478 replies to this topic

[Sweeney]

EDIT: And Sweeney, that is one of the great questions in the debate, along with when life begins.

The question of when "life" begins is irrelevant. Every stage of pregnancy consists of live cells. As do tumours. As do amputated limbs. We kill living cells for convenience all the time.

[Frizzle]

I had a wank and killed millions and then I went for a wash and killed even more.

[Kaddict]

The question of when "life" begins is irrelevant. Every stage of pregnancy consists of live cells. As do tumours. As do amputated limbs. We kill living cells for convenience all the time.

 

Cells are living, so are bacteria. But what I am obviously talking about is when life begins, a distinct life from the host. I seriously hope you were just trying to troll me...
At conception, there starts "life" of an organism that is distinct from mother or father, but when do you consider that ball of cells a human life?

 

EDIT: Also, fun fact, the human body has more bacterial cells than it has human cells. 

Edited by Kaddict, 18 July 2014 - 08:59 AM.

[Sweeney]

Cells are living, so are bacteria. But what I am obviously talking about is when life begins, a distinct life from the host. I seriously hope you were just trying to troll me...
At conception, there starts "life" of an organism that is distinct from mother or father, but when do you consider that ball of cells a human life?
 
EDIT: Also, fun fact, the human body has more bacterial cells than it has human cells.

Oh, "obviously". It's a shame that what you're talking about is a completely arbitrary distinction that has no scientific definition. Please explain to me how you define this border of "distinct life", and why it matters at all.

And, yes. We all know that.

[Kaddict]

Distinct life means non-self. The question is when you define it as a human life. Ridding yourself of your own cells is a daily occurance and has no comparable relation to this topic. Many Christians feel human life starts at conception, which is why it is a big deal for some people to take morning after pills and whatnot. But I feel that most people would agree a blastula isn't a human. So what is it that makes a human to you individually? Is it the beating heart? Is it fingernails? Is it a name? Or is it when it is born full term? Because having an abortion after the time that you decide it is a human life, is murder. That is why some people are so vehemently apposed to it. There isn't a definition that is generally agreed upon and accepted. 

[Cass]

Distinct life means non-self. The question is when you define it as a human life. Ridding yourself of your own cells is a daily occurance and has no comparable relation to this topic. Many Christians feel human life starts at conception, which is why it is a big deal for some people to take morning after pills and whatnot. But I feel that most people would agree a blastula isn't a human. So what is it that makes a human to you individually? Is it the beating heart? Is it fingernails? Is it a name? Or is it when it is born full term? Because having an abortion after the time that you decide it is a human life, is murder. That is why some people are so vehemently apposed to it. There isn't a definition that is generally agreed upon and accepted. 

I think that most people can agree that a (human) lifeform that cannot survive outside the uterus, id est the maximum age most countries allow abortion, cannot be defined as a human life in the way you mean it (so, ethically?)

[Kaddict]

I think that most people can agree that a (human) lifeform that cannot survive outside the uterus, id est the maximum age most countries allow abortion, cannot be defined as a human life in the way you mean it (so, ethically?)

This is the general consensus, but when will it stop? As technology advances, the time a baby needs in utero before being able to stay alive outside will diminish. 

[Sweeney]

Distinct life means non-self. The question is when you define it as a human life. Ridding yourself of your own cells is a daily occurance and has no comparable relation to this topic. Many Christians feel human life starts at conception, which is why it is a big deal for some people to take morning after pills and whatnot. But I feel that most people would agree a blastula isn't a human. So what is it that makes a human to you individually? Is it the beating heart? Is it fingernails? Is it a name? Or is it when it is born full term? Because having an abortion after the time that you decide it is a human life, is murder. That is why some people are so vehemently apposed to it. There isn't a definition that is generally agreed upon and accepted.

There isn't a definition that is agreed upon and accepted. Therefore it cannot be codified into law. Your beliefs are irrelevant to what my wife, or any other woman, chooses to do with her body.

[Kaddict]

There isn't a definition that is agreed upon and accepted. Therefore it cannot be codified into law. Your beliefs are irrelevant to what my wife, or any other woman, chooses to do with her body.

Ugh. No one cares what women are doing to their own bodies (well, some crazy people may care, but I would say most don't). What most people care about is what she is doing with the body that isn't hers. The life of the baby. We are not ok with mothers murdering their babies because they cry too much. We would not be ok with them killing the baby at birth for some reason. So then, how far back does it go? at 39 weeks is it ok? Or only at 24 because that is when most babies can't survive outside the womb?
http://healthland.ti...-young-to-save/

And just bc something can't be defined the same was as the whole population doesn't mean we can't pass it into law...

[Sweeney]

Ugh. No one cares what women are doing to their own bodies (well, some crazy people may care, but I would say most don't). What most people care about is what she is doing with the body that isn't hers. The life of the baby. We are not ok with mothers murdering their babies because they cry too much. We would not be ok with them killing the baby at birth for some reason. So then, how far back does it go? at 39 weeks is it ok? Or only at 24 because that is when most babies can't survive outside the womb?
http://healthland.ti...-young-to-save/

And just bc something can't be defined the same was as the whole population doesn't mean we can't pass it into law...

I've lost track of what you're arguing here. You said earlier that you are pro-life except in the cases of rape and maternal health complications. To me, that means you want to make abortion illegal for people who don't, in your opinion, fit those categories.

You're essentially saying here that you can't personally decide when the cut off should be, so we should make it all illegal, and to hell with the concept of a person having autonomy over their own body. I'm saying that you're giving a bunch of cells more rights than a grown woman. Your position, as I understand it, is woefully underdeveloped and, frankly, insulting.

But here, let me ask you this. If abortion were to be made illegal, how should women who have illegal abortions be punished?

[NapisaurusRex]

Also, going back to preg risks, how do you guys feel about the increasing trend of home birth?

I think it's fantastic and I hope to get the opportunity to do it myself.

[talbs]

But here, let me ask you this. If abortion were to be made illegal, how should women who have illegal abortions be punished?

 

Wouldn't the courts aim to punish those performing illegal abortions? Any doctor in America would be stripped of their license. Eventually the practice would completely phase out apart from a black market and I'd imagine finding a person to illegally perform an abortion would be a little more difficult than someone willing to sell you drugs, bootleg DVDs, and countless other illegal goods/services people buy. I'm no expert but what kind of utensils would some average Joe have to have lying around his home in order to perform these newly illegal procedures for people? (Assuming the yet to be developed abortion black market is made up of people who aren't displaced physicians)

 

I don't have a dog in the fight, I've just been reading all the debate, and that question popped in my head.

Edited by talbs, 18 July 2014 - 10:11 AM.

[Sweeney]

Wouldn't the courts aim to punish those performing illegal abortions? Any doctor in America would be stripped of their rights to practice, presumably.

If it's murder we're talking about, both the doctor and the mother would be complicit.

[Kaddict]

I've lost track of what you're arguing here. You said earlier that you are pro-life except in the cases of rape and maternal health complications. To me, that means you want to make abortion illegal for people who don't, in your opinion, fit those categories.

You're essentially saying here that you can't personally decide when the cut off should be, so we should make it all illegal, and to hell with the concept of a person having autonomy over their own body. I'm saying that you're giving a bunch of cells more rights than a grown woman. Your position, as I understand it, is woefully underdeveloped and, frankly, insulting.

But here, let me ask you this. If abortion were to be made illegal, how should women who have illegal abortions be punished?

No, I am not making an argument for my case. I am asking opinions. And I am asking people who are all for abortions to tell me when and why the cutoff should be at a certain point. I am asking you, when, to you, that bunch of cells turns into human life. Is it at the 24 week mark?

Ideally, the punishment would be revocation of procreative powers. But, that isn't realistic. (Honestly, I have sometimes thought it would be great if guys and girls didn't have sperm and eggs until they were ready for them, and passed a basic parenting test. Dystopian ideal? Maybe). It would likely be a fine for the parents, and a board trial for the doctor that aided. Increased punishment for repeat offenses or graver circumstances.

[Sweeney]

No, I am not making an argument for my case. I am asking opinions. And I am asking people who are all for abortions to tell me when and why the cutoff should be at a certain point. I am asking you, when, to you, that bunch of cells turns into human life. Is it at the 24 week mark?

Ideally, the punishment would be revocation of procreative powers. But, that isn't realistic. (Honestly, I have sometimes thought it would be great if guys and girls didn't have sperm and eggs until they were ready for them, and passed a basic parenting test. Dystopian ideal? Maybe). It would likely be a fine for the parents, and a board trial for the doctor that aided. Increased punishment for repeat offenses or graver circumstances.

I believe people should be able to choose. I think the arbitrary cutoff for "human life" is deceptive, distracting and wholly unhelpful. I think focussing a discussion on that point is inane.

I also think your attitude is ludicrous for one who is training to be a doctor, and is hiding their beliefs behind the veil of "do no harm".

[Kaddict]

I believe people should be able to choose. I think the arbitrary cutoff for "human life" is deceptive, distracting and wholly unhelpful. I think focussing a discussion on that point is inane.

I also think your attitude is ludicrous for one who is training to be a doctor, and is hiding their beliefs behind the veil of "do no harm".

How is determining what human life is a distraction? That is the whole reason people are against abortions, because it is an end of human life! Are you serious?

Also, to which part of my attitude are you referring? I hope it wasn't the clearly sarcastic part of revoking procreative privilege...

[Sweeney]

How is determining what human life is a distraction? That is the whole reason people are against abortions, because it is an end of human life! Are you serious?

Also, to which part of my attitude are you referring? I hope it wasn't the clearly sarcastic part of revoking procreative privilege...

Because "when does it become alive?" is a question that doesn't matter. All stages of pregnancy represent "human life". The question of when it becomes "independent life" is likewise irrelevant, because it depends entirely on medical capability. The only questions that matter are "does pursuing an alternative to abortion represent a greater risk to the mother's health, physically or mentally?", and "is the mother willing to undergo that risk?". If the answer to those questions are yes and then no, then the abortion is the ethical choice.

I am referring to your entire attitude - though I am confused by your reference to "clearly sarcastic" parts of your post that weren't anything like "clearly sarcastic". They read as totally sincere to me, and it would be worth your consideration that sarcasm is not generally a favoured tool in debate.

[Kaddict]

Because "when does it become alive?" is a question that doesn't matter. All stages of pregnancy represent "human life". The question of when it becomes "independent life" is likewise irrelevant, because it depends entirely on medical capability. The only questions that matter are "does pursuing an alternative to abortion represent a greater risk to the mother's health, physically or mentally?", and "is the mother willing to undergo that risk?". If the answer to those questions are yes and then no, then the abortion is the ethical choice.

I feel it isn't irrelevant. So, are you willing to allow abortions at any point during pregnancy?

[Sweeney]

I feel it isn't irrelevant. So, are you willing to allow abortions at any point during pregnancy?

If you read what I just wrote, you'll find the answer to that question contained within.

[Kaddict]

If you read what I just wrote, you'll find the answer to that question contained within.

even at 40weeks?

[Sweeney]

even at 40weeks?

I don't think I can be much clearer, can I?

[Adam]

@Sweeney -- just curious here, do you believe in after-birth abortion/infanticide?

For those of you unaware of this idea/prospective practice; here are some links.  [1] & [2]

I'd like to know your thoughts and arguments on the topic.

Edited by Adam, 18 July 2014 - 10:48 AM.

[Kaddict]

I don't think I can be much clearer, can I?

Wow, I honestly didn't see that one coming. Even most people that are super pro-choice are a bit disgusted by that...

[Sweeney]

@Sweeney -- just curious here, do you believe in after-birth abortion/infanticide?
For those of you unaware of this idea/prospective practice; here are some links.  %5B1%5D & %5B2%5D
I'd like to know your thoughts and arguments on the topic.

I have trouble imagining a scenario where there are no less-damaging alternatives available.

Wow, I honestly didn't see that one coming. Even most people that are super pro-choice are a bit disgusted by that...

Nothing about my opinion is disgusting. If you believe it is, then you have misunderstood.

[Ali]

Eventually the practice would completely phase out apart from a black market and I'd imagine finding a person to illegally perform an abortion would be a little more difficult than someone willing to sell you drugs, bootleg DVDs, and countless other illegal goods/services people buy. I'm no expert but what kind of utensils would some average Joe have to have lying around his home in order to perform these newly illegal procedures for people? (Assuming the yet to be developed abortion black market is made up of people who aren't displaced physicians)

We got through god knows how long with abortion being illegal (and parts of the world where it still is), you'd be surprised how well the practice endures regardless of legality. Outrightly dangerous of course, so whilst the abortion rate would drop, you're exposing women to far greater risk. Not to mention the harm women will inflict on themselves if they don't have the means to go down the backstreet route.

 

 

Personally I wouldn't bother, if I ever got pregnant and was denied an abortion I'm fairly certain I'd end up killing myself. Fuck your sanctity of life argument, you can either let me have an abortion or I'll be taking us both out.