header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Regarding abortion...

 (Read 3122 times)

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18363
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #42 on: December 12, 2017, 07:28:02 AM »


What won the right to commit murder if you go read the opinion was they did not know when life began. It is implied in the ruling that if it is ever determined by science that life begins at conception then the case for murder via abortion should be reheard. Science has made that determination and now some states are moving n that direction, what we see now is stooges such as Fuzzkid trying out other arguments 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 3081
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2017, 08:34:42 AM »
"Even when granting that ending life of the embryo/fetus is a greater moral problem than imposing on the autonomy of the mother, I can't figure out how that negates the analogy of forcing someone to provide life support while they wait for a transplant.  To win this debate, you've got to figure out why that analogy's wrong somehow.  The answer can only be something special about the mother/child relationship.  I'll keep thinking about it"

You do that. Maybe you'll figure it out, eventually.

Since we're arguing analogies, how about instead of a parasite, we think of the embryo/fetus as a vampire. It can only come inside if it's invited and leaves on its own when it's adequately fed.

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8441
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #44 on: December 12, 2017, 09:15:10 AM »
"Even when granting that ending life of the embryo/fetus is a greater moral problem than imposing on the autonomy of the mother, I can't figure out how that negates the analogy of forcing someone to provide life support while they wait for a transplant.  To win this debate, you've got to figure out why that analogy's wrong somehow.  The answer can only be something special about the mother/child relationship.  I'll keep thinking about it"

You do that. Maybe you'll figure it out, eventually.

Maybe the analogy falls apart because with one person not being legally obligated to provide life support for the other person waiting for the organ transplant, the prospective "host" has a legal option not to provide life support.  Whereas, the mother initially has no option not to comply with the parasitic nature of the relationship which is inherent to the embryo/fetus' existence.  They have to deliberately undo the parasitic relationship (have an abortion).  Is that different enough?  Does this option difference negate the analogy?  As you (maybe correctly) pointed out, we're talking about two potential (hypothetical) crimes here.  Does that different matter enough that we can legally justify a so-called "crime" against the mother (kidnapping/slavery) while considering the inherent innocence of the embryo/fetus?  

Sorry, I'm thinking out loud here but this is really interesting to me.  I wish Vandy was still around - I'd like to challenge her on it from the pro-life perspective.  


Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 5997
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #45 on: December 12, 2017, 09:41:08 AM »
the birds and the bees are taught (or passed from one kid to the next) at a young age.  even kids understand that pregnancy is a cause:effect circumstance.  so... why can't you, @fuzzynavol ?  

you can't escape that becoming pregnant is a response, not a circumstance with unfair or unsolicited happenstance.  unless you're discussing rape, there is no possible way to consider an unborn child something that wasn't requested either purposely or irresponsibly. 

we speak of religion and GOD in a similar tone, and another way of looking at the 'rules' could also be called 'laws of nature'.  i've actually watched animals give birth and turn and kill their offspring.  I don't know why they did.  I've seen animals give birth and then ignore their offspring- again with no idea why.  Far more often, i've seen animals give birth and nurture.  I've heard of offspring being adopted by other animals and raised- a buddy of mine has a pic of a puppy sucking the teet of a pig along with other piglets, and the sow (according to him) was just as protective of the puppy as she was her piglets. 

it has to do with wiring, no?  chemicals causing different responses by tickling different area's of the brain... 

and that^ is what i want to bring to your attention. 

we've discussed, ad naseum, the development of a child from the moment the egg is fertilized to the moment it slides out into the light.  but what of the mother?  

during that nine month period, she undergoes chemical alterations which impacts both thought and physical development.  

the physical changes can be manipulated with drugs and nutrients- but they're going to occur no matter what so long as she remains prenant.  so can the mental changes (be manipulated)- but drugs aren't needed so much with the mental aspects as conscious thought can disrupt what naturally occurs- or worse, it can create confusion when the laws of nature (which are naturally occurring to the mother) conflict with her intentions/desires.  

left to it's own course, and without conflicts interjected by societal notions- very few women would resist pregnancy.  except for the few that do- like those few dogs, cats, and farm animals i've seen turn their figurative shoulders on their offspring.  misfiring neurons? don't know... but it is universally considered a sickness in animals that do this... as it should be with women who do.  and that is the answer and solution to your riddle in my opinion- there are no mental gymnastics nor intellectual disassembly of the circumstance to justify it- abortion is the results of an illness or disorder. 

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Posts: 8441
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #46 on: December 12, 2017, 10:27:23 AM »
the birds and the bees are taught (or passed from one kid to the next) at a young age.  even kids understand that pregnancy is a cause:effect circumstance.  so... why can't you, @fuzzynavol ?
 
I do understand it. 


you can't escape that becoming pregnant is a response, not a circumstance with unfair or unsolicited happenstance.  unless you're discussing rape, there is no possible way to consider an unborn child something that wasn't requested either purposely or irresponsibly.

That's correct.  Now explain why it's relevant, Captain Obvious.  

we speak of religion and GOD in a similar tone, and another way of looking at the 'rules' could also be called 'laws of nature'.  i've actually watched animals give birth and turn and kill their offspring.  I don't know why they did.  I've seen animals give birth and then ignore their offspring- again with no idea why.  Far more often, i've seen animals give birth and nurture.  I've heard of offspring being adopted by other animals and raised- a buddy of mine has a pic of a puppy sucking the teet of a pig along with other piglets, and the sow (according to him) was just as protective of the puppy as she was her piglets.

Yup, there is such a thing as maternal instincts.    

it has to do with wiring, no?  chemicals causing different responses by tickling different area's of the brain...

and that^ is what i want to bring to your attention.

we've discussed, ad naseum, the development of a child from the moment the egg is fertilized to the moment it slides out into the light.  but what of the mother?  

during that nine month period, she undergoes chemical alterations which impacts both thought and physical development.  

Okay, this is new.  Strikes me as irrelevant, but at least you're saying something new...

the physical changes can be manipulated with drugs and nutrients- but they're going to occur no matter what so long as she remains prenant.  so can the mental changes (be manipulated)- but drugs aren't needed so much with the mental aspects as conscious thought can disrupt what naturally occurs- or worse, it can create confusion when the laws of nature (which are naturally occurring to the mother) conflict with her intentions/desires.  

Get to the point.

left to it's own course, and without conflicts interjected by societal notions- very few women would resist pregnancy.  except for the few that do- like those few dogs, cats, and farm animals i've seen turn their figurative shoulders on their offspring.  misfiring neurons? don't know... but it is universally considered a sickness in animals that do this... as it should be with women who do.
 
We're talking about resisting a specific pregnancy - not pregnancy in general.  Therein lies both your false premise and your confusion, thus rendering your insufferably long-winded diatribe irrelevant (as I suspected).    

and that is the answer and solution to your riddle in my opinion- there are no mental gymnastics nor intellectual disassembly of the circumstance to justify it- abortion is the results of an illness or disorder.
 
Bitches be crazy, huh?  

I don't think that logic is going to hold up in court.  

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #47 on: December 12, 2017, 11:24:25 AM »
henceforth and forever, you are... captain obvious?  
You're the one who used "irresponsible sex" as though there were "responsible sex"....

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 5997
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #48 on: December 12, 2017, 11:25:10 AM »
there is responsible sex.  

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #49 on: December 12, 2017, 11:27:05 AM »
Quote from: Fuzzkid on Today at 09:10:09 PM »

The point about parasites and humans being two separate entities flew over my head as I was pissing my pans in my failed attempt at a gotcha

I am also to scientifically challenged to grasp that no matter what stage of development a human is embryo, infant, teenager, old person they are all fully human. Nothing more nothing less, I just want to find when it is acceptable to butcher them

Likewise I lack any common sense and do not comprehend it is science/medical issue as to what age  we can keep a human being alive outside the womb and not amoral one.
-----------------------

Science fact Life begins at conception
Science Fact It is human it can not be anything else
the term fetus means is a stage of human life as many other terms. It is misused by many to feel good about being promurder. Fetus is a Latin term that means ‘’offsping’’, ‘young child”etc.

The child is uniquely different from the mother at conception, which is the moment life begins, a scientific fact not a theory. It is a separate human being. Even biologically it is a human being.  

The moment the two cells are join the single thread of DNA produced contains enough information for a library of 1000 books. That’s 6000,000 printed pages with 500 words per page. There is 50 times the amount of information than is contained in the entire Encyclopedia Britannica  

At 18 days the heart starts forming, the eyes start to develop, at 21 days the ehart is working pumping blood, at 30 days the brain I working at 40 days brain waves can be monitored at 42 days the brain is controlling muscle movement and the organs the child responds to stimuli and is known to feel pain at this point. AT just 9 weeks the hands can grasp objects, the child has already perfected many maneuvers such as backflips, kicks etc. At 10 weeks he can squint, swallow, frown. At 11 weeks the child starts urinating, smiling among many other facial expressions. This is all occurring during the first trimester

Every abortion terminates a beating heart, brain waves,

No living being can become anything else besides what it already is. Another scientific fact, not theory.

A living beings designation to a species is not determine by a stage of development, but by the sum total of its biological characteristics. Another scientific fact not theory  

Science fact Life begins at conception


Then you consider cancer to be 'alive', right?

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18363
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #50 on: December 12, 2017, 12:27:28 PM »

Science fact Life begins at conception


Let me make another apples and oranges comparison here as I don't understand basic science
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #51 on: December 12, 2017, 12:32:11 PM »
You realized that cells divide and multiply in cancer just as they do in a human embryo, right?  Why isn't cancer alive?

highVOLtage

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 3081
  • Liked:
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #52 on: December 12, 2017, 02:07:29 PM »
You realized that cells divide and multiply in cancer just as they do in a human embryo, right?  Why isn't cancer alive?

I suppose cancer is "alive" in that it's a mutation of the host's cells that eventually kills the host along with the cancer itself. Not sure what that has to do with the current discussion of pregnancy and human life, except perhaps that cancer is the antithesis of conception.

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #53 on: December 12, 2017, 03:02:01 PM »
I suppose cancer is "alive" in that it's a mutation of the host's cells that eventually kills the host along with the cancer itself. Not sure what that has to do with the current discussion of pregnancy and human life, except perhaps that cancer is the antithesis of conception.
The assertion of many, specifically dunkingdan, is that life begins at conception even though there isn't really anything more going on than what you would see in cancer.  So, i want to confirm that dunkingdan agrees that, by his own measure, cancer is 'alive'.

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 18363
  • Liked:
Diaper Boy aka Pitchy strikes out again
« Reply #54 on: December 12, 2017, 05:23:02 PM »
http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:



"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]
 


"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]
 


"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]
 


"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]
 


"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]
 


"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]
 


"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]
 


"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]
 


"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]
 


"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]
 


"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]
 


"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]
 


"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M�ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]
 


"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]
 


"[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization....
"[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo....
"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.
"The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'"
[Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]

---------------------------
Following are some excerpts from the book, approved by Planned Parenthood and SIECUS four years before the legalization of abortion:
 
 "... at least one [sperm] will reach the egg, fertilize it, and conception will take place. A new life will begin." (page 15)
 
 "... the egg which, if fertilized, gives rise to a new life." (page 3)

WHAT HUMAN EMBRYOLOGISTS SAY
 
 Embryology is the study of development of the new individual from beginning to end. We should, therefore, be alerted as to what contemporary and renowned human embryologists have to say about the beginning of a new life and the beginning of the human being:
 
 * Moore, Keith L. "This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being"24
 * Larsen, William J. ".... gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual."25
 * Carlson, Bruce M. "Human pregnancy begins with the fusion of an egg and a sperm ...."26
 * Patten, Bradley M. p. 13 "Fertilized ovum gives rise to new individual". P. 43: ".... the process of fertilization .... marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."27 Quoting F.R. Lillie: P. 41: ".... in the act of fertilization .... two lives are gathered in one knot .... and are rewoven in a new individual life-history."28
 * Sadler, T.W. "The development of a human being begins with fertilization."29
 * Moore, Keith L. and T.V.N. Persaud. "Human development is a continuous process that begins when an oocyte (ovum) from a female is fertilized by a sperm (spermatozoan) from a male."30
 * O'Rahilly, Ronan and Fabiola Müller. "Fertilization is an important landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed."31
 
 Conversely, it is worthwhile to note that this author has never seen a statement denying the truth of the above. Only when the biological facts have become politicized has there appeared any equivocation.
 
 The Supreme Court of the United States must ultimately come vis-a-vis with the known biological facts of human embryology and admit to the disingenuous interpretation of the beginning of life embodied in Roe v. Wade and affirmed in the Webster case.
 SUMMARY
 
 In summary: The fertilized egg is a living entity, a human being, a human individual, and, a person, all one and inseparable. The reason why this is true is the following:
 
 from the moment when the sperm makes contact with the ovum, under conditions we have come to understand and describe as normal, all subsequent development to birth of a living newborn is a fait accompli. That is to say, after that initial contact of sperm and egg there is no subsequent moment or stage which is held in arbitration or abeyance by the mother, or the embryo or fetus. Nor is a second contribution, a signal or trigger, needed from the male in order to continue and complete full development to birth. Human development is a continuum in which so-called stages overlap and blend one into another. Indeed, all of life is contained within a time continuum. Thus, the beginning of a new life is exacted by the beginning of fertilization, the reproductive event which is the essence of life. 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

P1tchBlack

  • Guest
Re: Regarding abortion...
« Reply #55 on: December 12, 2017, 05:36:54 PM »
Sigh..... I know that there's a name for the thing created when fertilization happens and I know that people like to say that fertilization is when "life begins".  It's just beautiful. However, the zygote is no different, initially, than cancer cells.  There's no heartbeat which, if you ask any medical professional, is THE sign that a human is alive.  So, if you're going to label a zygote as 'alive', then you'll agree that cancer is also alive.

 

Associate Links/Search