Does a pregnant woman carry a human being/person or just 'life'/meat?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I asked: why is the six week old embryo a potential human, but anyone reading this an actual human? What's the difference between that embryo and you?


You responded: viability outside the womb. take modern science into account and move the weeks of preg as "murder" vs removing a clump of cells. i,e, make abortion legal to the time prior to viability, and move that timeline back as science progresses. easy peazy.


I countered: June Wisenheimer is one month shy of her 100th birthday. Without any number of regular medical treatments and procedures, June will give up the ghost. Her days of biological viability are behind her. By your logic: we ought suspend any and all life-preserving -extending care and let her croak. Never mind that her mind is sharp, or that she might object to gettin' shoved into a grave.


You responded: i do not see the relivance of the above to abortion.


If 'viability outside the womb' is dividing line between a clump of cells and a person, then June Wisenheimer, with her decrepitude (her lack of viability) might be considered just a clump of aged cells not deserving of life-extending or -preserving care. Sounds silly, but it is the logical conclusion if 'viability outside the womb' is the litmus test. If we abort, based on inviability then we have no good reason to provide care to the inviable outside the womb.

i understand now. thanks for reply.

i do not agree with it -apples/oranges - but i understand your point now.

hard to say, but sometimes (not saying the gal you refer is one of them) - but sometimes extending life for its own sake is cruel. yes there is such a thing as mercy killing - should never be legalized (for gov power to become corrupt is too great) - but would not convict a person accused of that if given cercumstances as a juror on a trial of the accussed.

per a story about a gal that was beaten then set on fire by a serial killer - cop found the girl in the woods - he did not kill her to put her out of her missery (but i would have aquited him if i were a juror and he was on trial for killing her - he conforted her 90-pecent burnd 3rd degree body and of course she died a few hours later in the hospital.

And the hospital may well have put her out of her misery. That happens all the time. Unfortunately we are still lumbered with the kristian 'sanctity of human life' and 'suffering is good for the soul' bullshit. That's what it boils down to and the fact that politicians only care about votes. Kristians don't care how much babies and children suffer because suffering is good for them. If aborting an embryo will save a lot of future suffering then they feel it their duty to prevent that from happening.

[gaffo]

https://archive.org/details/NPRPresents ... bowitz.mp3

part 14 - the Catholic "God never gives you more suffering that you can bare" - so bare it nonsense. that is the catholic view though ;-/.

[gaffo]

moderators are working over time - 1/2 of my posts were removed in the "fascism thead" along with any reply you may have offered, oh well. i don't time for nanny mods - i out here for awhile. good day to you madam!

[vegetariantaxidermy]

moderators are working over time - 1/2 of my posts were removed in the "fascism thead" along with any reply you may have offered, oh well. i don't time for nanny mods - i out here for awhile. good day to you madam!

You might be looking at the wrong thread. There are several similar ones.

[gaffo]

maybe: watching this now anyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBcOyv8LZ8s

see ya

[henry quirk]

What a pregnant woman carries:

Is it a person?

When does it become a person?

If it's a person, shouldn't it be accorded the same consideration as any other person?

[FlashDangerpants]

What a pregnant woman carries:

Is it a person?

Eventually. But at the start of the process it is a collection of cells with personhood as a more or less probable outcome.

When does it become a person?

There's never going to be a valid way to define that. What are the essential bits of a person that makes them a person in the first place? It seems fundamentally erroneous to me to have a sub-question that is vastly larger than the parent.

At one extreme people are social beings created by participation in society and as such we aren't people until some time well beyond birth (which is why ancient societies were cool with abandoning weak babies on cold hillsides).

At the other there is some point in the gestation period where God attaches immaterial souls to those cells and that makes them persons eligible for all the life and death stuff. It hasn't always been the assumption that this occurs at conception, because in that case Hell is mostly populated by small collections of those cells which miscarried long before they could be baptized and accept Jebus as their saviour. I'm not interested in arguing about souls in an ethics sub, so I will just treat any bullshit that is predicated on them as categorically out of context here and let people who want to discuss that boring topic do so in the religion sub where I don't have to waste my time on it.

There is a current legislative trend in America to associate this bloom of personhood with a fetal heartbeat. That's before they have any form of brain that can experience things. This latter object seems more important though, the choice of a heartbeat an emotional prod to make people feel an attachment to something that has the actual biological complexity equivalent to an insect you would treat on without noticing (and which also has a heart that beats).

So another way of viewing this is to take the point at which the fetus can experience pain and so on as the first bloom of personhood. That's in the third trimester. However thanks to advancements in medical technology we don't allow abortion in that period anyway. As of right now we have a 50/50 chance of keeping the nipper alive outside the womb at 26 weeks, so that is considered the viability point, and thus the legally permitted stage at which termination can occur is typically in the 20 to 24 weeks zone.

Abortions in that time frame are rarely if ever a matter of whim, those all happened weeks earlier. They represent very real tragedies in somebody's life that it is somewhat shameful to judge at this distance.

If it's a person, shouldn't it be accorded the same consideration as any other person?

Sure, for all the sense that would make.

[henry quirk]

One question...

I asked: If it's a person, shouldn't it be accorded the same consideration as any other person?

You responded: Sure, for all the sense that would make.

Please, elaborate cuz I'm not gettin' what you mean.

[FlashDangerpants]

You con't get an awful lot of consideration just for being a person, you get most of it for what sort of person you are, and in what circumstances. Want to test that? just look at what passes for a discussion of immigration round these parts.

Prior to the viability point at roughly 26 weeks gestation, a fetus is a fraction of a baby in a life support situation who will not survive beyond 2 minutes if the plug is pulled no matter what efforts any doctor were to make on their behalf. Look at what happens to adults on those life support systems. We give them consideration, and then we pull the plug.

[henry quirk]

[gaffo]

the whole Abortion issue bores me - like Guns and Gays - its all "Red meat" (bread and circuses) to distract and divide the Proles so they fight themselves while the 1-percenters continue to rob us blind.

so i don't play that game. i could'nt care less about some feitus nor your rusty gun or if you are gay.

- but will address your below to clarify my views on a matter i really don't give 2 shits about. I care more about the Wallstreet robbers and the expansion of police power with military arms.

but if you fixate on a clump of cells while your Republic is removing your freedom and money from you - well more fool you.

What a pregnant woman carries:

Is it a person?

nope. it is a fish in the 2 trimester, and a rat in the 3rd.

When does it become a person?

upon viability outside of the womb - i allow for science to allow for viability, and so humanity. and so yes what was not human at 25 weeks 200 yrs ago (because it was not viable) - is now human due to science allowing its survival.

If it's a person, shouldn't it be accorded the same consideration as any other person?

yes - per my viability mention above.


----

surely you are not one of the millions so blind as to fall into the "bread and circus" game - why do you play there game? you wish for the 1-percenters to rob more of your money than they allready do so? if you play their game you seem to affirm "yes rob me while is play the abortion game".

wake up bubba.

[gaffo]

because in that case Hell is mostly populated by small collections of those cells which miscarried long before they could be baptized and accept Jebus as their saviour.

this concept is correct per "salvation" per Christian Dogma (well to be fair Catholic dogma allow for salvation of all that never heard the Word (and so negating the need for Christ/condoming all - including kids that hear it and die before excepting Christ - so in effect Jesus is an Agent of Death per the well meaning Catholic Dogma)) - but i digressed, ignoring Catholic dogma, your perspective of damnation of the unborn is accurate per Baptist/prot views.

that you though of this thing shows you are not a bot, but a person with a mind and use it to think!

i thank you - i like reading your above, it shows that there are still folks that think for themselves about the nature of "i, life, and everything".

rather than bleat like a sheep awaiting for DER Leader to tell them what to value and what to think about.

I'm not interested in arguing about souls in an ethics sub, so I will just treat any bullshit that is predicated on them as categorically out of context here and let people who want to discuss that boring topic do so in the religion sub where I don't have to waste my time on it.

indeed!!!!! me too. red meat bullshit fights are not worthy of my time when my Republic is being ruined by the 1-percenters.

militarization of the police and removal of Commi Conitotus (just found out it was removed via Obama in 2012 via the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) section 1020?).

There is a current legislative trend in America to associate this bloom of personhood with a fetal heartbeat. That's before they have any form of brain that can experience things. This latter object seems more important though, the choice of a heartbeat an emotional prod to make people feel an attachment to something that has the actual biological complexity equivalent to an insect you would treat on without noticing (and which also has a heart that beats).

So another way of viewing this is to take the point at which the fetus can experience pain and so on as the first bloom of personhood. That's in the third trimester. However thanks to advancements in medical technology we don't allow abortion in that period anyway. As of right now we have a 50/50 chance of keeping the nipper alive outside the womb at 26 weeks, so that is considered the viability point, and thus the legally permitted stage at which termination can occur is typically in the 20 to 24 weeks zone.

Abortions in that time frame are rarely if ever a matter of whim, those all happened weeks earlier. They represent very real tragedies in somebody's life that it is somewhat shameful to judge at this distance.

well said, and concur.

[henry quirk]

Thanks for playin', bro.

[Belinda]

Neither.

A pregnant woman carries something that is potentially a human being. Her foetus is part of a woman's body.

[henry quirk]

"Her foetus is part of a woman's body."

Well, the fetus is 'in' her, is fed by her, but is not her.