View Full Version : Surgery in the womb.
I don't know about you but this sure puts a kink (for me anyway) in the idea that the mass of tissue in the womb is not a human. (http://www.snopes.com/photos/thehand.asp) How can you look at these pictures and say abortion is "just a choice". That is a child.
netviper13
05-07-04, 12:04 AM
That was also a 21-week old fetus. I have no issues with abortions when they get rid of a bunch of cells still dividing that haven't turned into a humyn being yet, but I do have moral issues with aborting a fetus once it has become recognizably humyn.
At the same time, however, I acknowledge that abortions occur whether or not they are legalized, and I would much rather have one occur in the safe environment of a clinic using medically sound procedures and tools, than in a back alley with a coat hanger.
sytaylor
05-07-04, 02:15 AM
At the same time, however, I acknowledge that abortions occur whether or not they are legalized, and I would much rather have one occur in the safe environment of a clinic using medically sound procedures and tools, than in a back alley with a coat hanger.
That is the clincher for me as well for medium term ones, although a psychologist should be consulted in those occasions as well IMHO. The diving cells have probably been killed by emergency pills, and abortion of those is not much different to masturbation... preventing life rather than ending it.
DiscipleDOC
05-07-04, 08:13 AM
At the same time, however, I acknowledge that abortions occur whether or not they are legalized, and I would much rather have one occur in the safe environment of a clinic using medically sound procedures and tools, than in a back alley with a coat hanger.
Under that pretense, you make it easier for a woman to be more selfish and think of herself more than the child. The 'back alley' process would happen far less than a woman who chooses to have an abortion out of convenience. Abortion should not be legal.
I hate talking about abortion. It is so morally wrong. If two consenting adults make love and don't want a child, they should use birth control. Not convenient or 100% effective, but it's darn near 100% effective if both people use contraception.
However, you then have to consider conception by rape. This creates a real hardship for the mother. Aborting this pregnancy is still murder, but really too difficult to place restrictions on it one way or the other.
I cannot and will not ever approve of abortion. But I also don't think I or anyone else should have the right to enforce his/her belief on another person. Any real Christian knows this. Therefore I would have to be pro choice.
ChAsM, so its ok for god to kill all the first-born of Egypt, but abortion is wrong? IMO, as long as the procedure does not endager the mother, it is her choice.
DiscipleDOC
05-07-04, 10:53 AM
ChAsM, so its ok for god to kill all the first-born of Egypt, but abortion is wrong? IMO, as long as the procedure does not endager the mother, it is her choice.
Dude, please stick to debating things you know about...not something you seen on the movie, "TheTen Commandments". What about the choice of the child? You're not giving him any. With all being equal, a mother should not be deciding for that child it's fate.
sytaylor
05-07-04, 10:59 AM
The child cant choose. By that reconning we shouldn't kill flies because they don't choose to die, even though at the time they have about equal awareness.
And why does the goverment get to decide for the mother? The child gets a choice, but not the mother? It's her body, her choice.
DiscipleDOC
05-07-04, 11:24 AM
And why does the goverment get to decide for the mother? The child gets a choice, but not the mother? It's her body, her choice.
It may be her body, but there's a child in that body, and as a result, she lose out on making any otherwise choice that would be harmful to the child in that body.
The child cant choose. By that reconning we shouldn't kill flies because they don't choose to die, even though at the time they have about equal awareness.
With that logic, then until the child is able to make decisions for itself, he's a candidate for murder.
With that logic, then until the child is able to make decisions for itself, he's a candidate for murder.
Lets not over-dramatize, it is not murder and it is not a child. And where do you draw the line in getting the goverment run your life?
sytaylor
05-07-04, 12:00 PM
With that logic, then until the child is able to make decisions for itself, he's a candidate for murder.
Thats over simplyfying. A fly is not a candidate for murder, but if the circumstances are there, and there is a greater good then it excuseable (just). Of course nobody wants abortion but sometimes its the only realistic choice, just like war.
ChAsM, so its ok for god to kill all the first-born of Egypt, but abortion is wrong? IMO, as long as the procedure does not endager the mother, it is her choice.
This is pretty dumb. Lets follow your brilliant logic :screwy: If God greated all that is and He always was and always will be then He is well with in His right to make such decisions.
BTW you sound like you know nothing about Chrstianity. If you like Discipledoc or I can talk to you about God and his Son.
Lets not over-dramatize, it is not murder and it is not a child. And where do you draw the line in getting the goverment run your life?
If it is a child, then yes, it is murder. The question of when life begins is, for most people, rather arbitrary. Some say conception, some say embryo implantation, some say first trimester, some say birth.
At conception, the zygote has the unique DNA map that defines the physical (some say mental as well) framework for a human being. Of course, many zygotes never actually implant in the uterus, so there's that whole issue. Development then progresses until birth.
For reference, here's a fetal development timeline (http://www.w-cpc.org/fetal.html). Note that the heart starts beating at six weeks.
It's not about choice -- it's about the definition of a human being. Many people say that this is a human being and should be accorded the same rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that are our inalienable rights. And until someone can convince me that it's not a child, I'm going to err on the side of caution.
Cheers,
JND
jnd3, the reason they say it is about choice is because they want to make this a legal argument. If they make it a moral argument they know they will lose. They have to use scientific terms like "fetus" inistead of baby, "choice" instead of life.
When a society devalues life that society ceases to be moral.
jnd3, the reason they say it is about choice is because they want to make this a legal argument. If they make it a moral argument they know they will lose. They have to use scientific terms like "fetus" inistead of baby, "choice" instead of life.
When a society devalues life that society ceases to be moral.
It's not the terms themselves that are cumbersome ... it's the loaded definitions that go along with them. From the ever-present M-W.com:
Main Entry: fe·tus
Pronunciation: 'fE-t&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, act of bearing young, offspring; akin to Latin fetus newly delivered, fruitful -- more at FEMININE
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually three months after conception to birth
Sounds good to me. It's just that when "fetus" is redefined to be synonymous with "undifferentiated mass of tissue", well, then we've got a failure to communicate. ;)
(I'd agree that it is a moral issue, but it's been redefined away to the point of being a purely volitional or political issue.)
You can't murder something that isn't a human (PETA arguments notwithstanding), so what's a human?
Cheers,
JND
DiscipleDOC
05-07-04, 01:35 PM
Lets not over-dramatize, it is not murder and it is not a child. And where do you draw the line in getting the goverment run your life?
How can you 'over-dramatize' when you're talking about killing a baby? If your logic allows you to sleep at night, then by all means make it so.
Thats over simplyfying. A fly is not a candidate for murder, but if the circumstances are there, and there is a greater good then it excuseable (just). Of course nobody wants abortion but sometimes its the only realistic choice, just like war.
I'm sorry, I don't buy that. Abortion is used, for the most part, because the woman don't want to be inconvenienced with a child.
1.3 million abortions are performed in the US a year. Are the majority of those rape/incest/mother's life is threatened? No. They are performed because a woman chose to put her social status before the child. That's disgusting.
It's not the terms themselves that are cumbersome ... it's the loaded definitions that go along with them. From the ever-present M-W.com:
Main Entry: fe·tus
Pronunciation: 'fE-t&s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, act of bearing young, offspring; akin to Latin fetus newly delivered, fruitful -- more at FEMININE
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually three months after conception to birth
Sounds good to me. It's just that when "fetus" is redefined to be synonymous with "undifferentiated mass of tissue", well, then we've got a failure to communicate. ;)
(I'd agree that it is a moral issue, but it's been redefined away to the point of being a purely volitional or political issue.)
You can't murder something that isn't a human (PETA arguments notwithstanding), so what's a human?
Cheers,
JND
:clap: Very good points.
1.3 million abortions are performed in the US a year. Are the majority of those rape/incest/mother's life is threatened? No. They are performed because a woman chose to put her social status before the child. That's disgusting.
You're absolutely right discipledoc. And additionally they're performed because both women and men are too lazy to use contraception. There are also a lot of men and women who carelessly engage is sexual activity with the thought being "I'll just get an abortion (kill the baby) if I become pregnant". Not to mention that's why AIDs and other STDs continue to increase.
The big problem here is people just refuse to think.
Riptide
05-07-04, 03:09 PM
The big problem here is people just refuse to think.
I think they know what they're doing. The real problem is they just don't give a flying feck in a rolling doughnut.
Ya, they just don't care. I also don't believe they are actaully thingking "we can get an abortion if we make a oops" I think they just don't think and react to their urges.
Riptide
05-07-04, 05:16 PM
Ya, they just don't care. I also don't believe they are actaully thingking "we can get an abortion if we make a oops" I think they just don't think and react to their urges.
What is the difference between a human and an animal? ;)
We have urges, but we have a choice on reacting to them or not.
Rob_0126
05-07-04, 05:21 PM
And all these brings up the next point:
Humans above all else on the earth.
What I mean is, none should ever decide the life of an animal over a human.
Humans are far more valuable.
Doesn't mean it's ok to go out killing people cats and dogs(Kill mine, and you will have a fist in your mouth).
Robert
Riptide
05-07-04, 05:27 PM
Anyone ever read Dune? If you know what the gom jabbar is then you understand the test and how it differentiates humans from animals. :)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.