henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Jul 31, 2020 3:23 pm
Doesn't that assume that any, "bun in the oven," is bread (to use your metaphor)?
As a irrational deist I believe the bun in the oven is bread even when it's just a cluster of rapidly dividin' bread cells.
Goin' solely by science, I'd have to say the bun is bread by the beginnin' of the second trimester and not before.
I'm questioning the meaning of, "human?" Is the "bun" human because it is the consequence of coitus? Is it human because the cells are are genetically human? Is it human whether it makes it to term or not?
Bein' an irrational deist, I think the meaning or definition of person
is what we ought to focus on. What constitutes a person? Some folks think such a question has no factual answer. What do you think?
If the fetus is ectopic it is never going to reach term and if not removed it will kill the mother. Is that fetus a human being?
Goin' by science, after week 12, yeah, it's a person. It's also assumed the role of tumor
. Mom has a decision to make.
One kind of molar pregnancy produces an organism that is genetically human but not viable because the fertilized egg was not fully mature. Another kind of molar pregnancy produces a non-viable organism with an extra set of chromosomes (all perfectly human) which cannot survive but can kill the mother. Are these buns human beings?
Are these deviations persons? I don't know. Mebbe. Probably. Again: Mom has a decision to make.
What is a parasitic twin? It is genetically identical to the host twin, but cannot survive on it's own if removed from the host twin, but the host may not survive if it isn't. Is a parasitic twin a human being? The argument that it isn't because it cannot survive on its own sounds suspiciously like the description of any fetus, which cannot survive on its own.
Which raises the question of all fetuses with cephalic disorders, such as anencephaly, which is a fetus without most of its head or brain, or no brain at all (like a parasitic twin). They are genetically human but can never gain consciousness, even if born.
Between 10 and 20 percent of all pregnancies involve one of these non-viable buns.
With these (ectopic, molar, parasitic, cephalic) we move from abortion as relief from inconvenience
to abortion to save at least one life
The first, in my irrationally morally realistic view is wrong; the second is a matter of soul-searchin' and hard choices.
So my question is what exactly identifies a mass of protoplasm as a human being? If murder is killing a human being, just exactly what a human being is must be specified, doesn't it?
As I say: I focus on what is a person?
Unlike some folks, I'll give you an answer...
As a deist (whacky, irrational, morally realistic, ought to be locked away): I believe personhood is when spirit is irrevocably coupled to substance (crazy, yeah?). This composite of spirit and substance (soul and flesh, information and matter) is a person.
Goin' only by science: a person arises from a particular and peculiar kind of biological complexity most clearly evidenced by human beings from the end of the end of the first trimester on.
We associate certain qualities or characteristics with personhood. A full listing would bore the forum, tax me, and isn't necessary for the conversation. We can sum personhood up in this way: I-ness
(yeah, another whacky notion, like ownness
[somebody get the white coat boys in here, Quirk done gone off the deep end!].
We can talk about I-ness
if you want.