Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Life cycle ... Just like ... infant, toddler, adolescent, adult, elderly ... Maybe infants or elderly will be declared as 'clumps' of cells and not human next.
It would be nice if people could stick to defined words rather than making up their own self serving words, phrases and definitions.
No one said the embryo, zygote or foetus is not human.
Sheesh.
Regardless, humans do set out as clumps of cells. Those clumps of cells have a long way to go through the life cycle before they’re born as babies. A lot won’t make it. Many women experience spontaneous abortion. Many don’t even know it.
There are differing emotional attachments to the early stages of development, often dependent on the intent of the parent.
If you insist on equating an embryo or feotus with a breathing baby, then I would assume you are just as strenuously against the practice of IVF, where people freeze and store their babies, destroying the ones that aren’t needed.
It does matter because abortion advocates insist that a human embryo, fetus, etc., isn't a human life. They have to eschew science to rationalize advocating killing it.
Then I assume you, too, are just as strenuously against IVF. A practice which routinely destroys embryos.
No one said the embryo, zygote or foetus is not human.
Sheesh.
Regardless, humans do set out as clumps of cells. Those clumps of cells have a long way to go through the life cycle before they’re born as babies. A lot won’t make it. Many women experience spontaneous abortion. Many don’t even know it.
There are different emotional attachments to the early stages of development, often dependent on the intent of the parent.
If you insist on equating an embryo or feotus with a breathing baby, then I would assume you are just as strenuously against the practice of IVF, where people freeze and store their babies, destroying the ones that aren’t needed.
What about those babies?
You are a clump of cells right now. Do you disagree with that statement? If so please explain.
Many people experience spontaneous death, too. It happens. A lot of people die every day.
Re IVF: My views are consistent. If you'd like to discuss IVF, I'd suggest starting another thread so as not to derail this thread.
A baby in the womb is still a baby. He or she is a human being. Just like a toddler, adolescent, adult or the elderly. Are you in favor of killing THEM just because you feel like it or because you think that they are sick or deformed in some way?
You are a clump of cells right now. Do you disagree with that statement? If so please explain.
Many people experience spontaneous death, too. It happens. A lot of people die every day.
Re IVF: My views are consistent. If you'd like to discuss IVF, I'd suggest starting another thread so as not to derail this thread.
A baby in the womb is still a baby. He or she is a human being. Just like a toddler, adolescent, adult or the elderly. Are you in favor of killing THEM just because you feel like it or because you think that they are sick or deformed in some way?
Yes we are all clumps of cells. But we are sentient clumps of cells, who are breathing, with a brain.
We kill people once they no longer have a brain, even if we can keep them technically alive. People that no longer have brain activity are taken off life support, because without a brain you may be human, but to what end?
Before a brain is formed and active, in my opinion, which may obviously not be yours, you are not killing a baby, you’re terminating a pregnancy, the potential of a baby. It’s not a baby. Neither are embryos in a freezer, a baby. A clump of cells attached to the wall of the uterus, is not a baby.
No I wouldn’t kill anyone once they’re born. breathing and sentient. If they became an individual with no brain activity, then I would very likely consider it appropriate. If they were dying in agony and asked to be killed, to assist in their dying, I might consider it.
So where do you stand on embryos, those clumps of cells who are routinely destroyed when not wanted? You were strenuously defending the life cycle, equating all preborn humans with babies.
Yes we are all clumps of cells. But we are sentient clumps of cells, who are breathing, with a brain.
We kill people once they no longer have a brain, even if we can keep them technically alive. People that no longer have brain activity are taken off life support, because without a brain you may be human, but to what end?
Before a brain is formed and active, in my opinion, which may obviously not be yours, you are not killing a baby, you’re terminating a pregnancy, the potential of a baby. It’s not a baby. Neither are embryos in a freezer, a baby. A clump of cells attached to the wall of the uterus, is not a baby.
No I wouldn’t kill anyone once they’re born. breathing and sentient. If they became an individual with no brain activity, then I would very likely consider it appropriate. If they were dying in agony and asked to be killed, to assist in their dying, I might consider it.
So where do you stand on embryos, those clumps of cells who are routinely destroyed when not wanted? You were strenuously defending the life cycle, equating all preborn humans with babies.
Are they babies or not?
You have not defined what 'clump of cells' is. Except that "it's not a baby."
Which is where your "logic" falls off the rails. There is no such thing as 'potential life.' It's an idiotic phrase used by pro abortioners to pretend babies are not babies. If a baby was potential life? The baby would not be growing or developing. The baby would remain in one state forever in the womb.
You cannot kill a life that does not exist. If there were no baby? There would be no need for abortion.
And I've answered your question re IVF. You don't like my answer, so you ask again. Move on and start another thread instead of derailing this one.
It does matter because abortion advocates insist that a human embryo, fetus, etc., isn't a human life. They have to eschew science to rationalize advocating killing it.
I will not comment on when science says a fetus is a human life. I don't know much about that specific definition. I may have said I did. I'm no longer as confident about that.
Regardless of that though...I think my previous comment stands: Why is it relevant whether or not it's a human life to you? Do you think that there is something special about human life? I ask because I'd argue that we engage in a lot more casual harm towards nonhumans than we do towards fetuses.
If you think there is something special about just being human, regardless of what traits the human has...I'd be curious to know what about just being human you think makes humans special. (I don't think humans are special. I can think humans can be special one they develop certain traits, but not that they're inherently special).
If you don't think there's anything special about being human...are you an incredibly vocal animal rights activist? Are you rabidly anti-factory farming? If not, why so much focus on the problems related to abortion? Furthermore, even in that case, I think if you're concerned about ALL abortion you'd have to go beyond being a vegan to be consistent with your views. You'd probably have to be of the Jainism religion or have some similar philosophy and be deeply concerned about the lives of insects too.
I've described fetuses as being "among the most animalistic of animals, despite technically being human." I'd say that even though science is on the side of saying fetuses are human, they experience the world like animals do...so describing them as if they're animals would, I'd argue, put people in the frame of mind to perceive them the closest to what they are.
I will not comment on when science says a fetus is a human life. I don't know much about that specific definition. I may have said I did. I'm no longer as confident about that.
Regardless of that though...I think my previous comment stands: Why is it relevant whether or not it's a human life to you? Do you think that there is something special about human life? I ask because I'd argue that we engage in a lot more casual harm towards nonhumans than we do towards fetuses.
If you think there is something special about just being human, regardless of what traits the human has...I'd be curious to know what about just being human you think makes humans special. (I don't think humans are special. I can think humans can be special one they develop certain traits, but not that they're inherently special).
If you don't think there's anything special about being human...are you an incredibly vocal animal rights activist? Are you rabidly anti-factory farming? If not, why so much focus on the problems related to abortion? Furthermore, even in that case, I think if you're concerned about ALL abortion you'd have to go beyond being a vegan to be consistent with your views. You'd probably have to be of the Jainism religion or have some similar philosophy and be deeply concerned about the lives of insects too.
I've described fetuses as being "among the most animalistic of animals, despite technically being human." I'd say that even though science is on the side of saying fetuses are human, they experience the world like animals do...so describing them as if they're animals would, I'd argue, put people in the frame of mind to perceive them the closest to what they are.
As this thread is about human abortions, all of your off-topic irrelevant rambling is moot.
Yet they never explain WHAT they believe the baby is.
It's just 'not a baby.'
And then they walk away from the argument.
I think they frequently explain what a baby is. To them, a baby is what comes after birth. A fetus comes before birth. That also follows the scientific terms for things...noting that your stated latin definition of "fetus" means that exact same thing.
However, I do think a lot of pro-choicers would do well to think more about why they've made that divide.
I think such people typically just think, "We have to invent some type of divide or else there's no stopping point and we'll be euthanizing adults."
I don't think this is a terrible stopping point. The difference is in whether or not it's part of the woman's body anymore...so the argument goes that unless we consider it okay for the government to engage in very invasive things to us, we should be fine with all abortion, legally speaking.
I've heard another argument that goes, "Imagine that someone hooked someone up to your kidneys to survive for 9 months. They'll die if removed. Should you be legally obligated to keep them attached to your kidneys?"
I think that's a somewhat bad argument because I would be perfectly fine with the law mandating that you keep such a person connected to your kidneys for that temporary period of time...but that said, I could understand how a sufficiently small-government-wanting type of person would want us to have the legal option of disconnecting them from our kidneys. Also, as I've been repeating all over this forum...I'd say a self-aware person has a lot more to lose from death than a fetus.
I think a better argument would be that, that's how things work in most ways, but that euthanization of infants is still legal up to a year after birth if a strong argument could be made that it would benefit the baby.
No one said the embryo, zygote or foetus is not human.
Sheesh.
Regardless, humans do set out as clumps of cells. Those clumps of cells have a long way to go through the life cycle before they’re born as babies. A lot won’t make it. Many women experience spontaneous abortion. Many don’t even know it.
There are differing emotional attachments to the early stages of development, often dependent on the intent of the parent.
If you insist on equating an embryo or feotus with a breathing baby, then I would assume you are just as strenuously against the practice of IVF, where people freeze and store their babies, destroying the ones that aren’t needed.
What about those babies?
another good post
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
