$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', '
')
How many abortions have been performed in the past 4 years?
How many hundreds of billions?
PeakOil is You
THE Topic of Abortion Thread (merged)
Re: Abortion Question?
by CrudeAwakening » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 21:19:46
Zero hundreds of billions. Only about ten billion people have ever walked the earth. Lets keep things in perspective.
-
CrudeAwakening - Tar Sands
- Posts: 834
- Joined: Tue 28 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Abortion Question?
by RonMN » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 21:46:56
Oh gee...a slight exageration is beyond your persprctive?
Maybe we should talk about the "DOZENS" of embryos that will never see the light of day...
Maybe we should discuss how "they" were never a part of the human race to begin with? Kinda like me...the filthy tobacco smoker.
WHEN does it become real to you people??? when it's you?
Globald response: It'll "NEVER" become me!
Maybe we should talk about the "DOZENS" of embryos that will never see the light of day...
Maybe we should discuss how "they" were never a part of the human race to begin with? Kinda like me...the filthy tobacco smoker.
WHEN does it become real to you people??? when it's you?
Globald response: It'll "NEVER" become me!
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.
-
RonMN - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2628
- Joined: Fri 18 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Abortion Question?
by RonMN » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 22:10:50
There is nothing to gain...but lives!
Listen yee all:
They came for the jews...but I'm not jewish, I didn't want to get involved.
Then they came for the blacks, I'm not black...I didn't want to get involved.
They came for the gays, but I'm not gay...I didn't want to get invloved...
They came for me...and there was nobody to help...
Listen/Learn/Act!
Listen yee all:
They came for the jews...but I'm not jewish, I didn't want to get involved.
Then they came for the blacks, I'm not black...I didn't want to get involved.
They came for the gays, but I'm not gay...I didn't want to get invloved...
They came for me...and there was nobody to help...
Listen/Learn/Act!
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.
-
RonMN - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2628
- Joined: Fri 18 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Abortion Question?
by smallpoxgirl » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 22:21:58
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', 'W')e all began life as a fetus (which is latin for "little one")...I don't believe there can be any debate on this fact.
Of course there can. First of life doesn't begin with a fetus. Life begins with a sperm and an egg. By your logic, every time a woman lets a month go by without having sex, she is murdering her egg. Even the procreative act would, by your accounting result in a holocaust of millions of dead sperm. Extinguishing life is nothing unique. Every time you wash your hands, millions of little bacterial lives are snuffed out. The more important issue is, when does that life become invested with personhood. It is personhood which we protect with laws. No one would question your right to snuff out a billion lives by washing your hands. Most people would agree that you shouldn't be put on trial for mass murder if you, for example, were to have a wet dream. This is despite the fact that you killed killed several million living beings. Those sperm are even human, so it's several million human lives that you snuffed out.
The difference between you and a sperm is personhood. Being a person is the status that says in a moral and legal sense that it's not ok to kill you without due process. There are, however, two conflicting definitions of personhood in common use.
The first definition looks at it from the perspective that the basic goal is to preserve the integrity of the human community. Anyone who is able to interact with us forms part of that community, and is therefore a person and subject to full protection. People in this camp tend to view a sperm or an embryo as not able to interact with the community and therefore not invested with personhood. After quickening, they might look at a fetus as interacting with us in some limited fashion, and might see it as starting to develop personhood. This, in fact was the teaching of the Catholic Church until the mid-1800's: A fetus was given a soul at quickening and abortion before quickening was acceptable because the fetus didn't have a soul. Another extensions of the interaction model of personhood would be end of life issues. Many people would look, for example, at Terry Shaivo and say "If I ever get to the point where I am unable to interact with the world around me or people around me, then that wouldn't be a life worth living and I would want to die." Essentially once you loose that ability to interact, you cease to be a person, and there is no further moral imperative to medically extend your life. Another implication of the interaction model is animal rights. A lot of people have pets with whom they interact extensively and who form part of their community. Thus a lot of people extend some measure of surrogate personhood to companion animals. We therefore have laws making it a criminal offense to torture or neglect a dog.
The alternate definition derives from the Genesis edict to "multiply and subdue the earth." It see the basic goal as expanding the human community to the largest number of individuals possible. Despite it's religious origins, it takes a very strictly biological view of personhood, defining it as anything that is or ever might be a human individual. Characteristic of this view point would be admonitions against contraception, masturbation, and non-procreative sex. This group is also antagonistic to such things as brain death laws and palliative care preferring aggressive medical care to prolong life even at the expense of quality of life or the wishes of the person. This group tends to have little regard for non-human life viewing it as unrelated to the ultimate goal of increasing the number of humans.
It probably won't surprise anyone that I am more in the relationship camp. As such, I don't think that a sperm possess personhood, nor do I think it deserves legal protection. The distinction of exactly when to grant personhood is an abstract question. To my way of thinking, full personhood should be granted at birth when the fetus becomes part of the community. I don't have any particular objection to the laws conveying partial personhood at viability(i.e. 24 weeks) though I do think it is going overboard when judges order women to have pre-natal care because of the fetus' rights.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
-
smallpoxgirl - Expert
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Re: Abortion Question?
by RonMN » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 22:39:19
If I may debate with you Smallpoxgirl...you said:
By your logic, every time a woman lets a month go by without having sex, she is murdering her egg...
This is simply not true...I'm talking about the murder of a living "little one" who has a beating heart.
Smalpoxgirl wrote:
Anyone who is able to interact with us forms part of that community, and is therefore a person and subject to full protection.
Intreract with us? so if they can't speak...they have no right to live?
By your logic, every time a woman lets a month go by without having sex, she is murdering her egg...
This is simply not true...I'm talking about the murder of a living "little one" who has a beating heart.
Smalpoxgirl wrote:
Anyone who is able to interact with us forms part of that community, and is therefore a person and subject to full protection.
Intreract with us? so if they can't speak...they have no right to live?
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.
-
RonMN - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2628
- Joined: Fri 18 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: Minnesota
Re: Abortion Question?
by smallpoxgirl » Sun 18 Mar 2007, 22:58:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('RonMN', 'T')his is simply not true...I'm talking about the murder of a living "little one" who has a beating heart.
So your definition of person is "has a beating heart"?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')ntreract with us? so if they can't speak...they have no right to live?
Interaction obviously takes many forms. Hellen Keller was terrifically influential on society. Interaction can mean lots of things: A look, a touch, some shared emotion or knowledge. Like I said, a lot of people feel that sort of interaction with a fetus in the third trimester. It moves in relation to their touch. They read to it, talk to it, etc.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
-
smallpoxgirl - Expert
- Posts: 7258
- Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
a living breathing human...& to think i could have died a lowly un-living "fetus".
