|
|
|
|
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 6:27:41 PM | | Okay Sum I'll give you an example that might help you. Humans are distinct from other species by our ability to use language, you know communicate and compose abstract thought. Children under one year old can't use language, therefore they should be able to be terminated. This is an example of circular logic that is parallel to yours. I get to define what is human, and it doesn't allow for any outside arguments. I respect that you have strongly held views, but they are not universally accepted. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 6:37:43 PM | at half
[-Humans are distinct from other species by our ability to use language, you know communicate and compose abstract thought. Children under one year old can't use language, therefore they should be able to be terminated. -]
you'd be right if i was implying that only such distinctions are what classifies one as a human...but I'M NOT!.......what makes us human is predicated by the potential of what is encoded in our DNA, regardless of whether certain milestones are acheived or not! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 6:39:57 PM | | No you're not - that's my point. I am in my specious argument though and it does not allow for any way in. Just like yours does not allow for any way in. That's what circular logic is. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 6:55:45 PM | at half
[-This is an example of circular logic that is parallel to yours. I get to define what is human, and it doesn't allow for any outside arguments.-]
but wouldn't this depend upon how you arrive at this 'definition'?.........did the Nazi's use 'circular logic' to define who is human versus who is sub-human? | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 7:03:42 PM | | No. They mostly didn't allow for any inconvenient facts to mess up their flawed doctrine. There were a lot of holes in their reasoning. But yes, it is a matter of how you define human - if you say a fetus is human as soon as 2 cells divide into 4 then there is no way into that to disagree. The premise you set up means that there is no way to prove or disprove your thesis. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 7:16:05 PM |
Tim, I think a lot of stuff has been said on this thread that addresses what the OP (whatever that is) put forth...are you not convinced by the fact that scott wasn't convicted of killing a fetus in an abortion like manner? or that there is clearly a distinction between the two scenarios? if not, then why not? it's your turn.
OP = Original Post or Poster for the thread
I hate answering questions with questions, but.... Put Laci out of your mind 100% -- It all comes down to did he kill a fetus, which is legal, or did he kill a human being, which is not? | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 7:19:30 PM |
a fetus is a human by default!!!....meaning that it can't be anything thing BUT a human!!!!...regardless at what stage its in!!!........scientifically, i stand on solid ground...look at the DNA evidence which is incontrovertible!.....the DNA of a fetus is the same DNA of a newborn, a child, an adult.....as far as law is concerned, the legal system will put in effect whatever the society wishes to accept.....as an example, during the times of slavery in the US, the "law" did not consider blacks to being humanly equal to whites!!!......so law is just something pple manipulate to serve their own needs.
Here's where you lost the argument.... science is only valid when it applies to debunking creationism... | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 7:38:56 PM | quote: "Here's where you lost the argument.... science is only valid when it applies to debunking creationism... "
Tim: you've got a great wit..
Reel: however, the problem with using science is that ultimately you only prove that 2 cells dividing into 4 makes a creature similar to it's parentage...great, so in our case, a fertilized egg will eventually become a bipedal mammal with a driver's license...that does not begin to touch the special idealized status given to the term "human being"...my point is (and i know this is way off thread topic, and i hope the op isn't furiously gnashing his teeth because of it) that we qualify human being, that bipedal mammal, as something special...there is no social debate about aborting unborn kittens, after all..so, what truly is the composition of a "human being"....it is an intellectual distinction, not a scientific one....one way in which i can further what i see as the importance of this is an example...right around the time that Jeb Bush and every other BUsh family member was fighting for Terry Schiavo's life, her status as a human being deserving of additional medical support to continue her life, a young Texas boy was being taken off of life support because his family could not afford to pay the medical costs...now, if removing that toddlers life support seems justified to someone, is it because they have intellectually classified that boy as something other than human...that's why the abortion argument is many-fold, that's why I brought up examples of captial punishment...and that's why simply saying a fetus is a human being doesn't get us any closer to determining what a human being is... | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/4/2005 7:44:09 PM | | just another continuance...we should not be able to classify abortion as murder, because a fetus is a human being if we renig on that classification when it comes to the Texas boy simply because he's no longer a fetus...the definition of human being as it applies to "fetus" must then apply across the board, to texas toddlers alike...maybe that gets me back a little to the thread... | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 3:52:17 AM | The distinction you make between Schiavo and others is moreso a quality of life issue, not whether or not they are a human being. I am not morally opposed to ending life sustaining medical treatment, but there are specifics involved. When the body enters into a vegetative state, i.e., ceases to be able to breath or pump blood on it's own, that's an indication the BODY reached the end of it's usefulness for the person we knew.
They did not disconnect a respirator or any other life support system for Terri Schiavo, they starved her to death over a three week period, not because her body failed, but because her brain damage prevented her from being able to fend for herself.
I do agree that the husband had the right to make that decision, but I don't agree that criteria should be so lax.
Did I notice that in your logic, you came to the conclusion that SP should not have been charged with the second murder? | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 6:01:22 AM | Hey sum1real
^......a spontaneous abortion is carried out by the female reproductive system in conjunction with hormonal signals....most of the time it isn't known why it happens, but there is NO comparing this to elective abortion!!!.....when a person choses to abort, it is being done in a pre-meditated manner for self serving purposes!.... the only exception i would grant would be for rape, and when the mother of the fetus is in danger!
You say you would only advocate abortion if the woman was raped or the pregnancy endangered the womans life.
If abortion is murder in your eyes then there should be no excuse, but its much deeper than that and thats where pro-lifers always run into conflict with themselves.
I dont think abortion should be made aa a form of contraception but at the same time shouldnt be outlawed either. theres no "one side of the fence" position on this topic thats logical. Maybe moderation on both sides of the fence is the only solution warranted here.
Hence Liberals stance on a balanced supreme court, not a full right leaning court that Bush wants to build before he leaves office. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 6:45:48 AM | from sum1reel - msg 97 ... "this is one of the most ignorant statements i've heard in quite a while regarding the innate nature of a fetus!!!"
and just what might this innate nature entail? you're correct in your definition tho' - it's a human 'fetus', not a human being. anyhoot, your argument is subjective >>> disingenuous.
"a fetus is a human by default!!!...."
hmmmm ... a defaulted human being ... i.e., not a human being on its own merit. k, now i believe you.
and also from sum1weird ... "the Nazi's defined the Jews as non-human or parasites, they polished up this mantra, packaged it up, and 'sold' it to the public....and the rest was easy........get the picture!"
save your histrionic sermons for the pulpit preacher man. i live in a country that guarantees my right to separation of church and state. this is comparing apples to buffalo testicles, in other words, ballocks!!!!
and ... what gives you the right to make such a strong stand against abortion? you're not a woman, ergo you cant possibly be aware of all the circumstances and delicate nuances regarding this issue as it affects WOMEN, who have the inalienable right over their own bodies which supercedes all others (inclucing partially developed lifeforms). and dont say its your religious obligation to stand up for the rights of the fetus. yours is but one religion, so save it for your house of worship.
some advice sum1 ... dont rely on histrionics to make an argument, it makes it appear disingenuous.
when there exists in this world NO need for children's welfare or social services agencies then you can come back and preach to me. your argument will hold water then. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 7:21:06 AM | at tim
[-science is only valid when it applies to debunking creationism... -]
^...thats beautiful!!!!.........if i understand you correctly, science is ONLY valid when debunking creationism????.....well you've just given the racists, neo-nazis, klansmen a new breath of life here.......now they can use anything BUT science to expound on their beliefs on what is human, vs non-human, or subhuman.
atta boy tim! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 7:46:52 AM | at frany
[-the problem with using science is that ultimately you only prove that 2 cells dividing into 4 makes a creature similar to it's parentage...great, so in our case, a fertilized egg will eventually become a bipedal mammal with a driver's license...that does not begin to touch the special idealized status given to the term "human being".-]
^ if science doesn't demonstrate this then WHAT does??.......the totality of what is human emanates from what is imprinted in our DNA.
[[-what truly is the composition of a "human being"....it is an intellectual distinction, not a scientific one....-]]
^...this is merely your own view..simply because you are contriving your own (philosophical) definition of a human being stands for rather than using the scientific(empirical)one....the issue of schiavo has nothing to do with the status of being human....i'll tend to agree with tim's view on that!
[[[-a young Texas boy was being taken off of life support because his family could not afford to pay the medical costs...-]]]
^ i don't know anything about this.....but it seems that you are leaving alot out of this story, since because anyone in this situation who runs out of funds can apply for social assistance and thus prevent this from happening....but even if this is true (which i seriously doubt), the family would be at fault here because they've failed to exercise their due process to prevent this from taking place!........nonetheless, it seems to me that you are using the law as a frame of reference for what should be viewed as human and what shouldn't.......as i've said, laws can be manipulated for self serving purposes! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 7:56:07 AM | | Actually that was a little reported story that happened at the same time the Terry Schiavo case was happening. When W was Governor of Texas, he signed a law that allowed hospitals to remove vegitative patients off life support if they couldn't pay. The parents fought, but the law was against them. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 8:00:14 AM | at blacksheep
where do you see me saying that abortion is outright murder?
is it murder to abort a fetus if the life of the mother is endangered by the pregnancy?
its the same in the case of rape........where the integrity of a woman was violated, abortion is something which can be considered if she is inpregnated!
[-I dont think abortion should be made aa a form of contraception but at the same time shouldnt be outlawed either. theres no "one side of the fence" position on this topic thats logical. Maybe moderation on both sides of the fence is the only solution warranted here.-]
^....YES, i would agree with this!!!...abortion should be conducted only in special circumstances and reviewed by an ethics committee.......but i don't think we ought to be using the flimsy excuse that a fetus can be aborted because it doesn't constitute something human!!! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 8:09:03 AM | at weirdo
[-and also from sum1weird ... "the Nazi's defined the Jews as non-human or parasites, they polished up this mantra, packaged it up, and 'sold' it to the public....and the rest was easy........get the picture!"
save your histrionic sermons for the pulpit preacher man-]
^....if you firmly believe that this statement i've made is steeped in histrionics then you need to get your head examined........thus i wouldn't dignify anything else in your post with a response! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 8:26:37 AM | at half
if this is true then obviously Bush is a bit of a hypocrit here.......but keep in mind that such laws are written for ulterior motives, in this case it seems like it was done 4 monetary purposes here.....on the flip side, you would have to see what they defined as 'life support' and vegetative state'...............the worst case scenario would be a person who is brain dead who may be moribund and who is on a ventilator and gets artificially fed........personally, i would consider this to be euthansia?, but from what i'm aware, this is not legal anywhere in the 50 states! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 9:28:13 AM | from sum above ... "^...thats beautiful!!!!.........if i understand you correctly, science is ONLY valid when debunking creationism????.....well you've just given the racists, neo-nazis, klansmen a new breath of life here.......now they can use anything BUT science to expound on their beliefs on what is human, vs non-human, or subhuman."
@tim ... your protege plays the nazi card pretty freely. maybe you should explain to him the politics of freedom of choice/right to life.
denying freedom of will and choice to a woman who is pregnant is totalitarian in nature. totalitarian regimes tend to not separate church and state (i.e., sum's position). didnt john paul ll apologize to the jewish people for the church's position during WWll?
Therefore your protegy is a hypocrite. ironic how ppl claim others to be what they are.
he wont respond to my post bc he doesnt want to debate me in an open forum. convenient. personally i would want someone with a little more spine, substance and depth beyond their pragmatic religious dogma to support my position, but that's just me. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 5:34:23 PM | quote: "Did I notice that in your logic, you came to the conclusion that SP should not have been charged with the second murder?"
actually, I was still trying to address Reel in a way he would understand...if, according to him, an abortion is a murder of a "human being" then, according to him, the removal of life support for that young boy is murder too and Schiavo, and etc...not euthanasia, not medical practice, but according to him, murder, murder, murder...but thanks for bringing up the quality of life thing, because the idea of having a "quality of life" is one of those ways to designate what a human being is, which is an intellectual designation, not just the scientific mechanics of blood and body...scientifically, our human physical bodies aren't any different than any other mammal, we've got blood and bones and cells and cartilege, same as any cat, dog, chimp or horse...what makes us different is the capcities of our brains...
but just in terms of the thread, and I'm kind of exhausted at this point, I have to say, that because Pro-choice groups were adamently against the passing of the legal revision that made it possible to prosecute Peterson for the death of the baby, how did this become a thing where Pro-choicers are somehow the hypocrites here, or that this is somehow a confusion of the Liberal mindset...I'm just throwing that out, and I know Tim, that you've been trying to keep the distinction off of abortion all along....I guess I'll just go ahead and say, in reference to something Tim said in an earlier post, that this prosecution of Perterson IS clearly the CA legislature pandering, but to a conservative element, NOT to the pro-choice groups or to liberals...so maybe that at least will be taken as legitimate point
(oh, and I looked it up, and Peterson was charged with 2nd degree murder in the death of the baby;
http://www.courttv.com/trials/peterson/111204_verdict_ctv.html
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. — After seven days of tumultuous deliberations that saw the removal of two jurors and a mutiny against the foreman, a jury convicted Scott Peterson Friday of first-degree murder in the slaying of his pregnant wife.
The jurors also found the Modesto fertilizer salesman guilty of second-degree murder in the death of the son his wife, Laci, was carrying when he killed her in December 2002.) | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/5/2005 6:25:22 PM | at frany
[-but according to him, murder, murder, murder...-]
^........i don't believe that i ever said this........you should read my response to mr. blacksheep up above!
[-...scientifically, our human physical bodies aren't any different than any other mammal, we've got blood and bones and cells and cartilege, same as any cat, dog, chimp or horse...what makes us different is the capcities of our brains...-]
^...though we have the same basic elements/organs, we are far different than the mammals that you mentioned albeit we may have a phylogenic link.......as animals we are the only ones who are evolved enuff to make ethical decisions, we have the capacity to know ourselves in relation to everything else, in fact, WE are the means by which the universe can known itself!!!.......there's is about a 5% difference between our DNA and that of a chimp but that 5% makes a helluva difference by leaps and bounds.....so its not as simple as you seem to make it!
peace to all! | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/6/2005 2:44:38 AM | from franny above ... "in reference to something Tim said in an earlier post, that this prosecution of Perterson IS clearly the CA legislature pandering, but to a conservative element, NOT to the pro-choice groups or to liberals"
true, right wing attempt to make current an old debate. arnie's a republican isnt he?
2nd degree murder? at 8 months baby could have lived outside the womb if murdered mother was medically attended to shortly after death (as opposed to being thrown in the ocean). i see their logic.
arent there transcripts from the DA's opening and closing statements? wouldnt their rationale for bringing the murder charge forward for the unborn baby's death be there? | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/6/2005 4:25:56 AM |
[-science is only valid when it applies to debunking creationism... -]
^...thats beautiful!!!!.........if i understand you correctly, science is ONLY valid when debunking creationism????.....well you've just given the racists, neo-nazis, klansmen a new breath of life here.......now they can use anything BUT science to expound on their beliefs on what is human, vs non-human, or subhuman.
atta boy tim!
Just pointing out the hypocrisy Dude... "Science say there is no God, well then there is no God. Science says a fetus is a human being well.... wait, that can't be right!" LOL
@tim ... your protege plays the nazi card pretty freely. maybe you should explain to him the politics of freedom of choice/right to life.
denying freedom of will and choice to a woman who is pregnant is totalitarian in nature. totalitarian regimes tend to not separate church and state (i.e., sum's position). didnt john paul ll apologize to the jewish people for the church's position during WWll?
Therefore your protegy is a hypocrite. ironic how ppl claim others to be what they are.
My protégé?!?!?!??! He seems to be holding up his end of expressing his personal views all by himself, doesn't seem to need my help at all!
I will say that you seem to have a penchant for oversimplifying abortion. It is not as simple as a "choice". There is another element involved, the fetus. We can't even get the most liberal state in the union to decide whether a fetus is a human being or merely a glob of goo to be disposed of through elective surgery, so I can see where some wouldn't hesitate to point out the hypocrisy of the pro-choice position. From what I read, Sum1 has been pretty consistent throughout on his position... He's clearly pro-life and has every right to express his views whether they are popular or not. | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/6/2005 9:16:09 AM | quote: "so I can see where some wouldn't hesitate to point out the hypocrisy of the pro-choice position"
Tim, can you please read my last post and make a reasonable argument defending your assertion that this is pro-choice hypocrisy... | |
|
| Abortion
Posted: 11/6/2005 9:34:35 AM | to 2Weird:
truly, Arnold is a destructively conservative politically idiotic jackass, but I think David Gray was still governor at the begining of the Peterson case...
also, I think courtTV.com (or something like that) had the complete trial transcripts...
also to Reel, your last post pretty much perfectly illustrates all of my statements about the special status, intellectually conceived, that we bipeds grant our own species (as far as the universe is concerned our little planetary drama isn't even happening)....so thanks, I guess we were communicating a lot better than I had thought... | |
|
|
| Page 5 of 6
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
|
Home
login 
