okinrus? You say a women who commit abortion is deliberately making an effort to end the life...well at least you seem to understand that point. This IS the point of abortion Okinrus. If the mother is dying within the first few months of fetus growth the fetus cannot be saved Okinrus. Most of these cases you mentioned happen during childbirth itself (if anyone can come up with circumstances where this isnt true please let me know). Remember Okinrus women normally have abortions within the first two months. Inheritance rights are issued to babies who are intended to be born...why would a woman who intends to abort issue inheritance rights?
Quote:I think this will change as medical technology progressess.
That will still have no bearing on women who want an abortion.
For just about every flesh of your body you feel. You feel when acid is poured onto you and you feel when skin is punctured. However the mother of an aborted fetus does not feel what happens to her unborn child. Therefore her flesh is different from that of the unborn.
Vacuously true.
What's the difference? If a doctor can induce childbirth at 8 months for mother A and then he kills the baby, it's murder but if mother A decides to just have an abortion, it's not. I think when the mother dies the doctors may be able to do a c-section to save the child.
I don't think you can give your inheritance away to a rock, table or chair.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Quote:
What's the difference? If a doctor can induce childbirth at 8 months for mother A and then he kills the baby, it's murder but if mother A decides to just have an abortion, it's not. I think when the mother dies the doctors may be able to do a c-section to save the child.
Okinrus do you even remember your own statements? Go back and Read! You attempted to point out that a fetus can be saved when the mother's life is at risk. I have pointed out to you that this normally happens DURING CHILDBIRTH or when the baby is so very far along. Most fetuses are only seven inches long at the time of abortion and sooooo could not be saved if the mother died. You are a dolt and responded with round the bend nonsense I have had it with you.
What's the difference? If a doctor can induce childbirth at 8 months for mother A and then he kills the baby, it's murder but if mother A decides to just have an abortion, it's not. I think when the mother dies the doctors may be able to do a c-section to save the child.
Okinrus do you even remember your own statements? Go back and Read! You attempted to point out that a fetus can be saved when the mother's life is at risk. I have pointed out to you that this normally happens DURING CHILDBIRTH or when the baby is so very far along. Most fetuses are only seven inches long at the time of abortion and sooooo could not be saved if the mother died. You are a dolt and responded with round the bend nonsense I have had it with you.
http://www.aboutabortions.com/EmbFetal.htm
By 23 weeks of gestation, the fetus can live in an incubator
By 18 weeks, the finger prints are complete, you may distinguish the baby from another by taking his/her finger print.
how can we treat such a life like trash to be killed at our whims? what kind of message are we sending to the vulnerable? I guess no mercy for those that can't take care of themselves.
By 23 weeks of gestation, the fetus can live in an incubator
By 18 weeks, the finger prints are complete, you may distinguish the baby from another by taking his/her finger print.
how can we treat such a life like trash to be killed at our whims? what kind of message are we sending to the vulnerable? I guess no mercy for those that can't take care of themselves.
Mrs.Lucysnow
Valued Senior Member
Flores we are not speaking of a fetus of 18 or 23 weeks. Abortions typically take place anywhere between six to eight weeks. Abortions of a three month old fetus is much more complex, more expensive and requires a different procedure to that of suction. Most women don't wait that long...especially when they are sure of their decision.
As for the rest of your comment it has all been covered in the former posts. This discussion isn't worse than beating a dead horse its dragging it about with a pick up.
I understand you are against abortion, find it morally wrong and would not have one yourself. Good, fine, commendable. Just don't interfere with what happens in another woman's womb.
As for the rest of your comment it has all been covered in the former posts. This discussion isn't worse than beating a dead horse its dragging it about with a pick up.
I understand you are against abortion, find it morally wrong and would not have one yourself. Good, fine, commendable. Just don't interfere with what happens in another woman's womb.
Last edited:
I agree, we are speaking of a few minority, and thus this blow out discussion is not as important and unworthy of politicization as people try to make of it.
Well, I just wish that those who support the woman's choice stand would show more respect for the life of the fetus and don't show utter selfishness...It hurts a good cause....Supporting women's choice is a noble cause that should not be used to serve other agendas like the liberal sexual agenda....likewise, preserving life is a great cause that should not be used to undermine women's freedom....A medium balance is much needed and it goes hand in hand with freeing the women and empowering them to make the right decision. A woman can choose to keep her baby and that's still a choice that serves your agenda, so why do we always justify abortion by speaking nonsense like it's not a life, or it has no feeling, ect....Can't we promote the choice stand and life stand at the same time, can't we choose and be respectfull at the same time.?
I'm not againest early term abortion. Six weeks, max 8 weeks. As you said earlier, many miscarriages happen during that time anyways. When I was in college, they offered the "oh shit pill", you take it immediately after or the morning following unprotected sex. I have no problem with that. I'm totally againest late term abortion.
shrubby pegasus
Registered Senior Member
what is this mysterious, terrifying "liberal sexual agenda?"