Abortion

[Zylstra]

I read some early posts, but then I realised that there were thousands of posts that would take me hours.

ditto

 

[Dante the Marxist]

Define 'human being' for the purposes of this discussion. If you mean a living human organism, you are wrong. Perhaps you mean a 'human' consciousness? In that case, you still must define 'human', since it implies that it is the consciousness worth protecting, which raises questions regarding animal rights, AI, 'cyber children' etc

I mean human consciousness, meaning a mind with the ability to reason, feel emotion, and ponder.

 

[Zylstra]

I mean human consciousness, meaning a mind with the ability to reason, feel emotion, and ponder.

What of non-human consciousness with the ability to reason, feel emotion, and 'ponder'? If it is consciousness that is worth saving, how do you justify not extending this to any and all systems which demonstrate such traits?


Perhaps you have failed to list (notice?)some criteria or prejudice?

 

[Dante the Marxist]

What of non-human consciousness with the ability to reason, feel emotion, and 'ponder'? If it is consciousness that is worth saving, how do you justify not extending this to any and all systems which demonstrate such traits?


Perhaps you have failed to list (notice?)some criteria or prejudice?

Whales, apes, dogs, humans. Conciousness worth saving. Everything else can die for all I care.

 

[Dr.Who]

A fetus in the embryonic stage is not yet a human being. After that, they are people.

well since it is a human from conception and since it is an individual (being) since conception and since the definition of person is a human being I don't see how you can say that.

If you want to admit that they are humans and beings and persons but that they don't deserve rights at least you would be saying something consistent with the meaning of the words.

 

[Dr.Who]

Great.

OK then at least we know you do not buy into the silly notion that it only a womans' choice. If you would outlaw abortion after 8 weeks then you would limit a woman's choice after 8 weeks.

 

[Dr.Who]

So terminating an ectopic pregnancy should get you sent to prison?

Perhaps you'd care to rephrase your statement?

Assuming that the ectopic pregnancy would kill her (and it is a pretty safe assumption) then she has two choices:

1) Defend herself by the undesirable method of killing a living human being. The courts would permit this.

2) Remove the embryo and do everything she can do to provide it with a viable alternative environment in which to live.

 

[Dr.Who]

Define 'human being' for the purposes of this discussion. If you mean a living human organism, you are wrong. Perhaps you mean a 'human' consciousness? In that case, you still must define 'human', since it implies that it is the consciousness worth protecting, which raises questions regarding animal rights, AI, 'cyber children' etc

the words human and person have been defined for a long long time now and both definitions would require us to protect the unborn.

My definition (not legally binding) would be that a human has human parents and a person is any human (same as the legal definition).

 

[Zylstra]

Assuming that the ectopic pregnancy would kill her (and it is a pretty safe assumption) then she has two choices:

1) Defend herself by the undesirable method of killing a living human being. The courts would permit this.

2) Remove the embryo and do everything she can do to provide it with a viable alternative environment in which to live.

2 is not medically possible at this time

1 would get her locked away or executed by Steve's thinking

 

[Zylstra]

The law does not define '[person' as 'any human'. If it did, this subject wouldn't be a legal grey area

 

[Dante the Marxist]

well since it is a human from conception and since it is an individual (being) since conception and since the definition of person is a human being I don't see how you can say that.

If you want to admit that they are humans and beings and persons but that they don't deserve rights at least you would be saying something consistent with the meaning of the words.

OK, but they are not yet sentient, and are thus no different then a cow or fish.

 

[Dante the Marxist]

Assuming that the ectopic pregnancy would kill her (and it is a pretty safe assumption) then she has two choices:

1) Defend herself by the undesirable method of killing a living human being. The courts would permit this.

2) Remove the embryo and do everything she can do to provide it with a viable alternative environment in which to live.

Thats actually a wonderful idea.

 

[dahermit]

Assuming that the ectopic pregnancy would kill her (and it is a pretty safe assumption) then she has two choices:

1) Defend herself by the undesirable method of killing a living human being. The courts would permit this.

2) Remove the embryo and do everything she can do to provide it with a viable alternative environment in which to live.

3) Remove the embryo and deliver it to Conservative Ideologues so that they can provide it with a viable alternative environment in which to live.

 

[dahermit]

OK, but they are not yet sentient, and are thus no different then a cow or fish.

I suggest that you read all of Palerider's posts on the subject (admittedly there are many of them) before you make any more posts on the subject. This was all address before, and it will make you look less ignorant to the readers who have read his responses to posts like yours. You are just repeating statements that he countered.

Note: I am pro-abortion.

 

[Zylstra]

I've seen PR's attempts on another forum, if it's the same PR. I've countered his 'points' all before. I posted a lengthy post a few pages back that addressed this issue in some depth.