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.
Oh dear God --- seriously? If you can not spar on this level just say it --- or rather just bypass the argument, being debated.
It is a human being (you said that) that can not live outside the womb (you said that too) by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
If you cant speak facts maybe you should just bypass the arguement.
You said the abortion law. Each state has individual laws or do you mean Roe v Wade?
you claim it states : it does not have a right to life, because it is dependent on another for survival it has no rights, to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Never read that.
So yes seriously, I understand you are emotional about this but dont try passing off your emotional outburst with actual facts.
Your powers of deduction need a lot of work.
The fetus starts developing its own blood cells around three weeks and the circulatory system is developed around seven weeks. The unborn baby does have a different circulatory system and blood supply from the mother.
Oh dear God --- seriously? If you can not spar on this level just say it --- or rather just bypass the argument, being debated.
It is a human being (you said that) that can not live outside the womb (you said that too) by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
If you cant speak facts maybe you should just bypass the arguement.
You said the abortion law. Each state has individual laws or do you mean Roe v Wade?
you claim it states : it does not have a right to life, because it is dependent on another for survival it has no rights, to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Never read that.
So yes seriously, I understand you are emotional about this but dont try passing off your emotional outburst with actual facts.
Your powers of deduction need a lot of work.
" ... to test deductive reasoning to make sure the argument is valid.For example, "All men are mortal. Harold is a man. Therefore, Harold is mortal." For deductive reasoning to be sound, the hypothesis must be correct. It is assumed that the premises, "All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. Therefore, the conclusion is logical and true. In deductive reasoning, if something is true of a class of things in general, it is also true for all members of that class. "
It is a human being (you said that) that can not live outside the womb (you said that too) by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
Not what I asked.
You didnt define its own blood and circulatory system, you just said it had one.
Can a fetus or embryo with "its own blood and circulatory system" live outside the womb. We are talking at 6 weeks or less gestation, not 21 weeks or point of viability (survive without significant morbidity).
I did define it. You just didn't accept it.
I answered your questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
: smack:
It has it's own heartbeat just like you do. You are OK snuffing it out.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,596 posts, read 12,543,921 times
Reputation: 10478
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Yes. Different. Not separate and independent.
Show where the fetuses blood and the mother commingles, other than due to injury or possibly happening during birthing? The blood supply of the unborn baby is separate from the mother.
Quote:
Is that still your criteria for human being.
I never said it was "my criteria". I believe a fetus is human from conception.
What is your criteria for a human being?
" ... to test deductive reasoning to make sure the argument is valid.For example, "All men are mortal. Harold is a man. Therefore, Harold is mortal." For deductive reasoning to be sound, the hypothesis must be correct. It is assumed that the premises, "All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. Therefore, the conclusion is logical and true. In deductive reasoning, if something is true of a class of things in general, it is also true for all members of that class. "
It is a human being (you said that) that can not live outside the womb (you said that too) by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
True or false --- if false, how?
First of all I did not say a fetus was a human being.
So right out of the gate you are wrong.
I did not say it is a human being that can not live outside the womb.
I said to my knowledge an 8 week fetus can not live outside the womb.
There is nothing to deduce there.
And human physiology has nothing to do with government assistance. If you take away a persons food stamps they will not die because of it. They will still survive. And none of that has anything to do with having constitutional rights.
You deduction is more like all men are mortal, Harold is a man therefore Bruce Jenner is a woman.
It has it's own heartbeat just like you do. You are OK snuffing it out.
I asked you to define it in post 34.
I reiterated you had not defined it in post 42
You regurgitated information on placental circulation in post 75.
So I'm not sure why you are commenting on post 42 that you had defined it when you did in post 75.
Anyway I assume your definition is they dont have to be independent of one another to be separate.
That definition would certainly support the fetal homicide laws.
Again with the accusations. I am not debating and never have been on this thread if abortion is right or wrong or acceptable or unacceptable.
Show where the fetuses blood and the mother commingles, other than due to injury or possibly happening during birthing? The blood supply of the unborn baby is separate from the mother.
I never said it was "my criteria". I believe a fetus is human from conception.
What is your criteria for a human being?
Point taken for the most part the blood does not co mingle but they are not independent of one another no is the circulatory system totally separate as nutrients and oxygen are delivered via the mother circulatory system.
You said: When a being has its own separate blood and circulatory system, it's a human being.
Using Ellis Belles powers of deduction having its own separate blood and circulatory system is criteria for being a human being. What else would you mean by that.
Being a member of homo sapiens would be criteria for being a human.
A person, or personhood, or being would need to be viable.
" ... to test deductive reasoning to make sure the argument is valid.For example, "All men are mortal. Harold is a man. Therefore, Harold is mortal." For deductive reasoning to be sound, the hypothesis must be correct. It is assumed that the premises, "All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. Therefore, the conclusion is logical and true. In deductive reasoning, if something is true of a class of things in general, it is also true for all members of that class. "
It is a human being (you said that) that can not live outside the womb (you said that too) by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
True or false --- if false, how?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
First of all I did not say a fetus was a human being.
So right out of the gate you are wrong.
I did not say it is a human being that can not live outside the womb.
I said to my knowledge an 8 week fetus can not live outside the womb.
There is nothing to deduce there.
And human physiology has nothing to do with government assistance. If you take away a persons food stamps they will not die because of it. They will still survive. And none of that has anything to do with having constitutional rights.
You deduction is more like all men are mortal, Harold is a man therefore Bruce Jenner is a woman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
First of all I did not say a fetus was a human being.
So right out of the gate you are wrong.
really? lets verify ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
Never said they are not alive. Never said it was not a human being.
It is a human being (you said that) ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
I said to my knowledge an 8 week fetus can not live outside the womb.
that can not live outside the womb (you said that too)
"All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. --- all fetuses are human; all fetuses can not live outside the womb.
... by that deductive reasoning --- those who can not live outside government (womb) assistance to survive, do not have the rights (to life) granted to them by the Constitution of the u.s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares
And human physiology has nothing to do with government assistance. If you take away a persons food stamps they will not die because of it. They will still survive. And none of that has anything to do with having constitutional rights.
During the Great Depression, people died of malnutrition, because they had lost their way to survive on their own. In later years the government created a virtual invisible umbilical cord to nutrition, food stamps. It acts the same as the physical umbilical cord of the fetus --- yet, no value of life is placed on the unborn. Explain that --- how it is a person attached to government assistance has more value than the life of the unborn?
"In Roe v. Wade, the state of Texas argued that "the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment." To which Justice Harry Blackmun responded, "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.""
Can a distinctive difference be produced, in human value? If so, how?
Point taken for the most part the blood does not co mingle but they are not independent of one another no is the circulatory system totally separate as nutrients and oxygen are delivered via the mother circulatory system.
You said: When a being has its own separate blood and circulatory system, it's a human being.
Using Ellis Belles powers of deduction having its own separate blood and circulatory system is criteria for being a human being. What else would you mean by that.
Being a member of homo sapiens would be criteria for being a human. A person, or personhood, or being would need to be viable.
To the GDP of the country? What constitutes the value of viable?
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.
