Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doubting Didymus · 12-09-2002, 05:05 PM

Quote:

1. Fertilised egg - can result in a human

Okay.

Quote:

2. Unfertilised egg - can not result in a human

if you insist.

Quote:

3. About to be fertilised egg - an egg that's not fertilised, see #2. (If egg becomes fertilised, see #1)

This is where I lose the train of thought. Surely an egg that is surely about to be fertilised has as much potential to become human as an egg 2 seconds later, which has been fertilised. Both have the exact same chance of becoming human if left alone, right? Therefore the potential of a fertilised egg is no more or less than an egg+sperm in an IV lab petrie dish, even before the actual fertilisation occurs. To interrupt that dptential, even by simply semoving the sperm from the dish, is an equal interruption of potential as the destruction of the egg 2 seconds after fertilisation.

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]

fromtheright · 12-09-2002, 05:18 PM

Toto,

snip long winded rant - your user name was well chosen

We've truly gotten to a sad point when the opening of a post is a cheesy, snide comment on the length of someone's post who is simply trying to maintain some discussion on a calm and reasoned level. From a Moderator, no less.

All the talk about life beginning at conception has a hidden religious agenda.

Then, maybe you'll share with the class this insight you have as to this apparently deep psychological motivation that pro-lifers (or anti-abortionists or pro-choicers or whatever name you choose to call us) have to advance this religious agenda. Would you identify this agenda? And would you share with the class how non-theists who oppose abortion have been deceived?

I guess the debate is over, since Toto seems to think there is no legitimate discussion to be had without dragging religion into it.

It also amazes me how it is illegitimate for anti-abortionists to call pro-choicers Nazis, but you give no second thought to suggesting that those on this side want to establish a "fascist dictatorship".

Your posts and others like it (though, fortunately, you have been among the more extreme in this thread; kinda ironic for a "Moderator", don't you think?) are the reason I try to stay out of the abortion debate in IIDB, because for some people there is no debate, you've already demonized the other side, even fellow atheists.

Doubting Didymus · 12-09-2002, 05:29 PM

Fromtheright:

What Toto expresses are his own veiws, and not everyone elses. Attacking the attitude of your opponent instead of contributing to the debate is pointless. I, for one, would like to hear your justification of the moment of conception, if it is in fact your position. Can you highlight a characteristic of yourself that makes you a human being, that is also present is a zygote?

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]

fromtheright · 12-09-2002, 05:50 PM

Doubting,

What Toto expresses are his own veiws, and not everyone elses.

I don't think I said they were anyone else's. It just seems rather obnoxious for anyone to make such a comment about the length of someone's post, especially from a moderator, I don't care whom he is speaking for. I've seen far longer posts with no such comments. Most here have been rather respectful of the other side.

Attacking the attitude of your opponent instead of contributing to the debate is pointless.

Hell, color me pointless then.

I, for one, would like to hear your justification of the moment of conception, if it is in fact your position. Can you highlight a characteristic of yourself that makes you a human being, that is also present is a zygote?

For much the same reason Elaborate stated (no one here is going to convince the other) I try to stay out of the debate here, as I stated. It's my choice. We do want choices don't we? Perhaps I'll enter this debate or another one. Was simply making an observation, if I may be allowed.

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: fromtheright ]

Toto · 12-09-2002, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fromtheright:
Toto,

snip long winded rant - your user name was well chosen

We've truly gotten to a sad point when the opening of a post is a cheesy, snide comment on the length of someone's post who is simply trying to maintain some discussion on a calm and reasoned level. From a Moderator, no less.

FTR - I am not a moderator in this forum. I think you are overreacting to my little comment on another's name. It was his choice of screen name, and it fits. There are certainly worse sins that being long winded.

Quote:

All the talk about life beginning at conception has a hidden religious agenda.

Then, maybe you'll share with the class this insight you have as to this apparently deep psychological motivation that pro-lifers (or anti-abortionists or pro-choicers or whatever name you choose to call us) have to advance this religious agenda. Would you identify this agenda? And would you share with the class how non-theists who oppose abortion have been deceived?

The agenda is to uphold the Pope's infallibility and to use the abortion issue for the aid of the Republican Party. There may be other motives - some anti-abortionists are anti-sex, and want to keep the danger of pregnancy as a punishment for women who do not follow their sexual practices.

The anti-abortion faction has been careful to frame their arguments as purely moral respect for life and goodness. It is easy to get taken in.

Quote:

I guess the debate is over, since Toto seems to think there is no legitimate discussion to be had without dragging religion into it.

I didn't say the debate was over. There is a religious case for abortion. I just think that people should lay their cards on the table.

Quote:

It also amazes me how it is illegitimate for anti-abortionists to call pro-choicers Nazis, but you give no second thought to suggesting that those on this side want to establish a "fascist dictatorship".

Your posts and others like it (though, fortunately, you have been among the more extreme in this thread; kinda ironic for a "Moderator", don't you think?) are the reason I try to stay out of the abortion debate in IIDB, because for some people there is no debate, you've already demonized the other side, even fellow atheists.

I gave some cogent reasons why criminalizing abortion would require a dictatorship with what most Americans would consider an unacceptable amount of intrustion into women's private lives. Any response? Do you really think that outlawing abortion will make it not happen without some unpleasant actions?

I've tended to avoid abortion debates on II, but the live debate that I attended showed me that there is a lot of misinformation out there, and a concerted and dishonest attempt by the anti-abortion faction to claim a scientific basis for their side.

kukudupa · 12-09-2002, 06:23 PM

The only reason i am pro-life is because of the logic that i have that that zygote will become a human being; its not like killing a couple of skin cells

fromtheright · 12-09-2002, 08:10 PM

Toto,

I am not a moderator in this forum.

You're right and I was mistaken. I do apologize for picking on your Moderator status, thereby also taking most of the wind out of my own sail, I guess.

There are certainly worse sins that being long winded.

This is true. I just thought it a little tacky to point to the length of his posts. Others have rather lengthy posts also, and I thought that long-winded used his "space" rather well to argue his points.

The agenda is to uphold the Pope's infallibility and to use the abortion issue for the aid of the Republican Party.

I do think that anti-abortion/pro-life atheists and Protestants would be surprised at at least the first portion of your "vast papist-Republican conspiracy". The second part tends to be an ad hom attack to besmirch the motives of those who genuinely oppose abortion. Your point implies, as I said, that you see no legitimate room for debate on the merits of the issue.

It is easy to get taken in.

WADR, I think you've demonstrated that it's also all too easy to get paranoid over someone's disagreement.

There is a religious case for abortion.

Again, this is why, as I said above, I see little point in debating the subject here, as so many at II come out the gate thinking their opponents aren't honestly debating on the terms they espouse. Plus, as I said, no one will change anyone's mind here, I don't think.

MarcoPolo · 12-09-2002, 08:32 PM

I'm trying to take you seriously, but you're not making it very easy.

Quote:

Originally posted by Doubting Didymus:
>> Fertilised egg - can result in a human

Okay.

>> Unfertilised egg - can not result in a human

if you insist.

If I insist? Are you saying you disagree with that? Can you show me an example of an unfertilised egg resulting in a human (Without FIRST becoming fertilised?)

Quote:

> 3. About to be fertilised egg - an egg that's not fertilised, see #2. (If egg becomes fertilised, see #1)

This is where I lose the train of thought.

And I'm beginning to understand why. Surely you're just trolling with what you're about to write.

Quote:

Surely an egg that is surely about to be fertilised has as much potential to become human as an egg 2 seconds later, which has been fertilised.

Let me put it as simply as I can. No wait. I can't put it any simpler.

Quote:

Both have the exact same chance of becoming human if left alone, right?

No. See original statement.

Fertilised egg - has a chance at becoming a human
Non-Fertilised egg - NO CHANCE of becoming a human

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Quote:

Therefore the potential of a fertilised egg is no more or less than an egg+sperm in an IV lab petrie dish, even before the actual fertilisation occurs.

Certainly I'm not the only one in this group that laughs at this?

Quote:

To interrupt that potential, even by simply semoving the sperm from the dish, is an equal interruption of potential as the destruction of the egg 2 seconds after fertilisation.

Sperm can't be a human without an egg.
Egg can't be a human without the sperm.
A fertilised egg can be a human.

Can't be any simpler than that. If you need a reproduction course, see your nearest elementary school.

Doubting Didymus · 12-09-2002, 08:55 PM

Quote:

I'm trying to take you seriously, but you're not making it very easy.

You sir, are beginning to give me the shits.

Quote:

Let me put it as simply as I can. No wait. I can't put it any simpler.

It's not as though I didn't understand. You are just wrong, that's all. Explaining yorself more simply will not stop you from being wrong in the first place.

Quote:

Fertilised egg - has a chance at becoming a human
Non-Fertilised egg - NO CHANCE of becoming a human

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Because it isn't true. (you infuriating smear)

The original comments you are responding to were themselves in response to the idea that a zygote has rights because it has the potential to become human. See? Potential to become human is the topic I responded to. Do you agree or disagree that an unfertilised egg and an unfertilised sperm, in close proximity, have the potential to become human? Of course they have that potential. It is trivially obvious.

Quote:

Certainly I'm not the only one in this group that laughs at this?

Don't go and rupture a lung. That would make me terribly sad.

Quote:

Sperm can't be a human without an egg.
Egg can't be a human without the sperm.
A fertilised egg can be a human.

If you are deliberately avoiding my actual hypothetical scenario, congratulations on a fine job. Otherwise, reading comprehension classes are available at your nearest elementary school.

I will repeat for you. My scenario is not: single egg, or single sperm on their own. My scenario is BOTH a sperm and an egg in the same vicinity, at the same instant. The sperm WILL fertilise the egg, in 2 seconds time. That zygote (according to the logic I am responding to), has the potential to become a human. Therefore the separate sperm and egg has that potential also. Let me put even simpler. No wait. I can't put it any simpler.

fromtheright · 12-09-2002, 09:02 PM

Doubting,

Does that mean that a criminal who is about to rob a bank has already robbed it?

Sorry, I couldn't help it.

12-09-2002, 05:29 PM	#53
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Fromtheright: What Toto expresses are his own veiws, and not everyone elses. Attacking the attitude of your opponent instead of contributing to the debate is pointless. I, for one, would like to hear your justification of the moment of conception, if it is in fact your position. Can you highlight a characteristic of yourself that makes you a human being, that is also present is a zygote? [ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]</p>

12-09-2002, 05:50 PM	#54
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Doubting, What Toto expresses are his own veiws, and not everyone elses. I don't think I said they were anyone else's. It just seems rather obnoxious for anyone to make such a comment about the length of someone's post, especially from a moderator, I don't care whom he is speaking for. I've seen far longer posts with no such comments. Most here have been rather respectful of the other side. Attacking the attitude of your opponent instead of contributing to the debate is pointless. Hell, color me pointless then. I, for one, would like to hear your justification of the moment of conception, if it is in fact your position. Can you highlight a characteristic of yourself that makes you a human being, that is also present is a zygote? For much the same reason Elaborate stated (no one here is going to convince the other) I try to stay out of the debate here, as I stated. It's my choice. We do want choices don't we? Perhaps I'll enter this debate or another one. Was simply making an observation, if I may be allowed. [ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: fromtheright ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-09-2002, 05:18 PM	#52
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Toto, snip long winded rant - your user name was well chosen We've truly gotten to a sad point when the opening of a post is a cheesy, snide comment on the length of someone's post who is simply trying to maintain some discussion on a calm and reasoned level. From a Moderator, no less. All the talk about life beginning at conception has a hidden religious agenda. Then, maybe you'll share with the class this insight you have as to this apparently deep psychological motivation that pro-lifers (or anti-abortionists or pro-choicers or whatever name you choose to call us) have to advance this religious agenda. Would you identify this agenda? And would you share with the class how non-theists who oppose abortion have been deceived? I guess the debate is over, since Toto seems to think there is no legitimate discussion to be had without dragging religion into it. It also amazes me how it is illegitimate for anti-abortionists to call pro-choicers Nazis, but you give no second thought to suggesting that those on this side want to establish a "fascist dictatorship". Your posts and others like it (though, fortunately, you have been among the more extreme in this thread; kinda ironic for a "Moderator", don't you think?) are the reason I try to stay out of the abortion debate in IIDB, because for some people there is no debate, you've already demonized the other side, even fellow atheists.

12-09-2002, 06:23 PM	#56
kukudupa New Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Bensalem Posts: 4	The only reason i am pro-life is because of the logic that i have that that zygote will become a human being; its not like killing a couple of skin cells

12-09-2002, 08:10 PM	#57
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Toto, I am not a moderator in this forum. You're right and I was mistaken. I do apologize for picking on your Moderator status, thereby also taking most of the wind out of my own sail, I guess. There are certainly worse sins that being long winded. This is true. I just thought it a little tacky to point to the length of his posts. Others have rather lengthy posts also, and I thought that long-winded used his "space" rather well to argue his points. The agenda is to uphold the Pope's infallibility and to use the abortion issue for the aid of the Republican Party. I do think that anti-abortion/pro-life atheists and Protestants would be surprised at at least the first portion of your "vast papist-Republican conspiracy". The second part tends to be an ad hom attack to besmirch the motives of those who genuinely oppose abortion. Your point implies, as I said, that you see no legitimate room for debate on the merits of the issue. It is easy to get taken in. WADR, I think you've demonstrated that it's also all too easy to get paranoid over someone's disagreement. There is a religious case for abortion. Again, this is why, as I said above, I see little point in debating the subject here, as so many at II come out the gate thinking their opponents aren't honestly debating on the terms they espouse. Plus, as I said, no one will change anyone's mind here, I don't think.

12-09-2002, 09:02 PM	#60
fromtheright Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 633	Doubting, Does that mean that a criminal who is about to rob a bank has already robbed it? Sorry, I couldn't help it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.