• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hello I am a Baby in my Mommy’s Womb

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aurora151989 said:
ok.... steen has educated me on brain waves

a heart beating plus human dna plus a living mother (barring life support) equals a real live fetus!
Click to expand...
Close enough for now, at least aftre the 8th week of development :lol:
explain to me how something that's not living can die when the mother dies?
Click to expand...
Who said it can't die? I don't recall ANYBODY claiming that the mebryo/fetus couldn't die or wasn't "alive." So your claim doesn't make sense.
 
steen said:
Close enough for now, at least aftre the 8th week of development :lol:
Who said it can't die? I don't recall ANYBODY claiming that the mebryo/fetus couldn't die or wasn't "alive." So your claim doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

alright, i take back the claim of alive/dead

oh, partial hydatidiform moles can't be a human because it never grows into a fetus who becomes a baby once born. Ie, chicken eggs produce chicks, duck eggs produce ducklings but moles don't produce humans!
 
Last edited:

What a clever way to package total bullshit. The first misrepresentation in all this is the whole brainwave revision. Its a common lie that pro lifers tell to make you feel sympathy for a mass of cells that deserves no more moral elevation than my left pinky would when separated from my body. Brainwaves may be present in an erratic and fashion, but we dont know this. In fact, the only EEG data we have is taken from premies...not twelve week fetuses.

The second is the whole feeling pain lie. Pain cannot be experienced until the entire biological infrastructure is in place...nerves, lower brain, middle brain, cerebral cortex, and thalamus to connect it all.

You can package the lies from the "perspective" of the fetus all you want, but it is still all lie. The pro-life stance is flimsy and a complete sham and so must rely on emotional appeals and false imagery to inspire guilt or compassion (but most often guilt) in order to promote their objective of enslaving the woman and taking away her reproductive rights.
 
if i may ask, please read the thread, particularly my posts if you haven't already. However i respect your opinion of the opening post.:2wave:
 

DNA proves they are Homo Sapien
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
DNA proves they are Homo Sapien
Click to expand...


Gibberish said, it doesn't make them a living human... yes human dna makes a human but the human could be alive or dead. It takes a beating heart to make that distinction
 
Getting back to the title of this thread, it is not a baby and a viable human being until it leaves the womb and is born. Until then it is a fetus.
 
Aurora151989 said:
Gibberish said, it doesn't make them a living human... yes human dna makes a human but the human could be alive or dead. It takes a beating heart to make that distinction
Click to expand...

Wrong if something is alive it only has to growYou do not have to have heart beating for life to exist HMMM Should I

Well Please I am not calling a baby in a womb a plant or anything but human. Again DNA proves this. Plants do not have hearts they are alive.
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
DNA proves they are Homo Sapien
Click to expand...

Since Fetus's and Dead people both have DNA and are Homo Sapiens.

Back to the original debate.

What defines them as being an intellectual living being? Brainwaves such as stated in previous posts?
 
Please fix the use of your "quote" or use differentiating colors, thanks.

Sure. They didn't have brainwaves. Now, please go back to the point where Aurora claimed this:
"alright.... there is scientific evidence that babies have brain waves at 8 weeks gestation."

I am waiting for scientific evidence of this. Aurora is backing off a bit from this, but you now are taking it on yourself to claim this as factual. So I am now asking you, please provide the scientific evidence. Merely claiming that you can't believe anythign else is not evidence.
what was making their hearts beat?
Click to expand...
reflexes and autonomic nerve function. This occurs without brainwaves as well, and as such is not evidence of brai n waves.
or why were the breathing.
Click to expand...
Same answer.
Get your facts and show me your source now. Smart guy or gal
Click to expand...
I am merely asking for evidence of a claim made about science. I don't have to prove anything. But certainly, any embryonic neurophysiology textbook will confirm that the thalamocortical tract doesn't connect until the end of the 26th week of pregnancy. This is a known medical fact:

http://www.parliament.uk/post/pn094.pdf
....These thalamocortical fibres start developing
at 17 weeks and penetrate the cortical plate to
make permanent connections at 22-34 weeks.....

http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/294/8/947
...Fetal awareness of noxious stimuli requires functional thalamocortical connections. Thalamocortical fibers begin appearing between 23 to 30 weeks’ gestational age, while electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in preterm neonates probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks....

http://www.ampainsoc.org/pub/bulletin/jul03/article1.htm
......Prior to 26 weeks, the thalamocortical fibers have not yet penetrated the cortical plate, and it seems unlikely the cortical structures considered necessary for pain are responding to noxious stimulation (Mrzljak, Uylings, Kostovic, & van Eden, 1988).

Nah, you can not, of course, provide evidence for your claim, because in real science (you know, different from anti-choice whisful thinking and misrepresentations), "brain waves" are very specific interaction patters that physically are unable to occur until after the 26th week of pregnancy.
But the fetus is not a person, so that claim is irrelevant.
Fetus is Latin for Baby
Click to expand...
(1) Nope, your claim is false.
http://www.answers.com/topic/fetus
fe·tus (fē'təs)
n., pl. -tus·es.
The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.
In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo.

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0059:entry=#18064
fētus (foet- ), a, um, adj. [Part., from ‡ FEO, whence also: fecundus, femina, fenus, felix] , that is or was filled with young (syn.: gravidus, praegnans).

I. Pregnant, breeding (mostly poet.).
A. Lit.: lenta salix feto pecori, Verg. E. 3, 83 ; 1, 50: vulpes, Hor. C. 3, 27, 5 .--
2. Transf.
a. Of land, fruitful, productive: (terra) feta parit nitidas fruges, etc., Lucr. 2, 994 ; cf.: terra feta frugibus et vario leguminum genere, * Cic. N. D. 2, 62, 156: loca palustribus ulvis, Ov. M. 14, 103 : regio nec pomo nec uvis, id. P. 1, 7, 13 ; id. F. 1, 662.--Also of plants: palmites, Col. 3, 21, 3 .--
b. In gen., filled with any thing, full: machina armis, Verg. A. 2, 238 : loca furentibus austris, id. ib. 1, 51 : colla serpentis veneno, Sil. 17, 448 .--
B. Trop., full of.--With abl.: feta furore Megaera, Sil. 13, 592 : praecordia bello, id. 17, 380 : praecordia irā, id. 11, 203 . --With gen.: fetas novales Martis, Claud. Bell. Get. 25 ; and in a Gr. construction: fetus Gradivo mentem, id. 10, 14 .--
II. That has brought forth, newly delivered: veniebant fetam amicae gratulatum, Varr. ap. Non. 312, 12: agiles et fetae (opp. tardiores et gravidae), Col. 7, 3 fin. : ursa, Ov. M. 13, 803 : lupa, Verg. A. 8, 630 : ovis, id. E. 1, 50 ; Ov. F. 2, 413: qua feta jacebat uxor et infantes ludebant, Juv. 14, 167 .--Absol.: insueta gravis temptabunt pabula fetas, Verg. E. 1, 49 .


(2) We are not speaking Latin here.

There is no baby until birth, and your sophistry merely underscores your ignorance.
Click to expand...
Again who is ignorant Fetus is Latin for Baby.
Click to expand...
See above.
Source Dr Albert E Reese former chairman OB/GYN Temple University. I think he is now the Dean of the Arkansau U Med School
Click to expand...
And so what? Is he a linguist?
 
Ah, so you are basing this on its potential, not on what it actually is, admitting that the reference to DNA is outright invalid? Thanks for that.
 
At two weeks an embryo does NOT have a brain. The 'heart' is primitive and does not "thump", it flutters and looks like a strobe light when viewed in ultrasound.
At five weeks, the fetus looks like a 'paisley'. It does NOT have fingers, it has nubs sticking out from the inner curve of the paisley. It is about 1/4 long.
The circulatory system, while developing within the fetus, is NOT completely separate from the mother-it is attached through an 'umbilical cord', which is attached to a placenta, attached to the uterus with thousands of 'veins'(the villous network) that take blood and nutrients and, after filtering, feed through the fetus' blood stream. The placenta is in place around the second month-before then the embryo is directly attached to the wall of the uterus.

Abortion done properly does not rip off arms, etc. More anti-choice propaganda. Can't present facts, present false horrors. It never ceases to amaze me how people with no clue, no experience and no facts to back up their claims still try to make others become as unknowledgeable as they. Not to mention the fact that no one has denied that what grows in a human uterus isn't human. It's pointless WITH back-up, stupid waste of time without it.
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
DNA proves they are Homo Sapien
Click to expand...
But that is very different than claiming personhood based on DNA like you so deceptively did.

Are you always switching arguments like that? Are you able to hold honest discussions on what you actually say rather than trying to evade responsibility continuously for your false claims?
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
Well Please I am not calling a baby in a womb a plant or anything but human.
Click to expand...
Actually, what you did was calling it an individual and a person, dishonestkly claiming that DNA was evidence of this. Sofar, you have not proven your claim and have tried for all sorts of irrelevant stuff. Conclusion is that you can NOT prove your original claims, thay your claims were false. Thanks for showing us this.
Again DNA proves this. Plants do not have hearts they are alive.
Click to expand...
And they are not persons. Nor does a plant's DNA prove that it is an individual.

So your claim remains false.
 
this is for mr. steen!:2wave:

http://www.wprc.org/fetal.phtml

click on more.... and it will talk about brain waves and other stuff you are refuting, this is the main website i used for my abortion paper.

be sure to click on the "more" button for each trimester
 
Gibberish said:
Since Fetus's and Dead people both have DNA and are Homo Sapiens.

Back to the original debate.

What defines them as being an intellectual living being? Brainwaves such as stated in previous posts?
Click to expand...

WE Know Babies in the womb are living human beings. (see above post)
Does a 2 yr old have the same intellect as 21 yr old? We have no idea when the brain starts functioning. We do know Brain waves can be measured as early as 8 weeks. As instrument become more sensitive I am sure we will find Brain waves at even earlier.
 
Aurora151989 said:
this is for mr. steen!:2wave:

http://www.wprc.org/fetal.phtml

click on more.... and it will talk about brain waves and other stuff you are refuting, this is the main website i used for my abortion paper.
Click to expand...
Well, I don't put much stock in CPC's as they are proven to be lying in the past and do not constitute scientific sites. They are political with the motive of preventing abortions by any means necessary, regardless of how much they lie. If you want factual info, I would advice you to use scientific sources, not political ones.


What I am "refuting" here are outright lies, falsehoods, misrepresentations and half-truths that this site has published for political gains, nothing else. I am not at fault for the unscientific, dishonest nature of your source.
 


ooops, please educate me on how to tell if my source is scientific or political
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
WE Know Babies in the womb are living human beings. (see above post)
Click to expand...
Another lie. We KNOW that this is what you CLAIM. It is not proven in any of your posts. Please cease the very dishonest anti-choice tactic of misrepresenting beliefs and wishful thinking as facts.
Does a 2 yr old have the same intellect as 21 yr old? We have no idea when the brain starts functioning.
Click to expand...
We know it doesn't happen before the end of the 26th week of pregnancy, so again please cease your deceptions and misrepresentations. Your dishonesty is beginni8ng to be bothersome.
We do know Brain waves can be measured as early as 8 weeks.
Click to expand...
We know that you are lying when you make that claim.
As instrument become more sensitive I am sure we will find Brain waves at even earlier.
Click to expand...
It is not a matter of being able to meassure random impulses. You get the same "waves" off a plant. However, actual "brainwaves" do not occur until there is a coordinated pattern of signals between several centers of the central nervous system, which doesn't occur until such signals are transmitted throughout, whioch is at the end of the 26th week of pregnancy.

So by all means continue to spew your lies. the evidence against them have been posted.
 
Aurora151989 said:
ooops, please educate me on how to tell if my source is scientific or political
Click to expand...
If the source deal with political issues such as abortions, it likely is political (whether it is a CPC, Planned Parenthood, national right to life or NARAL). If it deals with referenced research, is from an academic institution or refer a scientific journal, then it is likely scientific.
 

You will not offer any scientific sites as sources to refute what we have said I told you my source I am still waiting for yours. You are the one not being honest.
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
WE Know Babies in the womb are living human beings. (see above post)
Click to expand...
You believe you mean.

Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
Does a 2 yr old have the same intellect as 21 yr old?
Click to expand...
Yes they do, they just lack the experience, knowledge and motor skills. There brains function the same though, unless there is an obvious disorder.

Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
We have no idea when the brain starts functioning. We do know Brain waves can be measured as early as 8 weeks. As instrument become more sensitive I am sure we will find Brain waves at even earlier.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between brainwaves and random firings. As Steen stated a few posts up.
 
Proudly Pro Life JP Freem said:
You will not offer any scientific sites as sources to refute what we have said I told you my source I am still waiting for yours. You are the one not being honest.
Click to expand...

steen has already given you his sources in links, which are scientific.

:2wave: steen, this isn't scientific or political, however i think it serves my purpose
http://www.premature-baby.com/

It's a personal website done of a baby girl born at 26 weeks, and there are abortions done at 26 weeks?????
 
It seems generally appropriate, although somewhat antropomorphizing. I didn't see a lot of factual ifo there, though.

A good source generally is the "religioustolerance.com" site, although they don't seem to good at sorting between scientific and non-scientific issues. But they do provide a nice relatively factual overview of the issue, from where you then can expand your own research.

http://www.google.com/custom?domain...336699;GFNT:223472;GIMP:223472;FORID:1;&hl=en
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…