Abortion
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Abortion
hack,
yes, I am
no, I won't
(how's that for snippin'? didn't bother quotin' you)
next up: snippin' out my responses
yes, I am
no, I won't
(how's that for snippin'? didn't bother quotin' you)
next up: snippin' out my responses
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Abortion
Go back to Know Thyself!!Mr. Snippet wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:56 pm hack,
yes, I am
no, I won't
(how's that for snippin'? didn't bother quotin' you)
next up: snippin' out my responses
Re: Abortion
A foetus is not a human being, innocent or otherwise.iambiguous wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 6:46 pmIs that true, Mr. Snippet?
The unborn may exist as a result of rape. But that doesn't make it any less an innocent human being.
But clearly making this exception raped or not, directs the interest to only selectively punish women.
This is always a tricky situation for some in the pro-life movement. There are those who are adamant that a life is a life and as terrible as the pregnancy itself is for the woman who is raped, it is still her moral obligation to give birth. Others accept that here exceptions can be made and abortion is reluctantly okay.
With God?
The same with pregnancies in which the woman's life may be endangered in giving birth.
Or the far more ambiguous context in which the woman's mental health may be impaired. How do we determine if this is true? What if the woman is just claiming that it is in order to have the abortion? In, say, a jurisdiction in which otherwise it would be illegal.
At least the faithful here can fall back on God. He knows all. And the bottom line is always Judgment Day.
Although with Mr. Snippet's God...you tell me.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Abortion
hack,
[snipped]
(next up: snippin' you outta my forum view)
[snipped]
(next up: snippin' you outta my forum view)
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Abortion
sculptor,
when does the fetus become a human being?A foetus is not a human being
- iambiguous
- Posts: 7444
- Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm
Re: Abortion
Here, of course, we are all in the same boat. We can assert what the fetus is as though we were something akin to an omniscient God, but, instead, in being just mere mortals, we have no way in which to demonstrate definitively when the unborn becomes a human being.henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:59 pm sculptor,
when does the fetus become a human being?A foetus is not a human being
From my frame of mind, it starts at conception. After all, not a single one of us "here and now" would be around if we were not first conceived, were zygotes, were embryos, were fetuses. It's one necessarily entirely intact sequence.
It's like Ayn Rand making that bold distinction between acorns and oak trees. As though there is even a single oak thee out there that was not first an acorn.
Nope, I think this tendency to draw different lines in different places here is just a way for those who have abortions [or perform them] to rationalize it. Shredding a "clump of cells" is okay.
But, come on, who is kidding whom?
That's why being "fractured and fragmented" here makes the most sense. You acknowledge that abortion is the killing of a human being, but you also insist that women must have the right to an abortion in order to have political equality with men: conflicting goods.
You're drawn and quartered because both sides make reasonable arguments; but we can't live in a world where both sides prevail. Thus the need for "moderation, negociation, and compromise.": Roe v. Wade.
Re: Abortion
That's a huge assumption that it does. Some folks have the opinion that it becomes a wallaby, and at certain stages of development it does look like a wallaby, and it does look like a fish at other times ... not microscopically, of course, but obviously some folks don't care a whit about science. Such folks can't see the reality (forest) for the ideologies (trees).henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 9:59 pm sculptor,
when does the fetus become a human being?A foetus is not a human being
I mean, who can be sure? What if it's an alien implant, like in one of them movies?
Re: Abortion
It's a question of what are the minimum requirements for someone/something to be considered a human being.
A clump of cells with human DNA does not seem to be sufficient. There's got to be more to it.
A clump of cells with human DNA does not seem to be sufficient. There's got to be more to it.
Re: Abortion
It’s more a matter of scientific knowledge. For example, as toilet gazers conditioned to the nuances of output can attest, although a turd is formed in the human body, a turd is not a human. In relation to philosophy, a turd is appropriate to fantasies limited by any particular mind portal capacity for transmission. In reality, outside of the delusions caused by conditioning, a turd is merely a piece of shit.
However, since everything changes, the foetus that is formed in the body is scientifically considered to be a human in a particular phase of changing development. Maturity is another particular phase of changing development. So is old age. The stages have definite demarcation points. For instance, first comes growth, and then decay. Maybe a bit of ossification and inflammation in between.
Come to think of it, in a metaphysical sense, which is the situation here, perhaps the beginning of decay is disproportionate attention to personal, bodily functions, which leads to limited identification of body, and the whole pronoun mess.
All the hubbub about person-hood, all the political, ideological bullshit rationalizing about clumps of cells, is nothing more than absolving the guilt of killing a human, in one of its most defenseless phases of development.
Much better for a society to level with itself and live truth by saying ... Yes, we kill humans, because we have deemed it necessary to do so.
Why is that level of brutal honesty beyond the poseurs of brutal honesty?
-
- Posts: 5039
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:29 pm
Re: Abortion
Well that's a bit much, walker. If anything, the brutal truth is that they would be preventing a life from happening later by terminating the genetic material it will evolve from, rather than killing an already living human being. As phyllo mentioned, yer talking about a cluster of cells, bruh. That's not a person, anymore than a booger from your nose is a person.
So preventing and killing are two different things man.
So preventing and killing are two different things man.
Re: Abortion
I know, it does sound mean.promethean75 wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 8:27 pm Well that's a bit much, walker. If anything, the brutal truth is that they would be preventing a life from happening later by terminating the genetic material it will evolve from, rather than killing an already living human being. As phyllo mentioned, yer talking about a cluster of cells, bruh. That's not a person, anymore than a booger from your nose is a person.
So preventing and killing are two different things man.
I feel the need for e-prime.
For a woman who shuns pregnancy, her reaction to hearing that life accepted her invitation to pregnancy, does not feel the same as a big ol’ boogie in the nostril … not felt with the same level of Fear! Boogies usually don’t warrant the capital F, for feeling fear.
No siree.
Fortunately for a woman in such a fearful fix of unwanted pregnancy, these days abortion gets treated as casually as nose picking.
However like shit, boogers are not alive, and like shit they grow larger by accumulation rather than by cell mitosis.
Did you know that in the context of abortion, the “health” of the mother references “mental health”? The way I see it, that reasoning qualifies as an ostensible excuse in most cases.
Seeing as how this mental health rationale does not require expert verification, then using “mental health preservation,” as cause for the killing act of abortion, causes a rather long stretch for ostensible to reach plausibility.
- attofishpi
- Posts: 10012
- Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
- Location: Orion Spur
- Contact:
Re: Abortion
Henry, still not sure if U R on the belief of Christianity, where both God and Christ proved it controls reality TOTALLY including indeed souls.
I do.
So. A God can put a human (a soul) into a virgin. A woman can remove a human, and return the soul to the SOULKEEPER (GOD!!!!)
..next you will be trying to defeat us...de foetus...de feet us of our SOULS!
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Abortion
atto,
I'm a deist: best I can tell, God is absent or indifferent; either way, we're on our own cuz He's not pullin' strings.
You see things differently: okay.
Are we supposed to fight about it now?
I'd rather not.
I'm a deist: best I can tell, God is absent or indifferent; either way, we're on our own cuz He's not pullin' strings.
You see things differently: okay.
Are we supposed to fight about it now?
I'd rather not.
- henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: Abortion
Too broad.Yes, we kill humans, because we have deemed it necessary to do so.
Better: yes, we kill people before they're born, and -- most of the time -- we kill 'em simply becuz they're inconvenient.