Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Bizarre and Very Sad; Warning: Disturbing
Topic Started: Nov 24 2004, 11:07 AM (555 Views)
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
24thcenstfan
Nov 27 2004, 03:06 PM
ANOVA
Nov 27 2004, 10:39 AM
Quote:
 
I would say the level of development of the human being has something to do with supporting abortion and being against killing a full grown person.


So toddlers and adolescentes arefair game?

Can you be anymore ridiculous? The answer is No.

Quote:
 
What abount mental developement? We can kill all the emotionally challenged.

Again with the silly questions. The answer is No...in regards to those that have been born (no longer inside the mother's womb).

I do not think these questions are ridicules or silly. If we are going to use words like full grown person to explain one killing away and not another, then toddlers and adolescents do not fall under that category, and if you want to be strict about it nether some mentally deficient people.



Quote:
 
These are all very generalized opinions. I would have to look at each case and set of circumstances to determine if it were killing vs. murder. 
But society cant do that it would take up to much time and money to ponder each and every case. There for we need to put in place guidelines. Set a date when life begins and call it murder after that point. We need real legislation on this issue not the anything goes fest we have had thus far. I know it wont be easy, I know a lot of people will be upset but it must be done. We can no longer leave it open to interpretation because if we do, we leave the door open for any one to interpret it in a way that is defiantly not intended.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Dandandat
Nov 27 2004, 04:05 PM
24thcenstfan
Nov 27 2004, 03:06 PM
ANOVA
Nov 27 2004, 10:39 AM
Quote:
 
I would say the level of development of the human being has something to do with supporting abortion and being against killing a full grown person.


So toddlers and adolescentes arefair game?

Can you be anymore ridiculous? The answer is No.

Quote:
 
What abount mental developement? We can kill all the emotionally challenged.

Again with the silly questions. The answer is No...in regards to those that have been born (no longer inside the mother's womb).

I do not think these questions are ridicules or silly. If we are going to use words like full grown person to explain one killing away and not another, then toddlers and adolescents do not fall under that category, and if you want to be strict about it nether some mentally deficient people.

That phrase was intended to distinguish between the unborn and someone who was being put to death after being sentenced in a court of law. Those who have been put to death via the death penalty are usually adults (a full grown person). That is why I did not mention any other stage of human development. I can’t think of any children, adolescents, minors who have been put to death via the death penalty. Not that there haven't been any children put to death (I can't be positive). However, if it happened it was indeed a rare occurrence.

My sentence made sense in context of my original reply (which was discussing abortion vs. the death penalty). Once ANOVA took my sentence out of its original reply it lost its context. His questions therefore became ridiculous and silly in my opinion. Even in context, his questions would have the same result. In addition, the fact that he would even dare to ask me (really insinuate) if I would find it acceptable to kill adolescents, toddlers or the emotionally challenged is downright insulting. I stand by my assessment of his questions.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
Quote:
 
Children are blessings. They are to be loved and protected.

Fire,

Agreed. And IMO, this includes whether they have been born or not. :)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ANOVA
Vice Admiral
24:

You made a statement and I took it to its logical conclusion.

What happens at instant the first trimester ends that makes abortion less acceptable?

I'm looking for some distinct developmental change you can point to and say "human" and point to another unborn and say "not human".

You can't point and say alive and not alive since life is a continium and the tissue is living even if you fail to recognize it as human.

At what point can you differentiate between human and not human?

Quote:
 
I would say the level of development of the human being has something to do with supporting abortion and being against killing a full grown person.


Even in context, what level of development and why?

The only other reading I could give that statement is that you believe that peoeples beleifs about the abortion and the death penalty are based on their individual level of developement. If this is true, I doubt you could give me a graduated scale an state why such a scale is so.


ANOVA
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
ANOVA
Nov 28 2004, 04:30 PM
At what point can you differentiate between human and not human?

I don’t differentiate between human and non-human when thinking about the unborn and the born. Human (as a species) is a general term I use to describe the being from conception to death. If you go back and read my quote you orignally commented on:

"I would say the level of development of the human being has something to do with supporting abortion and being against killing a full grown person."

You will see that I was clearly referring to the level of development of the human being. Which as I further explained above includes all levels of development (before and after birth). My focus was on the level of development of the human being, not human vs. non-human.

Quote:
 
What happens at instant the first trimester ends that makes abortion less acceptable?

As far as me finding it acceptable to have an abortion no later than the first trimester...

As much as I understand human development, it isn't until almost the end of the first trimester that the life form growing inside of the mother even begins to resemble a baby. It isn’t until eleven or twelve weeks that the fetus even shows signs of developing major organs and other body parts.

If a woman is going to end her pregnancy, then I would be more comfortable if she did so no later than when the embryo is making the transition from embryo to fetus (toward the end of the first trimester). When the life form growing inside of the mother is on the verge of making what I consider a pivotal transition in its development.

I am afraid that is as much as I will offer you on my reasons for finding abortion acceptable and at what stage of development.

Quote:
 
The only other reading I could give that statement is that you believe that peoeples beleifs about the abortion and the death penalty are based on their individual level of developement. If this is true, I doubt you could give me a graduated scale an state why such a scale is so.


No, I am strictly referring to how each person views the stages of development of the life form growing inside of the mother (how that affects a person’s opinion on abortion) vs. how a person would view another person (having already been born) being killed via the death penalty. Not the stage of development of the individual person who is forming the opinion on abortion or the death penalty.

In other words, more importance might be assigned to the preservation of the life of a man on death row vs. the preservation of the life of an embryo. Hence a pro-abortion and an anti-death penalty stance. This is only speculation...what I was doing in my original reply.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
I have one question about your mindset. You say that after the first trimester the fetus begins to resemble a human being and that is why you consider abortion acceptable before then. However, that first trimester fetus IS going to turn into a human. It will not turn into a dog, horse, platypus, or lobster. It is a human fetus and will develop as such. Are you basing your limits on abortion on pure aesthetic reasons?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
doctortobe
Nov 28 2004, 11:57 PM
I have one question about your mindset.  You say that after the first trimester the fetus begins to resemble a human being and that is why you consider abortion acceptable before then.  However, that first trimester fetus IS going to turn into a human.  It will not turn into a dog, horse, platypus, or lobster.  It is a human fetus and will develop as such.  Are you basing your limits on abortion on pure aesthetic reasons?

No. Please reread both paragraphs in that section of my reply. It isn’t simply about what the life form looks like (when it starts to look like a baby). It is about its developmental stage (first signs of organ development, etc.). That was the main point.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
But is there any doubt that the fetus would eventually develop into a human?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
doctortobe
Nov 29 2004, 12:38 AM
But is there any doubt that the fetus would eventually develop into a human?

No, there is no doubt that the fetus will develop into what you are referring to as a human being (e.g. you, me, everyone else who is eventually born (?)). However, I consider the life form a human being (as a species) from conception. I guess it depends on how you look at it.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
Then, if the lifeform IS indeed a human being from conception, and murder is the taking of human life without a VERY reasonable justification, then is it not murder to kill a fetus at ANY stage unless such a justification exists (i.e. A woman not wanting the pregnancy is not justification).
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
doctortobe
Nov 29 2004, 01:12 AM
Then, if the lifeform IS indeed a human being from conception, and murder is the taking of human life without a VERY reasonable justification, then is it not murder to kill a fetus at ANY stage unless such a justification exists (i.e. A woman not wanting the pregnancy is not justification).

No. In my opinion, the label of murder cannot be applied comprehensively in the manner in which you are trying to do (including women who choose to abort the embryo/fetus within the legal limit). There is a difference between saying the embryo or fetus is human in origin (i.e. my general definition of human being is a general term used to point out what kind of species the life form is), and saying the embryo or fetus is already a human being (what you believe the fetus will eventually develop into). The embryo/fetus certainly isn't a goat in origin (it can easily be dertermined that it was the product of human sperm and egg). I do believe there is a distinction.

Up until the end of the first trimester (my own personal cut off point...there is still the legal cut off point for having an abortion to take into consideration), there is no way (or very little chance) you will be able to convince me that the embryo/fetus is a human being by your definition, should be subject to the same laws as you and I would be or in general should covered under the general definition of murder:

Main Entry: 1mur·der
Pronunciation: 'm&r-d&r
Function: noun
Etymology: partly from Middle English murther, from Old English morthor; partly from Middle English murdre, from Old French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English morthor; akin to Old High German mord murder, Latin mort-, mors death, mori to die, mortuus dead, Greek brotos mortal
1 : the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought


or

Main Entry: 2murder
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): mur·dered; mur·der·ing /'m&r-d(&-)ri[ng]/
transitive senses
1 : to kill (a human being) unlawfully and with premeditated malice



Edit: Cases where one person takes the life of the embryo/fetus without the mother's permission before the legal abortion period ends, and cases when someone (including the mother) takes the life of the fetus after the time period when abortion is no longer legal, have to be looked at in a different light when it comes to labeling the ending of the lifeform in side the mother.

In other words, if a husband purposfully poisons the mother in an attempt to make her lose "the baby" (kill the fetus) then legal action in some form should be taken. Or for example, in the Lacy Peterson case. The husband was charged with Lacy's murder and that of the unborn baby. It depends on the circumstances.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ANOVA
Vice Admiral
Quote:
 
When the life form growing inside of the mother is on the verge of making what I consider a pivotal transition in its development.


I find it interesting that you admit that a human life begins at conception and then dehuminize it by referring to it as "lifeform".

More interesting is the ability to strip a human life of its basic right to exist. Do you not see a slippery slope.

Argument #1
The unborn are not human lives.
Only human lives have the right to exist
Therefore the unborn do not have the right ot exist.

I disagree with the premise but not the logic.

Arugment #2
The unborn are human lives.
Only human lives have the right to exist
Therefore the unborn have the right to exist.

I agree with the premise and conclusion (though this is a simplified form of the argument)

Your argument
The unborn are human lives.
Arbitrary developmental demarcation can be used to strip the unborn of human rights.
Therefore the unborns right to exist is arbitrary.


So, why not other forms of development. Near term or partial birth abortion are no less horrendous then what that women did to her child yet it is supportable under your logic.

Human life and human development is a continium. Desrtuction of an innocent life at any stage is murder regarless of wether or not the state or the doctors recognise it as such.

Yor linguistic acrobatics result in the moralization of the murder of Jews by the Nazis. Since the Nazis made the death camp part of their law. The Holocaust was not (by your definition) murder.

I find legal moralism a poor out. Legality does not equate to morality.


ANOVA
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
ANOVA, I have already clearly stated my position on abortion and up to what stage of development I find abortion acceptable. In addition, from the beginning I have stated that the level of human development is only one aspect of why I support abortion. Which includes biological, moral and legal aspects of abortion. You and I apparently disagree on all three levels.

However, that does not mean my position equates to the “moralization of the murder of Jews by the Nazis. Since the Nazis made the death camp part of their law.”

I see no need to continue with this conversation when you will, in my assessment, never be able to understand or accept my point of view on human development, abortion and the legal system (or accept any of my argument as legitimate). You will instead further equate my views to the evil that was Nazism.


I therefore am bowing out of this conversation on abortion.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
24,

Although I do not agree with your position, let me say that you have stated it (and your convictions) as well as I've ever seen it/them stated (seriously). :)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus