- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I'm sorry, SheWolf. These distinctions that make all the difference to you just don't make any sense to me. I have a friend who's 36 weeks pregnant. If he (screw calling him an "it" or a fetus, it is a he) was born today, he'd likely be fine. I just cannot imagine her telling me she wants to abort the pregnancy and me being, "well as long as he stays in the womb while it's done, it somehow completely changes what he is".
You're being inconsistent. If the unborn life is not worth protecting why do you say you oppose late term abortion?
That's a lot less arbitrary than saying it's not a baby in the first trimester, it kinda sorta starts being baby-like in the second trimester and it is a baby in the third (unless it has physical problems).
Sorry for being so apathetic, but, what exactly is morally wrong with quickly dispatching a newborn?
Seriously? :shock:
Yes. I don't see how it's any worse than killing a newborn puppy, deer, etc. If you use the "Depriving it of a happy life" routine, I assure you that most animals experience a more fulfilling existence than human beings. I wasn't trying to make a point, just curious as to why this is any worse than late-term abortions?Seriously? :shock:
Yes. I don't see how it's any worse than killing a newborn puppy, deer, etc. If you use the "Depriving it of a happy life" routine, I assure you that most animals experience a more fulfilling existence than human beings. I wasn't trying to make a point, just curious as to why this is any worse than late-term abortions?
Sorry to say it cold but the unborn and even newborns are easily replaceable
She didn't say that
From what you just said, you would not support legal protection for a baby in the womb no matter how far along it is, am I right? I actually already know you won't answer the question but I thought I'd ask it anyway.
Yes. I don't see how it's any worse than killing a newborn puppy, deer, etc. If you use the "Depriving it of a happy life" routine, I assure you that most animals experience a more fulfilling existence than human beings. I wasn't trying to make a point, just curious as to why this is any worse than late-term abortions?
Seriously? :shock:
I'll answer if you can explain exactly when this "moment of conception" BS occurs
To play your same silly game, explain to me what you mean by birth. Is it when the baby is naturally born or does inducing birth early count? What if it's not completely out. What if the baby's crowning? Could a woman decide at the point she's changed her mind about the whole thing and tell the doc to go ahead and abort it?
I would disagree. I don't think of MY son as replaceable at all. A baby can be replaced, but it is NOT the same person. Why would anyone even say such a thing?
What motivation would there be to say such things?
Seriously. Welcome to the natural conclusion of the baby-grist mill that America has become. There is no discernible moral distinction between killing a child still in the womb or killing it 10 minutes later once it is out, so if the former is acceptable (and many believe that it is), then why wouldn't the latter? The child you are killing is no different.
I'm glad to see you arguing that birth is no less arbitrary than your own criteria for determining when a life is deserving of legal protection
That's absolutely disgusting IMO. I could never even harm a baby in any way whatsoever. I can't imagine how or why people would want to even think about EVER doing such a horrible thing!
I'll answer if you can explain exactly when this "moment of conception" BS occurs
Naturally. There is no more particular reason to establish "Birth" as there is "the fifth birthday" or "12th week of gestation". All simply represent different stages of a child growing into an adult, and there is no moral distinction between the killing of a child in any of them.
Well, I think it's when the sperm penetrates and fertilizes the egg.
FYI:
Discovery Health "From Sex to Conception"
When an egg enters the fallopian tube from the other end, it produces a scent that drives the sperm cells crazy. They become very excited and begin a process called capacitation, during which they shed certain proteins and become very excited. Both the shedding of proteins and the boost in mobility aid the sperm cell in its quest to penetrate the egg.
When a sperm cell finally makes contact with the egg, the head of the sperm releases enzymes that help it penetrate the egg's exterior. Once a sperm cell does, the two cells -- the sperm and the egg -- form a single-celled unit called a zygote, and the change prevents any other sperm cells from getting through.
The fastest sperm can get to a fallopian tube is about 30 minutes, meaning that the quickest conception could occur following sex is in the half-hour range [source: WebMD]. This means that, following sex, the egg could be fertilized before you've gotten up to get a drink of water.
Conception can occur as many as five days after sex or possibly longer, as strong, healthy sperm can survive for about that many days (and perhaps even longer) in the supportive environment of the fallopian tubes as they wait for an egg to be released, if one isn't already present [source: Harms].
You can click on the next page for lots more information on fertility and conception in far less time than it takes to create a zygote.
That quote describes a process, not a moment
So which moment are you referring to? The moment the sperm cell makes contact with the egg? The moment the head of the sperm first release enzymes that help it penetrate the egg's exterior? etc
You and me both. But there are quite a lot of people who disagree, quite a lot more who prefer to acquiesce to it through silence, and not a few who are quite in support of it. The President, for example.Hope you didn't vote for him.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?