Texas senator Wendy Davis stands for women's rights - literally

[Underverse]

Yet they would kill a human in an earlier stage anyway.

Nothing wrong with causing the destruction of tissue belonging to H. sapiens

[Elegiac]

The lack of ideological introspection among the forced birthers is astounding. Those people never actually stop to think about their beliefs.

Most people that espouse most of the moralistic standpoints don't.

To be fair, even Thomas Jefferson used the "inalienable rights" copout.

[Grumash]

I said inherently valuable. You can construct whatever value you want. But it doesn't change the innate quality of the value.

It isn't a child. I don't think anyone here would sacrifice their 7 year old to have sex once without having to worry about pregnancy.

What is the difference between inherrant value (something that has value from the beginning) and any other value? How is value assigned to life? By people. Just because you do not assign something value does not mean others dont.

The example you use of a 7 year old child being sacrificed is not applied correctly. Any parent (I hope) of a child they have raised grows more and more attached to them after experiences and living with them, as would anyone who loves another. The comparison is if one life is worth having sex once worry free.

Think about the 'push the button for a million dollars dillema', when you push the button you get a reward, but someone in the world dies, most likely someone you will never know about. Who would push the button? Anyone who would get an abortion.

[Deleted]

The main argument of this thread is about if abortion should be legal. I do not believe it should, and thus it would be murder.

That's what you believe it should be, not what it is thus the use of the word is still incorrect and is naught but an attempt to invoke the negative emotions connected with the word 'murder' to abortion.

That is very interesting language you are using. To be a parasite, an organism must be there against the will of a host. You may argue that the mother does not want the baby thus it is a parasite. However the mother was very happy to create this 'parasite', not to mention even viewing a fetus this way is morally appalling to me.

There is nothing about being a parasite about being there "against the will of a host". That it is there and how it 'lives' is sufficient for something to fulfill the definition of the word 'parasite'.

Also the logic that "the mother was happy to create this parasite" means nothing in this debate. People do things that negatively effect their health all the the time, that does not mean that they shouldn't be able to treat said issues.

You may find it morally appalling however it is an accurate description of a foetus' state of being.

[Elegiac]

What is the difference between inherrant value (something that has value from the beginning) and any other value? How is value assigned to life? By people. Just because you do not assign something value does not mean others dont.

The example you use of a 7 year old child being sacrificed is not applied correctly. Any parent (I hope) of a child they have raised grows more and more attached to them after experiences and living with them, as would anyone who loves another. The comparison is if one life is worth having sex once worry free.

Think about the 'push the button for a million dollars dillema', when you push the button you get a reward, but someone in the world dies, most likely someone you will never know about. Who would push the button? Anyone who would get an abortion.

You're equating people (women, rather) that would get an abortion to someone that has no regard for other people. Very droll.

[Underverse]

A zygote is not a body part, no. A zygote is its own individual being. You're basically arguing that a common parasite would be the same as an arm. The funny thing here is that you think a zygote shares the exact same biological make up as its mother, which it does not.

Parasites do not fuse with human tissue and become a part of their host. They live inside their host.

The funny thing here is that I never stated anything about the fetus and mother having the same biological makeup, and in fact I stated that they did not have the same biological makeup, and that this is no ground to determine the quality of 'individual being', as cancerous lesions have different genetic makeup from the rest of the body yet are considered part of the body.

[Grumash]

goddammit wells, we finally got off of that "debate", dont start it again

Having read many of Wells posts in the past, I usually ignore him due to his raging incompetence and bigotry.

Infracted: Please do not insult other users

[Deleted]

Nothing wrong with causing the destruction of tissue belonging to H. sapiens

It's a human being.

Funny thing here is that Texas is trying to pass a law to ban abortion at 20 weeks. By that time, it's a baby. It can live on even if it was born extremely early.

[Wells]

Having read many of Wells posts in the past, I usually ignore him due to his raging incompetence and bigotry.

Stop it you're making me blush.

[Elegiac]

Having read many of Wells posts in the past, I usually ignore him due to his raging incompetence and bigotry.

I honestly don't see much of that coming from Wells unless the victims of his vitriol merit it; in which case they by definition deserve it.

So, I'll ask the question then. How do you define a human being or person?

---------- Post added 2013-06-28 at 04:18 PM ----------

It's a human being.

Funny thing here is that Texas is trying to pass a law to ban abortion at 20 weeks. By that time, it's a baby. It can live on even if it was born extremely early.

Fun Fact: The vast majority of abortions take place before 18 weeks.

[Underverse]

What is the difference between inherrant value (something that has value from the beginning) and any other value? How is value assigned to life? By people. Just because you do not assign something value does not mean others dont.

The example you use of a 7 year old child being sacrificed is not applied correctly. Any parent (I hope) of a child they have raised grows more and more attached to them after experiences and living with them, as would anyone who loves another. The comparison is if one life is worth having sex once worry free.

Think about the 'push the button for a million dollars dillema', when you push the button you get a reward, but someone in the world dies, most likely someone you will never know about. Who would push the button? Anyone who would get an abortion.

An inherent value is based on something. Any other value is not necessarily based on something, but it might be - you just have to prove that it is.

Your analogies are fine, but we still haven't agreed that fetuses are individual humans of equal status with actual individual humans.

[Deleted]

Parasites do not fuse with human tissue and become a part of their host. They live inside their host.

The funny thing here is that I never stated anything about the fetus and mother having the same biological makeup, and in fact I stated that they did not have the same biological makeup, and that this is no ground to determine the quality of 'individual being', as cancerous lesions have different genetic makeup from the rest of the body yet are considered part of the body.

But unlike like a cancerous lesion, a zygote is human.

---------- Post added 2013-06-28 at 02:19 PM ----------

I honestly don't see much of that coming from Wells unless the victims of his vitriol merit it; in which case they by definition deserve it.

So, I'll ask the question then. How do you define a human being or person?

---------- Post added 2013-06-28 at 04:18 PM ----------



Fun Fact: The vast majority of abortions take place before 18 weeks.

Fun Fact: There are still many after. Not like it matters, cause you're still killing a human.

[Grumash]

That's what you believe it should be, not what it is thus the use of the word is still incorrect and is naught but an attempt to invoke the negative emotions connected with the word 'murder' to abortion.


There is nothing about being a parasite about being there "against the will of a host". That it is there and how it 'lives' is sufficient for something to fulfill the definition of the word 'parasite'.

Also the logic that "the mother was happy to create this parasite" means nothing in this debate. People do things that negatively effect their health all the the time, that does not mean that they shouldn't be able to treat said issues.

You may find it morally appalling however it is an accurate description of a foetus' state of being.

I do not know of many parasites that are created partly by the host, and the host has a biological pathway for their development and eventual birth.

Also, you can change murder to killing if it makes you feel better.

[Elegiac]

Fun Fact: There are still many after. Not like it matters, cause you're still killing a human.

Many? Less than 1.1 percent.

[Underverse]

It's a human being.

Funny thing here is that Texas is trying to pass a law to ban abortion at 20 weeks. By that time, it's a baby. It can live on even if it was born extremely early.

5 months? It's possible. But not without extreme medical aid. And even then, it doesn't matter much. Because it doesn't matter if 'it can live' if it's not an individual human right now at the current moment.

---------- Post added 2013-06-28 at 07:21 PM ----------

But unlike like a cancerous lesion, a zygote is human.

What's not human about a cancerous lesion?

[Tradewind]

It's a human being.

Funny thing here is that Texas is trying to pass a law to ban abortion at 20 weeks. By that time, it's a baby. It can live on even if it was born extremely early.

I bet you could count on one hand the number of viable births at 20 weeks gestation...

[Trunksee]

This is the point its not a religous arguement, its subjective. We are both argueing points of when an individual. The problem is us we disagree with abortion can give scientific reasons, all proabortion people can do is compare two un alike things call the related to make a blanket statement which has no point but to call a fetus not an individual.
Thinking about the idea that because of abortion you may not have existed is sickening. I know what ill get "I would know if i didnt existed" but thats the point neither would anyone else. Every dingle fertilized.egg deserves the right to run its life cycle until it puts anothers life in danger or is forced on them by rape, because that fetus did nothing wrong but exist.

[Deleted]

Many? Less than 1.1 percent.

Yes, thousands.

[Wells]

This is the point its not a religous arguement, its subjective. We are both argueing points of when an individual. The problem is us we disagree with abortion can give scientific reasons, all proabortion people can do is compare two un alike things call the related to make a blanket statement which has no point but to call a fetus not an individual.
Thinking about the idea that because of abortion you may not have existed is sickening. I know what ill get "I would know if i didnt existed" but thats the point neither would anyone else. Every dingle fertilized.egg deserves the right to run its life cycle until it puts anothers life in danger or is forced on them by rape, because that fetus did nothing wrong but exist.

So you want to ban in vitro fertilization then right?

[Windfury]

No fetus has ever survived before at 20 weeks. The survival rate at 21 weeks is very low, it gets up to 50% by the 25h week.