Doubting Didymus

Wow, think of all those tragic losses that happen every day, without anyone even noticing.

I do not understand why an egg that is about to be fertilised has less destiny than one that has just been fertilised. Both will develop into a human, if no intervention is taken.

Doubting Didymus

I fell like I almost agree.

Luckily for me, I don't think that embryos are human in any meaningful sense. I don't see how 'potential to develop into a human' applies to an embryo any more than a fertilised egg, an unfertilised egg, a sperm, or a cheek cell nucleus. You are not human until you are human, and not before.

Shake

Agreed. They by no means have a monopoly on saying dumb things, but they are a majority shareholder, IMHO!

Elaborate

Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree. I simply look at what actually happened, not what may happen. If those persons knew about their loss, it would be tragic to them. Not knowing doesn't make it any less sad.

Then when do you think you become human?

long winded fool

This works for contraception but not abortion. You would be hard pressed nowadays to find a credible biologist who would tell you that a human embryo, from zygote to fetus, is anything other than homo sapiens sapiens. If homo sapiens sapiens is not necessarily indicative of humanity, then you must define what it means to be "human in a meaningful sense." I think you can see the danger of allowing individuals to pick and choose who they consider to be human. Humanity needs to be clearly defined for everyone in this country and homo sapiens sapiens seems to be the safest definition of humanity. If you think there should be some other criteria for the granting of humanity, please share.

simian

Nor does it work for organ donation from brain dead individuals. You would be "hard pressed nowadays to find a credible biologist who would tell you that a" brain-dead person being kept alive by life support is anything but homo sapiens sapiens. Does this mean it is murder to cut out the heart of this homo sapiens sapiens and give it to another person? It seems to me that by the definition you gave, the "safest" route would be to not take the organs of the brain dead.... Or perhaps there is more to humanity than genetic material.

Simian

Amazon

I am beyond shocked that anyone could calmly state that the rights of an adult woman with a history, a family, perhaps other dependant beings, are superceded by a cluster of cells without even the basic hardware and wiring required to feel or think.

If the cluster of cells can't live without its specific host, then it is part of the host's body and that woman can have it removed if she wishes.

Perhaps medical research will figure out a way to harvest unwanted zygotes and sustain them throughout fetal development, so we don't have to penalize existing humans.

Harumi

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: Harumi ]</p>

THE_LEGENDARY_HQB

Originally posted by The Admiral:
"Let them call themselves pro-lifers but I think we should call them anti-choicers."

As someone who considered himself "prolife" for many years, and who now loathes the simplistic lables advocates and critics of abortion throw at each other, I must take exeption to this statement. "Anti Choicers" in what sense? Randall Terry probably makes the "choice" to pray every day, just before he makes the "choice" to harass and intimidate women in front of clinics. So, I repeat, "prochoice" for what? Just come out and say it: you're either {IMHO, anyway}...
Proabortion. You see absolutely nothing ethically or medically wrong with abortion, and see it as being about as much as a big deal as any other invasive operation.
Proabortion rights {my position}. You have very serious issues with abortion, but you believe that it is a neccesary evil.
Antiabortion. You believe that abortion is the murder of an innocent child, and, depending on when you believe human life begins, you desire to either restrict or outright ban the procedure.

You do your side no good by trying to pigeon hole your adversaries into a narrow definiton that does no more justice to their position than the mindless parroting of "prolife does for your opponents.

Originally posted by Simian:
"Seconded. In fact, I do refer to them as anti-choice. I will begin calling them pro-life when they are portesting the death penalty, working toward a healthy envirnoment, and providing basic medical care for all those too poor to afford it on their own. While there may be a few true "pro-life" people out there, I have yet to meet any in person"

Beware, Simian, because a "prolife" person oculd easily turn that around on you by pointing out what they see as advocating that murderers be spared, but innocent babies get killed, in most cases, for no other reason than the fact that they were an inconvenience to their mother and/or father. It really is in the eye of the beholder. As for the other issues you brought up, i.e, free health care, a healthy environment, these are all red herrings. What do they have to do with the issue? If you say you're against the death penalty, do I come back and say "well, if you're against executing criminals, maybe YOU should have them in your house, let them eat YOUR food," et cetera. Of course not. If you say that you're against rape, do you suddenly get bombarded with pleas to work with every single rape victim, and help them get over their trauma. Not where I live. So please, enough of the hackneyed "how many prolifers are working for cheap affordable birth control" schtick. Just because you come out against something, does not mean you must personally have an answer to every single cause of the problem.

And before some of the more militant folks decide to flame me, please remember that I'm certainly NOT advocating for any of the things that have been done in the name of the "the Prolife Movement." In fact, I'm not even saying I'm prolife. I simply want to see the issue handled with more intelligence than the absurd "Prolife" and "Prochoice" lables will allow.
Repsect,
The Legendary HQB

{P.S} please pardon me if I went on and on and on and...well, I'm cashed.

Toto

This is twisted logic run amok. You say "if" an embryo is a human being, then its destruction is a capital crime. So I say an embryo that cannot live on its own outside the womb is clearly not a human being, and the woman involved has no legal duty to let it live in her womb and off her blood, mess up her hormones, and perhaps wreck her life and her family's life. Even if the embryo were somehow considered a separate human, that separate human has no right to use another's body, just as a person with kidney disease and a good match to your blood type has no right to commandeer one of your kidneys.

The human race has continued because evolution has produced many women who want to be pregnant and continue the species. There is no need to force every woman to continue every pregnancy.

Do you have any knowledge of what it was like when abortion was illegal in this country or in others? If you did, you could not even consider recriminalizing abortion.

Are you willing to execute women who have abortions for murder? 14 year olds? Mothers who already have as many children as they can handle? How is that pro-life?

I recently attended one of those Christian debates involving abortion. The Christian refused to talk about religion, and based his case on what he called "science." He claimed that he "proved" that a zygote was a human from the point of conception. His case was very cleverly constructed but completely unscientific and an underhanded attempt to avoid the real issues by claiming that "life begins at conception." (The guy also believed in Intelligent Design.)

There is no scientific case against abortion. All the talk about life beginning at conception has a hidden religious agenda, and I am appalled that secularists can be taken in by it. If you don't like abortions, don't have one. If you want to oppose abortion, at least recognize that making abortion illegal is not going to make it go away.

A few years ago, there was a debate on this site between Richard Carrier and a "pro-life" feminist, but I don't seem to be able to locate it. Carrier won hands down.