• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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!

Riddle me this

mac said:
Interesting points, but unrelated to the question at hand.

Whether or not the zygote was created through sexual intercourse or not does not change the fact that the zygote was created through sexual reproduction. It only changes the mechanism.
Click to expand...

It's totally related to question at hand. You claim that a zygote is different from organs because it is created through "sexual reproduction", so what of those embryos that are created from cloning? Or those offsprings that result from asexual reproduction? Are they not member of the same specie from which they come?
 
nonpareil said:
And I asked what is the definition of an "organism"? You claim it is not, but why should I go by your claim when you can't explain how it is valid?
Click to expand...

This explanation of organism is pretty good. If you dislike wiki, follow up with the footnotes.
 
nonpareil said:
It's totally related to question at hand. You claim that a zygote is different from organs because it is created through "sexual reproduction", so what of those embryos that are created from cloning? Or those offsprings that result from asexual reproduction? Are they not member of the same specie from which they come?
Click to expand...

Yes they are, if they result in an organism. What makes this line of "reasoning" irrelevant is that it doesn't rule out that an organism created through sexual reproduction is anything other than a member of the parents' species.
 
The fact is that there is legal homicide (death penalty and abortions), and illegal homicide (murder).
 
Fleshofthegods said:
The fact is that there is legal homicide (death penalty and abortions), and illegal homicide (murder).
Click to expand...

And guys like me are endeavoring to get rid of the legal homicide. :shrug:
 
nonpareil said:
This thread is about the term "human", whether something is "human", it's a semantic thread. Avoiding the question of what is a "human" or the "quality of being a person" is to avoid arguments that is relevant to this thread. I can accept that zygote is "human", but then so is an organ according to the definition used.
Click to expand...

Accepting that a zygote is human is accurate. Claiming that an organ is, is equivocating the definition and dishonest... and inaccurate. The only reason this is currently a silly semantic debate because some folks are attempting to mess with definitions... as you are.
 
mac said:
And guys like me are endeavoring to get rid of the legal homicide. :shrug:
Click to expand...

There are also guys like you that agree with the death penalty and disagree with abortion. How does that work? You may not, but some conservatives agree with the death penalty.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Accepting that a zygote is human is accurate. Claiming that an organ is, is equivocating the definition and dishonest... and inaccurate. The only reason this is currently a silly semantic debate because some folks are attempting to mess with definitions... as you are.
Click to expand...

I know that zygotes are human, that's not my issue. My issue is the rights of the pregnant mother to go through birth or not.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Accepting that a zygote is human is accurate. Claiming that an organ is, is equivocating the definition and dishonest... and inaccurate. The only reason this is currently a silly semantic debate because some folks are attempting to mess with definitions... as you are.
Click to expand...

As a moderator, you really shouldn't lie to people.
 
Fleshofthegods said:
There are also guys like you that agree with the death penalty and disagree with abortion. How does that work? You may not, but some conservatives agree with the death penalty.
Click to expand...

So do some liberals. I'm not a conservative.

While I personally oppose the death penalty, I know that associating it with the abortion debate is dishonest. In fact, being pro-choice and anti-death penalty is even more nonsensical to me than the opposite. It makes absolutely no sense to me that someone would condone the death of the innocent and protest the death of the guilty.
 
Fleshofthegods said:
I know that zygotes are human, that's not my issue. My issue is the rights of the pregnant mother to go through birth or not.
Click to expand...

So, it's simply a matter of elitism with you. That is promoting the rights of one human over an another.
 
All right, maybe that was an unfair comment... but then let me ask you this CC: if the placenta is not human, then what species is it?
 
mac said:
So do some liberals. I'm not a conservative.

While I personally oppose the death penalty, I know that associating it with the abortion debate is dishonest. In fact, being pro-choice and anti-death penalty is even more nonsensical to me than the opposite. It makes absolutely no sense to me that someone would condone the death of the innocent and protest the death of the guilty.
Click to expand...

I never said that you were a conservative I said that some guys like you (meaning pro-choicers).

and once again that is your opinion. If a man is wrongly convicted of murder and put to death, then that is where the illegality of the death penalty comes into play. Not whether or not the person is guilty and should be punished by killing them. Even though the criminal has committed a crime against humanity, they have a conception of their own existence and knows that they will be put to death. Unlike a zygote.
 
Fleshofthegods said:
If you truely cared about the feelings of the woman, then you wouldn't force her to have birth. I'm not saying that adoption is not a better option what I am saying is that not everyone wants to go through the process of being pregnant.
Click to expand...

Feelings in any debate is not a good debate tactic. Its also not a good tool to use when deciding your stance on a subject.

Fleshofthegods said:
There are also guys like you that agree with the death penalty and disagree with abortion. How does that work? You may not, but some conservatives agree with the death penalty.
Click to expand...

Unborn child= never did a thing. The very definition of innocent.
Person on death row=convicted of murder by a jury of their peers.

Keep in mind I didn't make a stance here so don't assume I support this.
 
Last edited:
Hierophant said:
All right, maybe that was an unfair comment... but then let me ask you this CC: if the placenta is not human, then what species is it?
Click to expand...

It doesn't belong to a species in and of itself, it is a component of a member of a species.
 
"Unborn child= never did a thing. The very definition of innocent."

According to Christianity, this is actually false. I mention this because the vast majority of anti-abortion advocates are Christian, at least in North America. So this argument cannot stand.
 
Fleshofthegods said:
I never said that you were a conservative I said that some guys like you (meaning pro-choicers).
Click to expand...

I am not a pro-choicer either, at least in this context.

and once again that is your opinion. If a man is wrongly convicted of murder and put to death, then that is where the illegality of the death penalty comes into play. Not whether or not the person is guilty and should be punished by killing them. Even though the criminal has committed a crime against humanity, they have a conception of their own existence and knows that they will be put to death. Unlike a zygote.
Click to expand...

Or a sleeping person...
 
Hierophant said:
As a moderator, you really shouldn't lie to people.
Click to expand...

As a member here, I will correct the lies/inaccuracies of others whenever I choose to. As I've done with you and others on this issue.

And I will tell you that bringing up my status as a moderator is irrelevant to this thread, is a weak attempt at an ad hom... and if you do it again, you will receive consequences. I hope I am being clear.
 
More vacuous and pompous threats, and still no answers. What species is the placenta, CC?
 
Fleshofthegods said:
I know that zygotes are human, that's not my issue. My issue is the rights of the pregnant mother to go through birth or not.
Click to expand...

My comment was not towards you. And I agree with both of your above statements.
 
Hierophant said:
"Unborn child= never did a thing. The very definition of innocent."

According to Christianity, this is actually false. I mention this because the vast majority of anti-abortion advocates are Christian, at least in North America. So this argument cannot stand.
Click to expand...

The argument "can not stand" because you think it is in opposition to Christian dogma? Talk about faulty logic...
 
Hierophant said:
All right, maybe that was an unfair comment... but then let me ask you this CC: if the placenta is not human, then what species is it?
Click to expand...

A placenta is not a species. It is a group of specific cells that identify as part of an organism... a member of the homo sapien species.
 
Finally, we get the truth from you! About time!
 
Hierophant said:
More vacuous and pompous threats, and still no answers. What species is the placenta, CC?
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Enough. Any more personal attacks and you will be out of this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom