| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jim07D6" |
| Date: |
19 Mar 2006 12:47:04 PM |
| Object: |
A Few Abortion Questions |
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
h. Other __________________.
Additional comments? ______
2. If your answer is a "moment" that is not easily detected or
established, what evaluation, information or test should be used to
determine when that moment has occurred in an individual situation?
(Note that the moment of conception is not currently determinable by
tests -- existing pregnancy tests detect implantation.)
a. The woman's evaluation alone.
b. The man's evaluation alone.
c. Whichever of them wants the earliest evaluation to be used.
d. The word or decision of other non-medical persons (who? _________)
e. A physician's evaluation alone, without tests being needed.
f. A medical exam result, eg, a positive pregnancy test, ultrasound
showing a heartbeat, or other test that fits your answer to #1
g. Other objective evidence (what) ________?
Additional comments? ______
3. Assuming that the moment when human life has begun as in question
#1 has occurred and been confirmed as in question #2, under what
circumstances should the woman be permitted to have an abortion?
(Pick all that apply)
a. Never
b. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis is that continuing the
pregnancy will kill her.
c. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis that continuing the
pregnancy will not kill her, but will seriously affect her health
and/or significantly shorten her life.
d. At the sole prerogative of her parent or legal guardian if she is a
minor or mentally incompetent.
e. In confirmed cases of rape including statutory rape, or incest if
she is a minor.
f. If the fetus is seriously damaged, e.g., has Down's syndrome.
g. If the man involved wants the abortion (even if she doesn't.)
h. .At her sole prerogative, with none of the reasons given in this
list of choices, required.
Additional comments? ______
4. What should the penalty be for an illegal abortion?
a. Death for woman and anyone assisting/performing the abortion.
b. Death for anyone assisting/performing abortion but only jail or
parole for her.
c. Jail sentences for anyone involved, plus delicensing of any medical
professionals involved.
d. Punish under existing homicide laws of the state, (eg, first or
second degree murder, manslaughter, etc., depending on premeditation,
mental competency, degree of complicity for accomplices, etc.)
e. Other_________
Additional comments? ______
5. What is the primary basis of your answers to these questions?
a. My religion, which is _________
b. My secular/non-religious beliefs.
c. Other________________________
Additional comments? ______
6. What is your experience regarding abortions? (It is possible to
have both a and b, below in your experiences.)
a. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did get one. The reason
was _______
b. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did not get one. The
reason was_______ and the reason they did not get one was __________.
c. Neither a or b.
d. Other___________
Additional comments? ______
Thank you. I might have follow up questions.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 11:33:56 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
You asked two separate questions there Jim, and I'm not so sure that one is
necessarily connected to the other. I can give an opinion when I think human
life begins, but that may not be when I (or anyone) think protection by law
should begin, if ever. So my answers are to the first question, at least at
this point that's the approach I plan to take, that may change when I read
the questions.
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
h. Other __________________.
The answer is in the area of b. when the new genetic code forms and the new
cells begin to divide.
Additional comments? ______
2. If your answer is a "moment" that is not easily detected or
established, what evaluation, information or test should be used to
determine when that moment has occurred in an individual situation?
(Note that the moment of conception is not currently determinable by
tests -- existing pregnancy tests detect implantation.)
a. The woman's evaluation alone.
b. The man's evaluation alone.
c. Whichever of them wants the earliest evaluation to be used.
d. The word or decision of other non-medical persons (who? _________)
e. A physician's evaluation alone, without tests being needed.
f. A medical exam result, eg, a positive pregnancy test, ultrasound
showing a heartbeat, or other test that fits your answer to #1
g. Other objective evidence (what) ________?
I don't know, and I don't know if it matters if no reliable way to determine
exists, and in my case since I am not inclined to allow the state to rule on
it anyway.
Additional comments? ______
3. Assuming that the moment when human life has begun as in question
#1 has occurred and been confirmed as in question #2, under what
circumstances should the woman be permitted to have an abortion?
(Pick all that apply)
a. Never
b. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis is that continuing the
pregnancy will kill her.
c. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis that continuing the
pregnancy will not kill her, but will seriously affect her health
and/or significantly shorten her life.
d. At the sole prerogative of her parent or legal guardian if she is a
minor or mentally incompetent.
e. In confirmed cases of rape including statutory rape, or incest if
she is a minor.
f. If the fetus is seriously damaged, e.g., has Down's syndrome.
g. If the man involved wants the abortion (even if she doesn't.)
h. .At her sole prerogative, with none of the reasons given in this
list of choices, required.
b,c,e,f,h
Additional comments? ______
Obviously "pregnancy" does not exist prior to implantation so there is a
window of opportunity for a compomise there.
4. What should the penalty be for an illegal abortion?
a. Death for woman and anyone assisting/performing the abortion.
b. Death for anyone assisting/performing abortion but only jail or
parole for her.
c. Jail sentences for anyone involved, plus delicensing of any medical
professionals involved.
d. Punish under existing homicide laws of the state, (eg, first or
second degree murder, manslaughter, etc., depending on premeditation,
mental competency, degree of complicity for accomplices, etc.)
e. Other_________
No penalty
Additional comments? ______
5. What is the primary basis of your answers to these questions?
a. My religion, which is _________
b. My secular/non-religious beliefs.
c. Other________________________
b. Although the fetus is a living human organism, a defacto human being, and
it is in my opinion reprehensible to destroy it, I cannot in good conscience
impose that view onto a pregnant woman. I also cannot believe that the state
regulating abortion would be in anyone's best interests.
Additional comments? ______
6. What is your experience regarding abortions? (It is possible to
have both a and b, below in your experiences.)
a. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did get one. The reason
was _______
b. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did not get one. The
reason was_______ and the reason they did not get one was __________.
c. Neither a or b.
d. Other___________
I have experienced all of the above with mixed results. Several friends have
had abortions because they did not want children at that time, most have not
regretted it, one remains troubled by it, another was rendered sterile by a
post-abortion infection.
Additional comments? ______
I find this issue impossible to come to a definitive position on. Most
people seem to know what side they are on and believe in that side
passionately to the point that they are utterly incapable of empathizing
with the other side. I have been on both sides during my life and have felt
the passion from both sides personally. Both have valid yet conflicting
perspectives. In the end, although I find this a most disturbing moral
issue, I find the sheer, staggering incompetence of the law in legislating
morality to be the most compelling factor.
The only point of argument I can find solace in is the pursuit of forcing
all sides to admit to the absolute truth, unfettered by political agendas,
then let the chips fall where they may.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
19 Mar 2006 11:05:38 PM |
|
|
In article <to5r12de90e0o2hedtepl3f1n4qmjnd67h@4ax.com>,
Jim07D6@nospam.net says...
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
******************************************************
h. Other: Around the middle of the third trimester.
******************************************************
Additional comments? ______
I'll go with h and describe that as the "middle in the third trimester"
when the higher centers of the brain are finally formed and the fetus
would be capable of reasonably functioning outside the womb. I mean, if
a woman carried the kid that long then there would be little point in
abortion, unless there were some sort of very serious medical issue. .
2. If your answer is a "moment" that is not easily detected or
established, what evaluation, information or test should be used to
determine when that moment has occurred in an individual situation?
(Note that the moment of conception is not currently determinable by
tests -- existing pregnancy tests detect implantation.)
a. The woman's evaluation alone.
b. The man's evaluation alone.
c. Whichever of them wants the earliest evaluation to be used.
d. The word or decision of other non-medical persons (who? _________)
e. A physician's evaluation alone, without tests being needed.
f. A medical exam result, eg, a positive pregnancy test, ultrasound
showing a heartbeat, or other test that fits your answer to #1
******************************************************
g. Other objective evidence (what): a calendar?
******************************************************
Additional comments?
The third trimester is detectable with the aid of an instrument known as
a calendar.
3. Assuming that the moment when human life has begun as in question
#1 has occurred and been confirmed as in question #2, under what
circumstances should the woman be permitted to have an abortion?
(Pick all that apply)
a. Never
b. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis is that continuing the
pregnancy will kill her.
c. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis that continuing the
pregnancy will not kill her, but will seriously affect her health
and/or significantly shorten her life.
d. At the sole prerogative of her parent or legal guardian if she is a
minor or mentally incompetent.
e. In confirmed cases of rape including statutory rape, or incest if
she is a minor.
f. If the fetus is seriously damaged, e.g., has Down's syndrome.
g. If the man involved wants the abortion (even if she doesn't.)
h. .At her sole prerogative, with none of the reasons given in this
list of choices, required.
Additional comments? b,c,e,f______
4. What should the penalty be for an illegal abortion?
a. Death for woman and anyone assisting/performing the abortion.
b. Death for anyone assisting/performing abortion but only jail or
parole for her.
c. Jail sentences for anyone involved, plus delicensing of any medical
professionals involved.
d. Punish under existing homicide laws of the state, (eg, first or
second degree murder, manslaughter, etc., depending on premeditation,
mental competency, degree of complicity for accomplices, etc.)
******************************************************
e. Other: No punishment for the doctor, other than noting the fact for
the public record. The middle of the third trimester should be a
voluntary ethical guideline. The mother should take a mandatory class in
health, family planning or parenting.
******************************************************
Additional comments? Under my scenario, the fetus is viable, so unless the
doctor had some medical reason, then he should simply tell her to wait a
few more weeks, or to induce premature delivery. But premature delivery
would likely not be advisable for the fetus. Also, abortion at this
stage is very risky for the woman.
5. What is the primary basis of your answers to these questions?
a. My religion, which is _________
******************************************************
b. My secular/non-religious beliefs.
******************************************************
c. Other ________________________
Additional comments? ______
6. What is your experience regarding abortions? (It is possible to
have both a and b, below in your experiences.)
a. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did get one. The reason
was _______
b. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did not get one. The
reason was_______ and the reason they did not get one was __________.
******************************************************
c. Neither a or b.
******************************************************
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
20 Mar 2006 05:41:48 AM |
|
|
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e87e60f90e412ab9898f7@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <to5r12de90e0o2hedtepl3f1n4qmjnd67h@4ax.com>,
Jim07D6@nospam.net says...
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
******************************************************
h. Other: Around the middle of the third trimester.
******************************************************
Additional comments? ______
I'll go with h and describe that as the "middle in the third trimester"
when the higher centers of the brain are finally formed and the fetus
would be capable of reasonably functioning outside the womb.
Why is the level of brain function relevant when a healthy fetus at five
months is virtually assured to have full brain and other functions in a
matter of a few weeks or months? Explain the moral calculation one uses to
do that. Could you morally pull the plug on a comatose patient if you knew
virtually for certain that they would be coming out of the coma in a few
months?
I mean, if
a woman carried the kid that long then there would be little point in
abortion, unless there were some sort of very serious medical issue. .
She doesn't want a kid! Isn't that a good enough reason? What happened to
choice?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
20 Mar 2006 06:42:34 AM |
|
|
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
Why is the level of brain function relevant when a healthy fetus at five
months is virtually assured to have full brain and other functions in a
matter of a few weeks or months?
Why do you think that you have some ability to divine the future?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
20 Mar 2006 05:50:53 PM |
|
|
In article <121t57rq7eu328d@news.supernews.com>, says...
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e87e60f90e412ab9898f7@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <to5r12de90e0o2hedtepl3f1n4qmjnd67h@4ax.com>,
Jim07D6@nospam.net says...
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
******************************************************
h. Other: Around the middle of the third trimester.
******************************************************
Additional comments? ______
I'll go with h and describe that as the "middle in the third trimester"
when the higher centers of the brain are finally formed and the fetus
would be capable of reasonably functioning outside the womb.
Why is the level of brain function relevant
Because, as I've already explained to you, "death" in modern medicine is
defined as permanent cessation of human brain activity. Since the fetus
does not have a fully human brain at the moment of abortion, it cannot
"die" in the same sense that a human dies.
when a healthy fetus at five
months is virtually assured to have full brain and other functions in a
matter of a few weeks or months?
Again, I've already explained to you that the issue is what the fetus is
at the moment of abortion. All the coulda, woulda and shoulda about what
it might have been if given extra weeks or months is not relevant to the
issue of what it is NOW at the very moment that the procedure is taking
place. Talking about what something could have been is kind of like
talking about all the eggs that a chicken might have laid and all the
chicks that might have hatched and laid more eggs, and on and on. If we
followed that reasoning then nobody could ever justify eating a single
egg, because it might hatch into a million chickens, if given enough
time.
Explain the moral calculation one uses to
do that.
I've explained the relevant issue for determining whether the entity
killed actually qualifies as a human, which the fetus does not, until
somewhat into the third trimester.
Could you morally pull the plug on a comatose patient if you knew
virtually for certain that they would be coming out of the coma in a few
months?
The comatose patient already has a fully human brain and was born and
presumably had a life. The fetus never achieved any of these things. We
preserve the comatose person, if that appears to be the individual's
will, because that person is fully human right here and right now. The
fetus is not human right here and right now and therefore any action
against it is not an action against a human person.
Furthermore, your argument appears to be purposely trying to create a
slippery slope. If we use birth control, then, if only we had waited, it
could have been an embryo and then if only we wait, it could have been a
second trimester fetus and finally, if only we wait it can actually be
born. But there really isn't a stopping point for your type of thinking.
If the father hadn't worn the condom then fertilization might have taken
place and if he had met his wife ten years earlier then they might have
six kids already and if his grandmother....
I mean, if
a woman carried the kid that long then there would be little point in
abortion, unless there were some sort of very serious medical issue. .
She doesn't want a kid! Isn't that a good enough reason? What happened to
choice?
Don't play dumb (assuming that's different from the way you normally
play). There are two separate issues involved and you know it, so don't
pretend you can't distinguish the two. One is "choice" and the other is
"viability". If the fetus can be viable outside the mother then, in
theory we could remove it, without having to abort it. The woman's
choice is to end the pregnancy. Before viability, there is no other way
to end the pregnancy. The rights of mother and fetus are in conflict and
we side with the mother before viability. After viability, the rights of
both parties can theoretically be satisfied.
Additionally, I explained that late term abortion would be very dangerous
to the mother and we do restrict actions which endanger one's person
unnecessarily.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
20 Mar 2006 11:25:42 PM |
|
|
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote
In article <121t57rq7eu328d@news.supernews.com>, says...
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e87e60f90e412ab9898f7@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <to5r12de90e0o2hedtepl3f1n4qmjnd67h@4ax.com>,
Jim07D6@nospam.net says...
I am collecting information on people's opinions on abortion. I don't
intend to argue with your answers, at least in this thread. ;-)
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
******************************************************
h. Other: Around the middle of the third trimester.
******************************************************
Additional comments? ______
I'll go with h and describe that as the "middle in the third trimester"
when the higher centers of the brain are finally formed and the fetus
would be capable of reasonably functioning outside the womb.
Why is the level of brain function relevant
Because, as I've already explained to you, "death" in modern medicine is
defined as permanent cessation of human brain activity. Since the fetus
does not have a fully human brain at the moment of abortion
That's a lie, it's brain is "fully human". It may not be fully developed,
but it's human.
it cannot
"die" in the same sense that a human dies.
It is human, and it dies.
when a healthy fetus at five
months is virtually assured to have full brain and other functions in a
matter of a few weeks or months?
Again, I've already explained to you that the issue is what the fetus is
at the moment of abortion. All the coulda, woulda and shoulda about what
it might have been if given extra weeks or months is not relevant to the
issue of what it is NOW at the very moment that the procedure is taking
place.
It is very relevent. You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that
*it* is the only factor. The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If
a human organism were going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make
for a completely different moral calculation than if it has potentially
eighty years of human life ahead of it.
Talking about what something could have been is kind of like
talking about all the eggs that a chicken might have laid and all the
chicks that might have hatched and laid more eggs, and on and on. If we
followed that reasoning then nobody could ever justify eating a single
egg, because it might hatch into a million chickens, if given enough
time.
We do not place moral value on the lives of chickens. We do presumably on
the lives of humans.
Explain the moral calculation one uses to
do that.
I've explained the relevant issue for determining whether the entity
killed actually qualifies as a human, which the fetus does not, until
somewhat into the third trimester.
Again, you are illegitimately disregarding the potential of that human
organism. Killing is the act of robbing an organism of it's future,
therefore that future potential is of utmost relevance. We pull the plug on
humans who have no hope for a decent future. Insurance compensates families
based on the potential future loss when a provider is killed.
Could you morally pull the plug on a comatose patient if you knew
virtually for certain that they would be coming out of the coma in a few
months?
The comatose patient already has a fully human brain and was born and
presumably had a life.
So what? Why should that matter? What happened a long time ago is gone, in
the past, it "is not relevant to the issue of what it is NOW at the very
moment that the procedure is taking place".
The fetus never achieved any of these things.
So now there are acheivement standards that fetuses are required to meet in
order to be allowed to live? Isn't that a little unfair?
We
preserve the comatose person, if that appears to be the individual's
will, because that person is fully human right here and right now.
It has no brain activity "here and now".
The
fetus is not human right here and right now and therefore any action
against it is not an action against a human person.
I disagree completely, the fetus *is* a human "right here and now", it
cannot be anything else.
Furthermore, your argument appears to be purposely trying to create a
slippery slope.
Nonsense, creation and development of a unique human organism does not begin
until conception and pregnancy does not begin until implantation.
If we use birth control, then,
If successful, then no unique organism is formed.
if only we had waited, it
could have been an embryo
Waited for what? Without conception there's no organism.
and then if only we wait, it could have been a
second trimester fetus and finally, if only we wait it can actually be
born. But there really isn't a stopping point for your type of thinking.
If the father hadn't worn the condom then fertilization might have taken
place and if he had met his wife ten years earlier then they might have
six kids already and if his grandmother....
That was just an exercise in obfuscation, surely you don't think it made any
sense. There are very clear "stopping" AND starting points in my thinking.
The stopping is adequate birth control, the starting is conception of a
unique human organism.
I mean, if
a woman carried the kid that long then there would be little point in
abortion, unless there were some sort of very serious medical issue. .
She doesn't want a kid! Isn't that a good enough reason? What happened to
choice?
Don't play dumb
Don't assume that I'm playing dumb because I point out contradictions in
your beliefs.
(assuming that's different from the way you normally
play). There are two separate issues involved and you know it, so don't
pretend you can't distinguish the two. One is "choice" and the other is
"viability".
I know what viability is in the context of pregnancy, it's a term bandied
about and given a lot of weight which I disagree with.
If the fetus can be viable outside the mother then, in
theory we could remove it, without having to abort it.
What does "theory" have to do with what you actually do with the fetus?
The woman's
choice is to end the pregnancy.
And NOT end up with a baby, and NOT have abdominal surgery. What happened to
that choice? Why does viability remove that choice?
Is it because all of a sudden you can start to relate to the fetus? Well,
some of us could relate to it all along.
Before viability, there is no other way
to end the pregnancy. The rights of mother and fetus are in conflict and
we side with the mother before viability.
Fine, the rights of the mother and fetus are still in conflict after
viability.
After viability, the rights of
both parties can theoretically be satisfied.
"Theoretically"? How about "actually"? What if the mother's choice is NO
BABY and NO SURGERY? Has her choice been extinguished? Killing the
unconsious fetus at eight months does nothing substantially different as far
as I can see than killing it at six. It still robs the fetus of a chance to
be born and have a life, THAT is the issue that has meaning to
anti-abortionists. Explain to someone new to this issue why the huge
difference in valuation of a fetus? Why is it suddenly a bad thing to kill
it just because it has acheived a particular stage of development when it
was all right before?
Additionally, I explained that late term abortion would be very dangerous
to the mother and we do restrict actions which endanger one's person
unnecessarily.
Again, where did the mother's choice go? It's her body, how can you tell her
what risks she can and cannot take? Perhaps the idea of having a baby to
deal with is just more than she can bear.
And don't say I'm "playing dumb", I am subjecting your ideas to logical
questions that deserve honest, thoughtful answers.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank ODwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 02:28:45 AM |
|
|
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that
*it* is the only factor.
A "moment" like conception.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If
a human organism were going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make
for a completely different moral calculation than if it has potentially
eighty years of human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
- Frank
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:39:31 AM |
|
|
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 09:59:58 AM |
|
|
"Dutch" <no@email.com> said:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Are you aware of the process that occur in "conception"? When does an
ovum become "fertilized"?
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:04:38 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:pl8022lk43bl7jqugmp6hvvh296s2ajug3@4ax.com...
"Dutch" <no@email.com> said:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism
were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Are you aware of the process that occur in "conception"? When does an
ovum become "fertilized"?
Not specifically, no. That should be quite easy to look up.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:45:32 PM |
|
|
"Dutch" <no@email.com> said:
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:pl8022lk43bl7jqugmp6hvvh296s2ajug3@4ax.com...
"Dutch" <no@email.com> said:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism
were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Are you aware of the process that occur in "conception"? When does an
ovum become "fertilized"?
Not specifically, no. That should be quite easy to look up.
Well, it would be interesting to know what point after the lucky sperm
draws up near to and taps on the ovum, but before implantation, you
call the beginning of human live.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 10:10:36 AM |
|
|
"Dutch" <no@email.com> said:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Dutch, I don't recall seeing your replies.
Would you mind answering the questions? I am interested all of them,
but especially in your answer to #2. If you believe that human life
begins at conception, how should we determine whether conception has
occurred?
1. At what moment between intercourse and live birth (inclusive of
those two points) should a human life be assumed to have begun, that
should be protected to at least some extent, by abortion laws? Choose
one:
a. As soon as semen is in the vagina
b. At conception -- as soon as a sperm cell successfully enters and
combines with an ovum in the uterine tract
c. As soon as the fertilized ovum has implanted on the uterine wall
d. _______ months after the last menstrual period (the last menstrual
period is the conventional way of dating the start of pregnancy).
e. Ultrasound showing heartbeat, limb movements, etc.
f. At quickening (first easily detectable movement of the fetus).
g. At live birth.
h. Other __________________.
Additional comments? ______
2. If your answer is a "moment" that is not easily detected or
established, what evaluation, information or test should be used to
determine when that moment has occurred in an individual situation?
(Note that the moment of conception is not currently determinable by
tests -- existing pregnancy tests detect implantation.)
a. The woman's evaluation alone.
b. The man's evaluation alone.
c. Whichever of them wants the earliest evaluation to be used.
d. The word or decision of other non-medical persons (who? _________)
e. A physician's evaluation alone, without tests being needed.
f. A medical exam result, eg, a positive pregnancy test, ultrasound
showing a heartbeat, or other test that fits your answer to #1
g. Other objective evidence (what) ________?
Additional comments? ______
3. Assuming that the moment when human life has begun as in question
#1 has occurred and been confirmed as in question #2, under what
circumstances should the woman be permitted to have an abortion?
(Pick all that apply)
a. Never
b. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis is that continuing the
pregnancy will kill her.
c. If official, confirmed medical diagnosis that continuing the
pregnancy will not kill her, but will seriously affect her health
and/or significantly shorten her life.
d. At the sole prerogative of her parent or legal guardian if she is a
minor or mentally incompetent.
e. In confirmed cases of rape including statutory rape, or incest if
she is a minor.
f. If the fetus is seriously damaged, e.g., has Down's syndrome.
g. If the man involved wants the abortion (even if she doesn't.)
h. .At her sole prerogative, with none of the reasons given in this
list of choices, required.
Additional comments? ______
4. What should the penalty be for an illegal abortion?
a. Death for woman and anyone assisting/performing the abortion.
b. Death for anyone assisting/performing abortion but only jail or
parole for her.
c. Jail sentences for anyone involved, plus delicensing of any medical
professionals involved.
d. Punish under existing homicide laws of the state, (eg, first or
second degree murder, manslaughter, etc., depending on premeditation,
mental competency, degree of complicity for accomplices, etc.)
e. Other_________
Additional comments? ______
5. What is the primary basis of your answers to these questions?
a. My religion, which is _________
b. My secular/non-religious beliefs.
c. Other________________________
Additional comments? ______
6. What is your experience regarding abortions? (It is possible to
have both a and b, below in your experiences.)
a. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did get one. The reason
was _______
b. I, or someone very close to me, had to make a choice whether to get
an abortion for one of the reasons above, and did not get one. The
reason was_______ and the reason they did not get one was __________.
c. Neither a or b.
d. Other___________
Additional comments? ______
Thank you. I might have follow up questions.
--- Jim07D6
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 11:40:29 AM |
|
|
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism
Dutch is somewhat insane and thinks that repeating the same falsehoods
will make them true. Conception is no more or less significant than
any other event.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Every year tens of millions of them do just that.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 08:24:40 AM |
|
|
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the human
organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential is
significant because it is what it means to be human.
Sperm and ova have that potential, too. Seems that you're arbitrarily
setting a line where DNA from both meld into a unique string. Why then?
Why not when the cells that will eventually become a heart start
twitching in unison? How about when the eyes form? Or, why not when
the gametes form?
Why the arbitrary "unique DNA" line?
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Yet all have the potential of fertilization. When you do not have sex
every month that the woman's body lays dormant, you are destroying
potential human lives.
Murderer.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "Torture has never been a reliable means of *
* extracting information.... One wonders why it *
* is still practiced." --Jean-Luc Picard *
****************************************************
--
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:03:34 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the
human organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential
is significant because it is what it means to be human.
Sperm and ova have that potential, too.
No they don't, not within themselves. In and of themselves they are merely
groups of short-lived cells bearing the genetic code of the parent organism.
Seems that you're arbitrarily setting a line where DNA from both meld into
a unique string.
That's not arbitrary at all, it's clearly defined as when *that* organism,
that unique life form emerges and begins to develop towards adulthood.
Why then? Why not when the cells that will eventually become a heart start
twitching in unison? How about when the eyes form? Or, why not when the
gametes form?
Because those events all fall *after* the first moment that unique life form
first emerges.
Why the arbitrary "unique DNA" line?
Why are you referring to a strictly defined point in time as "arbitrary"? It
is when the human organism of that signature, that *you* begins.
The potential of a being is extremely relevant. If a human organism were
going to die anyway in fifteen minutes that would make for a completely
different moral calculation than if it has potentially eighty years of
human life ahead of it.
Which an unfertilised ovum has.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
Yet all have the potential of fertilization.
Potential of fertilization means nothing. What is significant is the unique
organism in the midst of the incredible process of growing, dividing,
developing towards adult form. You advocate *killing* that process.
When you do not have sex every month that the woman's body lays dormant,
you are destroying potential human lives.
Murderer.
Rubbish, grade-school sophistry.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
22 Mar 2006 01:00:31 AM |
|
|
Dutch <no@email.com> wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence of the
human organism which may last eighty years or more. That whole potential
is significant because it is what it means to be human.
Sperm and ova have that potential, too.
No they don't, not within themselves.
Likewise embryos and fetuses.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 03:23:02 PM |
|
|
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
of the human organism
It no more a human than a random grain of sand is a sandcastle. Yes,
sandcastles are made out of sand. But it's ridiculous to compare a
grain of sand to castle and say that the two are equivalent. If they
are not equivalent to stop referring grains as "sandcastles" or even as
"potential sandcastles". The fact is that you don't know what the sand
will become and you likewise don't know that a fertilized ovum will turn
into a human. 3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
No fertilized ovum has ever grown into a baby in a petri dish. No first
term fetus has ever survived outside of a mother's womb.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 03:45:58 PM |
|
|
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins. What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
of the human organism
It no more a human than a random grain of sand is a sandcastle. Yes,
sandcastles are made out of sand. But it's ridiculous to compare a
grain of sand to castle and say that the two are equivalent.
That is a very weak analogy, it's like saying you can just pour water over a
brick and it will become a house. Grains of sand are not living organisms
containing within them the incredibly intelligent genetic code and capacity
to become a whole adult human being, an embryo is.
If they
are not equivalent to stop referring grains as "sandcastles" or even as
"potential sandcastles".
That's just really, really bad.
The fact is that you don't know what the sand
will become
Yes I do, no amount of nourishment will allow a grain of sand to develop
into anything. To become something requires the application of incredible
intelligence and ingenuity. Not only does the fetus contain this ability, it
contains the unparalleled ability to turn sand into castles of the
imagination as well.
and you likewise don't know that a fertilized ovum will turn
into a human.
It already is an early-stage human.
3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
Assuming that is a correct statistic, so what? We are not tasked to overcome
the vagaries of nature. What is significant here is what we *do* and why.
No unfertilized ovum has ever grown into a human or ever will.
No fertilized ovum has ever grown into a baby in a petri dish. No first
term fetus has ever survived outside of a mother's womb.
All the more reason to leave the marvel that is a human fetus where it can
continue to develop into an adult human being, not kill it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:11:57 PM |
|
|
"Dutch" <> said:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins. What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
Yes but the point is, when is the "beginning of conception"? If it is
not at the moment of ejaculation, would you mind going to the
following link and say when it is?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:12:33 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:15u0225am8v972ak5dpuj6mov25ai7cub9@4ax.com...
"Dutch" < > said:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
Yes but the point is, when is the "beginning of conception"? If it is
not at the moment of ejaculation, would you mind going to the
following link and say when it is?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840
All he says is that a lot of joinings of egg and sperm end up as non-events.
I don't see the purpose of that argument. Anyway, my answer is 10. when the
first full set of diploid chromosomes begins to assemble.
LOL! I notice that he warns men that if you vote for outlawing abortion you
might regret it sometime while out of town on a business trip getting a
little side action. What a dink.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:46:46 PM |
|
|
"Dutch" <> said:
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:15u0225am8v972ak5dpuj6mov25ai7cub9@4ax.com...
"Dutch" < > said:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
Yes but the point is, when is the "beginning of conception"? If it is
not at the moment of ejaculation, would you mind going to the
following link and say when it is?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840
All he says is that a lot of joinings of egg and sperm end up as non-events.
I don't see the purpose of that argument. Anyway, my answer is 10. when the
first full set of diploid chromosomes begins to assemble.
OK, now, is there a test to determine when that happens, a test that
does not destroy what we'd want to preserve?
LOL! I notice that he warns men that if you vote for outlawing abortion you
might regret it sometime while out of town on a business trip getting a
little side action. What a dink.
Yep, that would be a dink.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:05:36 PM |
|
|
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:15u0225am8v972ak5dpuj6mov25ai7cub9@4ax.com...
"Dutch" < > said:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
Yes but the point is, when is the "beginning of conception"? If it is
not at the moment of ejaculation, would you mind going to the
following link and say when it is?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840
Oh, yikes! Right away he uses pro-choice jargon like "anti-choice", "myth".
Anything he says without a very clear arms-length citation gets heavily
discounted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:45:12 PM |
|
|
"Dutch" <> said:
"Jim07D6" <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:15u0225am8v972ak5dpuj6mov25ai7cub9@4ax.com...
"Dutch" < > said:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
What
follows is a continuous process of growth, regrowth, and development until
death.
Yes but the point is, when is the "beginning of conception"? If it is
not at the moment of ejaculation, would you mind going to the
following link and say when it is?
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/8/64210/84840
Oh, yikes! Right away he uses pro-choice jargon like "anti-choice", "myth".
Anything he says without a very clear arms-length citation gets heavily
discounted.
Sorry you couldn't get past that. We have to be able to get past that,
to find common ground.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Frank ODwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 04:01:47 PM |
|
|
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
You are making it up.
[...]
3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
Assuming that is a correct statistic, so what? We are not tasked to overcome
the vagaries of nature.
And yet when it comes to real people we will move heaven and earth to do just that.
- Frank
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:00:16 PM |
|
|
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fJ_Tf.11657$814.9560@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
You are making it up.
Argument by denial.
[...]
3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
Assuming that is a correct statistic, so what? We are not tasked to
overcome the vagaries of nature.
And yet when it comes to real people we will move heaven and earth to do
just that.
We develop medical treatments and procedures within the limits of our
abilities. None of them are foolproof. There are now surgical operations and
treatments performed on fetal organisms, so we are developing that area of
medicine. Early stage embyros are in a fragile situation, I see nothing in
that would benefit the agenda of a person like yourself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank ODwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 06:44:43 PM |
|
|
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fJ_Tf.11657$814.9560@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
You are making it up.
Argument by denial.
Also known as "Prove it"
[...]
3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
Assuming that is a correct statistic, so what? We are not tasked to
overcome the vagaries of nature.
And yet when it comes to real people we will move heaven and earth to do
just that.
We develop medical treatments and procedures within the limits of our
abilities.
Just only for real people.
None of them are foolproof.
But procedures to improve implantation rates exist and work pretty well. Apart
from infertile couples and their providers, nobody cares.
There are now surgical operations and
treatments performed on fetal organisms, so we are developing that area of
medicine.
Only for fetuses that are planned to be born.
Early stage embyros are in a fragile situation, I see nothing in
that would benefit the agenda of a person like yourself.
And what "agenda" would that be?
- Frank
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
21 Mar 2006 11:44:44 PM |
|
|
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%51Uf.1523$Ph2.1010@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fJ_Tf.11657$814.9560@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
You are making it up.
Argument by denial.
Also known as "Prove it"
Right, with the usual crossed arms, stamp of one foot, and petulant nod.
[...]
3/4ths either fail to implant or spontaneously abort
early on.
Assuming that is a correct statistic, so what? We are not tasked to
overcome the vagaries of nature.
And yet when it comes to real people we will move heaven and earth to do
just that.
We develop medical treatments and procedures within the limits of our
abilities.
Just only for real people.
No, they are used on animals also.
None of them are foolproof.
But procedures to improve implantation rates exist and work pretty well.
Apart from infertile couples and their providers, nobody cares.
Why would they?
There are now surgical operations and treatments performed on fetal
organisms, so we are developing that area of medicine.
Only for fetuses that are planned to be born.
I presume they would work equally well on any fetus.
Early stage embyros are in a fragile situation, I see nothing in that
would benefit the agenda of a person like yourself.
And what "agenda" would that be?
To wave your hand perfunctorily and make vanish all the annoying objections
of people concerned with the interests of fetuses.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Frank ODwyer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
22 Mar 2006 04:18:05 PM |
|
|
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%51Uf.1523$Ph2.1010@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fJ_Tf.11657$814.9560@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>, says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life begins.
You are making it up.
Argument by denial.
Also known as "Prove it"
Right, with the usual crossed arms, stamp of one foot, and petulant nod.
That is indeed your usual 'proof'.
You say here that the "beginning of conception" is the moment that a new human
life begins, and in another post a little later you say that the beginning is
step 10 of conception.
It is obvious that you are simply making it up as you go along.
- Frank
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dutch" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
24 Mar 2006 04:43:56 AM |
|
|
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%51Uf.1523$Ph2.1010@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fJ_Tf.11657$814.9560@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
Dutch wrote:
"quibbler" <quibbler247@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1e8a1ca0ab3b86929896bd@news.readfreenews.net...
In article <121vlv3j4bj55b3@news.supernews.com>,
says...
"Frank O'Dwyer" <batsignal1@gmail.com> wrote
Dutch wrote:
You cannot isolate a moment in time and declare that *it* is the
only
factor.
A "moment" like conception.
Right, that just happens to be the beginning of the existence
Conception isn't a moment. It takes place over days.
The beginning of conception is the moment that a new human life
begins.
You are making it up.
Argument by denial.
Also known as "Prove it"
Right, with the usual crossed arms, stamp of one foot, and petulant nod.
That is indeed your usual 'proof'.
Why are you making demands that I prove to you when a human life begins?
Why should I care what you think? Why don't you prove when human life
begins?
You say here that the "beginning of conception" is the moment that a new
human life begins, and in another post a little later you say that the
beginning is step 10 of conception.
Step 10? wtf? Where did you get that?
It is obvious that you are simply making it up as you go along.
It is obvious that you have nothing to contribute.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: A Few Abortion Questions |
25 Mar 2006 12:28:48 AM |
|
|
Dutch < | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
