Horror of Abortion!

Post Reply New Topic

No because a sperm hasn't a full set of gametes and isn't activated in to the human life cycle in to which we belong.



Okay, well fortunately I don't care about that at all. All I care about is that it's Human. It's a human being which cannot ask for its own death or vouch for its own life and is in a normal life cycle, therefore we should not expect to kill it.


Good that your arguments don't matter.

THe problem is that it doesn't give the justifications that I give.

By the way I'd like to point out that Joker's arguments I am not associated with.


Then again the clod who compared foetusus to bacteria or are dehumanizing foetuses needs a good wake up call. It's got the full set of DNA. It's in the same life cycle and if you don't do anything it'll have all those lusciously wonderful qualities that you arbitrarily hope will qualify it as not worthy of being protected. It's a damned Human Being!

Human.

Is a Human foetus a Human? Or is it a gazelle foetus? Is a Human Embryo a Human like a Human child is a Human? Or is it just a clump of cells for cloning research like in a lab?

But that even raises more questions. Since the group of cloned cells in the lab is not in a life cycle then it is basically growing tissue. But since Embryos and Foeti are in a natural life cycle they are individuals, not tissues. So a small layer of skin in a petri dish is not deserving of Human rights. But, since a foetus is an individual, then they are deserving of the rights that we give Humans.

why wouldnt my arguments matter?
why dont people follow just a tad logic.
this thread has only shown us just how ignorant people can be when they want.

why dont you try to better your actual understanding of physiology?

You are dehumanizing human beings by thinking they deserve the same rights as fetuses which are , once again, physically unable to have any consciousness, they just cannot be considered human beings

Worse, in fact you are asserting that the blob of meat that does not have a brain wired at all and no consciousness deserves MORE rights than the pregnant woman. You are putting women under a level of rights inferior to many creatures which have brains that are more advanced than a 20 weeks fetus.

Stop dehumanizing people.

If you don't do anything, the fetus will die. Pregnancy requires a lot of maintenance and care. It also requires the willingness of the host.

This :

Also has the full set of DNA. it is not a person. And no matter how would you insist, four cells are not a human being. DNA is not magical nor an accomplishment.


Stop dehumanizing people.

They don't matter because they aren't the arguments for determining Humanity that I consider crucial to being opposed to abortion.

Yes I do wonder why.

Is there going to be an argument to say how I am wrong are are you just gonna say that I am ignorant for no reason.

[quote="Oodain]why dont you try to better your actual understanding of physiology?[/quote] Yeah, thought so.

Why don't you actually show where I was wrong when I mentioned physiology in my arguments before you argue that I was ignorant.

logic dictates that the differntiating factor is consciousness,
it doesnt matter what you think it is,

life is not unique, quite common, bacteria reach this criterion,
dna is not unique, your individual cells die by the millions every day,
brain activity and heartbeat are common in other species far less advanced than a person.
in the end the differentiating factor is consciousness.

if you argue for the potential then why do you get a right to determine what others should want and do?
the pro choice side does not force their opinion in any way, anyone can keep a foetus if they want, kudos to them for doing it.

A human foetus is a human. So it is a Human being. Saying that it isn't a human being is therefore dehumanzing it in order to give it a trait that it doesn't have, that it isn't human.


No I am not. I am giving a human the same rights as any other human. People don't have the right to end a life just because it's inconvenient for them. Nobody has some special right to end it just because the human happens to be in their body. Just like how two parents don't have a right to end their child's life just because they have custody over the child.


Stop it yourself.


Children require a lot of maintenance and care. But not looking after a child is called child abuse, not disposing of an unwanted person. Also a woman isn't a host for anything. For starters a host is for a parasite or a symbiont. And a parasite or symbiont only occur between different species. I doubt that human foeti are different species from human mothers.


DNA isn't magical, but it is defining. There's a good reason why Genetics is important to zoology. Any organism that is at the start of its lifecycle is still the same organism that it is at any other part of its lifecycle. A Human Zygote is a Human like an Adult Human is a Human. If that (dehumanizingly named) clump of cells is developing in to a human being then it's an individual human being and not just a tissue or clump of cells. Ergo it's Human.


Point that argument at yourself. You just put up a picture of a group of cells and have constantly tried to fight the fact that an organism at the start of its lifecycle is not the same organism as at the end of its lifecycle.

Last edited by Gedrene on 17 Oct 2011, 8:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

First: No it isn't.
Second: Foetuses have a consciousness quite a lot of the time. Being born doesn't give you consciousness.
Third: Yes it does matter what I think it is because it's a lot less arbitrary and false than your method.
Fourth: Logic doesn't work that way. Logic isn't reason.


These are all irrelevant to the fact that an individual is an individual and you have no right to end their lives on your behalf just because it's an inconvenience. It's a human at the start of its life cycle. So to your complaints I say 'so what?'


This isn't about potential. This is about fact. A human individual at the start of their life cycle is a human individual. I don't care whether they're beethoven. What I care is that they be treated fairly.


One shouldn't get to choose to end a human life because they want to and somehow see that as 'just the way they want to live'. It's just infanticide in the womb. You're killing a human that hasn't been born yet.

Whilst I am at it fighting these irrelevant and unscientific comments about what is a Human I'll just qualify that I have no problem with aborting a baby in order to preserve the life or sanity of the mother. Why ruin a life to preserve an equally valuable life? No reason.
And also when it comes to rape then I feel the mother has full custody over what to do. Rape is a terrible things whose chief offending characteristic is dominance over another's life. It's heartbreaking and was against any form of planning or indeed forseeable in a conscientious way.

What I have a bone to pick with is people who think they can use abortion as a form of contraception by calling their babies parasites (which is in technical terms false and wrong for more reasons beside) or by saying I am dehumanzing them (by not allowing them to kill a human, which by the way nobody else should get to do for conveience's sake)

That's something I don't agree with either. Repeated abortions can have very detrimental effects. It's a last resort procedure and not a viable form of contraception.

It is. If heartbeat is what makes something a human being, then rats are human being. If DNA makes you a human being then DNA or zygotes are human beings and that would be ridiculous. If shape like human makes you a human being , then Chimpazee fetus would be human beings too.

Human consciousness is what makes something a person and deserving of an undeniable right to live. A 20 weeks fetus is physically unable to have such thing.


No one is denying that late term fetuses may have a consciousness, what is true is that 20 weeks fetuses are certainly unable to have one. So, let's make early abortion legal and late abortion legal when the mother is at risk. Your late fetuses that may have a consciousness will be protected.



Your method is human DNA , it is bull. Zygotes are not people. Embryos without brains are not people. Fetuses without wired sensory organs are not people.


This is a straw-aborting woman argument. No woman out there is happy or eager to get an abortion, save maybe a few ones with mental issues. Abortion is not an easy way out of a solution and I tell you, a mentally capable well-informed woman would rather use contraception and/or the day after pill than just plan to have an abortion.

However, it is not always an option. Contraception is not 100% effective. Rapists exist and sometimes it may be possible that you were planning a pregnancy but some events happened that make you unable to go with it. Abortion as an option (And since it is THEIR BODY, it is a right) should exist. It is the humane, non-misogynistic thing to do.


It is impossible to abort babies.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 17 Oct 2011, 9:07 am, edited 2 times in total.

Finally! Someone who actually gives some depth to their reasoning rather than trying to use straw arguments and remake the boundaries of lanuage by saying who and who isn't human!

"Convenience". A woman is entitled to do whatever she finds most convenient with HER OWN body.

Do you not do that with your own body?

Why the tendency to demonize the idea that people want to do things for their convenience? People do that all the time and freedom means that you should be allowed to look for your own convenience.

Not only that, but since most women (and men) look forward to have children one day. When a woman makes a decision to abort she is likely looking also for the best outcome of her future (and perhaps past) children. If a woman is free to delay pregnancy until she has finished university then her later kids will be more likely to be successful. If a mother of three decides to abort the fourth so that the three have better economic chances, it is also a good idea.




It is dehumanizing to give the same (OR MORE) rights to a non-human thing as you give to human being.

It is a relief then that a fetus without a functioning brain is not a human individual.


And it is legal and a right because it is a last resort procedure.


----
I want exactly the same as you do. I would want there to be less abortions. Want less abortions to happen? Inform people about contraception and make it widely available. Making it illegal would deny people their rights to do what they want with their own bodies. It is also dehumanizing to human beings to give them less rights than thinks that are not people.

How do you dare to call these arguments unscientific?

It is a scientific fact that a fetus has no thalamic connections until the 26-th week. IT is a scientific fact that rats have heat beats and that bacteria are OMG!Alive. It is a scientific fact that zygotes have human DNA and it is also a scientific fact that they are a bunch of cells that have no consciousness. Cows have more complex brain functions than a 20 weeks fetus - another scientific fact.

We are talking about facts here. Human DNA, heartbeat, OMG!Live cannot be valid arguments to call something a human being because there are many things that we do not consider human that have those traits.

They are definitely not irrelevant either. Because we are speaking about removing basics rights from who (I hope) we all agree are human beings - Pregnant women are definitely human beings so before we remove rights from them you HAVE to give better compelling arguments as to why we should do such horrendous thing .

What you do is to put magical properties to human DNA. Magical properties that science has not found to exist. You are the one proposing unscientific arguments in the discussion.

Last edited by Vexcalibur on 17 Oct 2011, 9:27 am, edited 1 time in total.