12 year old girl speaks against abortion, and she does it well.

[Annoying]

Yes, No, and No.

Well, the only way you're getting no and no for those last ones is if you're requiring all of the 7 standard biological qualities, instead of most of the 7, as is common.

If you're going for all 7, a zygote isn't alive, as response to stimuli is one of the 7 qualities. And we'd be back to the whole pain response/brain function thing, which isn't the topic at hand.

So:
a) Zygotes, semen, and eggs are all alive, as they reach most of the 7 standard biological qualities for life.
b) Zygotes, semen, and eggs aren't alive, and fetuses are considered alive when they reach all 7 standard biological qualities for life.
c) You're choose to ignore the scientific community's definition of "life" and substitute your own, completely invalidating any discussion of science.

[Deleted]

Pretty much any secular term.

I don't have an issue with people arguing for the sanctity of life, but when you're a self-professed atheist, it's like arguing that you have "faith" that evolution is real. It's using exclusively religious terminology when it isn't relevant.

Again, demonstrably not true. You're acting like domestic violence isn't common. It is, and always has been. And that's just dealing with immediate family, let alone expanded community.

Objectively wrong on the latter two. Sperm and unfertilized ovum are absolutely as alive as a fetus. Arguably more so, in certain respects, since both are expected to have a lifespan, however brief, when not being directly sustained by their producer.

fine, in any further utterance, i shall use a secular term, as i used it the one time, this is somewhat overkill.
domestic violence is not killing, and its one of the two rules of society, no lying, as that renders language pointless, and no killing as then you cant trust anyone not to kill you and you have to then be solo, or with other people who agree not to kill you, and voilà you have just agreed to rule two.

neither conduct mitosis, and are thus not alive.

[FlyingWoodchuck]

Just because people use words wrong doesn't mean that it should just be accepted because they want it to.

Inviolability would be more appropriate if you're not speaking in terms of religion.

They're not using it wrong. Its meaning has grown over centuries. If you don't like it that is too bad. Feel free to look up its definition.

[Tradewind]

They're not using it wrong. Its meaning has grown over centuries. If you don't like it that is too bad. Feel free to look up its definition.

sanc·ti·ty
ˈsaNG(k)titē/
noun
noun: sanctity; plural noun: sanctities

1.
the state or quality of being holy, sacred, or saintly.


sanc·ti·ty
[sangk-ti-tee] Show IPA
noun, plural sanc·ti·ties.
1.
holiness, saintliness, or godliness.
2.
sacred or hallowed character: the inviolable sanctity of the temple.
3.
a sacred thing.

[Masark]

neither conduct mitosis, and are thus not alive.

So any cell that has reached senescence is no longer alive?

[oujosh29]

Just because people use words wrong doesn't mean that it should just be accepted because they want it to.

Inviolability would be more appropriate if you're not speaking in terms of religion.

Sanctity is a perfectly ok word for an atheist to use when talking about this, despite it having roots in religion. If you were that strict then half our vocabulary would be off limits. I'm an athiest and I say "on my god" when I see something surprised or say "god damn it" when I screw up. Its not because I believe in him its now integrated in our everyday language.
Off topic a little: Who creates abortion threads? theres literaly no pont. The pro abortion side thinks their completely right and pro life people are evil religious nuts (even though for a lot of us it has nothing to do with religion, like I said I'm an atheist) and just "science" deniers even though we understand the science we just think its being twisted to justify abortion. And pro life will always consider the unborn baby as a human being from conception, and that the fact he/she is growing into a child doesn't mean its ok to kill him/her BEFORE the baby looks human enough that you can abort without feeling guilty. These threads do no one any good.

[FlyingWoodchuck]

sanc·ti·ty
ˈsaNG(k)titē/
noun
noun: sanctity; plural noun: sanctities

1.
the state or quality of being holy, sacred, or saintly.


sanc·ti·ty
[sangk-ti-tee] Show IPA
noun, plural sanc·ti·ties.
1.
holiness, saintliness, or godliness.
2.
sacred or hallowed character: the inviolable sanctity of the temple.
3.
a sacred thing.

Now go look up what sacred means (and to save you from another post look up reverence to get an idea of what things apply to sacred which is something that fits with the above definition).

edit: here, I'll actually save you the trouble:

sa·cred [sey-krid] Show IPA
adjective
1.
devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.
2.
entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.
3.
pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane ): sacred music; sacred books.
4.
reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.
5.
regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.



rev·er·ence [rev-er-uhns, rev-ruhns] Show IPA
noun
1.
a feeling or attitude of deep respect tinged with awe; veneration.
2.
the outward manifestation of this feeling: to pay reverence.
3.
a gesture indicative of deep respect; an obeisance, bow, or curtsy.
4.
the state of being revered.
5.
( initial capital letter ) a title used in addressing or mentioning a member of the clergy (usually preceded by your or his ).

[Tradewind]

Sanctity is a perfectly ok word for an atheist to use when talking about this, despite it having roots in religion. If you were that strict then half our vocabulary would be off limits. I'm an athiest and I say "on my god" when I see something surprised or say "god damn it" when I screw up. Its not because I believe in him its now integrated in our everyday language.

An atheist refencing the "Sanctity of Life" specifically as an argument is more than just a little ironic don't you think? Since it has a wholly religious meaning.

- - - Updated - - -

Now go look up what sacred means (and to save you from another post look up reverence to get an idea of what things apply to sacred which is something that fits with the above definition).

sa·cred
ˈsākrid/
adjective
adjective: sacred

1.
connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.

Are we done this stupid fucking exercise yet? What's next, define Holy?

[Sunseeker]

Well, the only way you're getting no and no for those last ones is if you're requiring all of the 7 standard biological qualities, instead of most of the 7, as is common.

If you're going for all 7, a zygote isn't alive, as response to stimuli is one of the 7 qualities. And we'd be back to the whole pain response/brain function thing, which isn't the topic at hand.

So:
a) Zygotes, semen, and eggs are all alive, as they reach most of the 7 standard biological qualities for life.
b) Zygotes, semen, and eggs aren't alive, and fetuses are considered alive when they reach all 7 standard biological qualities for life.
c) You're choose to ignore the scientific community's definition of "life" and substitute your own, completely invalidating any discussion of science.

I'd just like to point out (this isn't against you, I'm just jumping off your post, sorry) that as omnivores, being "alive" clearly doesn't mean that it has any rights. Further, since different "grades" of human (fetus, child [birthed baby to tween], teen, young adult, adult, comatose but not brain-dead, brain-dead human) receive different rights and protections. So clearly we're not against delineating between one grade of human and another. So clearly we're not against the idea that some things are "more human" (on the basis of how many rights they get) than others.

So really if we're going to say "fetuses are alive" that's not the same as saying they're "human", because there are different grades of human. So if we are saying that "fetuses are alive, and therefore human" we need to clarify what grade of human they are. If they can't be matched up with an existing grade of human, then we need to create a grade.

[Annoying]

Are we done this stupid fucking exercise yet? What's next, define Holy?

I got this:

Holy, also known as FADE in the NES release due to censorship issues, is a level 8 White Magic spell which inflicts a large amount of damage against all enemies. The total damage dealt depends on the caster's Spirit. It is one of the most powerful offensive spells in the game, second only to Flare.

The spell can be bought at Gaia and can only be learned by the White Wizard job class. In the Dawn of Souls and 20th Anniversary Edition releases it costs 50 MP to cast.

[oujosh29]

An atheist refencing the "Sanctity of Life" specifically as an argument is more than just a little ironic don't you think? Since it has a wholly religious meaning.

- - - Updated - - -


sa·cred
ˈsākrid/
adjective
adjective: sacred

1.
connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.

Are we done this stupid fucking exercise yet?

Our entire culture has a religious history behind it. My name is even from the bible. Trying to speak in a completely non-religious way isn't possible. Or at least it would take way more work than I'm willing to do. Plus I think its a stupid standard; the religious don't own my language anymore than they own christmas anymore, the best holiday ever!

[FlyingWoodchuck]

An atheist refencing the "Sanctity of Life" specifically as an argument is more than just a little ironic don't you think? Since it has a wholly religious meaning.

- - - Updated - - -



sa·cred
ˈsākrid/
adjective
adjective: sacred

1.
connected with God (or the gods) or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration.

Are we done this stupid fucking exercise yet? What's next, define Holy?

Guess I got the edit in too late, but here, just in case you don't scroll back up:

sa·cred [sey-krid] Show IPA
adjective
1.
devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.
2.
entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.
3.
pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane ): sacred music; sacred books.
4.
reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.
5.
regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.



rev·er·ence [rev-er-uhns, rev-ruhns] Show IPA
noun
1.
a feeling or attitude of deep respect tinged with awe; veneration.
2.
the outward manifestation of this feeling: to pay reverence.
3.
a gesture indicative of deep respect; an obeisance, bow, or curtsy.
4.
the state of being revered.
5.
( initial capital letter ) a title used in addressing or mentioning a member of the clergy (usually preceded by your or his ).

[Austilias]

I don't know why her age is of any significance when the Left have flirted with the idea of lowering the Age of Consent as far as 13 years old. Apparently children are intelligent/responsible/informed enough to make decisions pertaining to sex at the approximate age group of the girl in this video; so i'm confused as to why she is not also qualified to give her opinion on a procedure explicitly relating to sexual anatomy.

Beyond that point I see no sense in arguing about the matter. MMO-Champion's userbase has a pretty undeniable slant with regard to these things, so it's unlikely that any conversation would be fruitful; and I say that as someone's who's unopposed to the practice of abortion.

[Endus]

domestic violence is not killing

Not exclusively, but it certainly includes murders.

and its one of the two rules of society, no lying, as that renders language pointless, and no killing as then you cant trust anyone not to kill you and you have to then be solo, or with other people who agree not to kill you, and voilà you have just agreed to rule two.

The first isn't even a rule. Hell, the Bible doesn't even say "no lying". Lying is arguably a fundamental necessity. It doesn't "render language pointless", in any remote way.

neither conduct mitosis, and are thus not alive.

That isn't one of the necessary hallmarks of "life".

[schwank05]

You'd force a woman to endure a pregnancy she took all reasonable precautions against, simply to give an infant to a childless couple?

I'm not sure i like your view of the world...

Ignoring the mother may die, and her body will be stretched, tested, and experience mild to severe discomfort throughout the months; What makes your opinion valid enough to enforce it?

Nothing, like most other points in any thread on the internet it's my opinion nothing more nothing less. I just openly stated how I feel on the subject, you feel different. It's to be expected, I am not trying to sway anyone, I just state how I feel about certain topics.

[Tradewind]

Our entire culture has a religious history behind it. My name is even from the bible. Trying to speak in a completely non-religious way isn't possible. Or at least it would take way more work than I'm willing to do. Plus I think its a stupid standard; the religious don't own my language anymore than they own christmas anymore, the best holiday ever!

Speak in a non-religious way? Easy, I already mentioned it.

Inviolable.

[Deleted]

So any cell that has reached senescence is no longer alive?

its not perpetual mitosis that is the definition its doing it.
A virus will never do it its not alive.
a sperm will never do it, its not alive.

[Annoying]

I'd just like to point out (this isn't against you, I'm just jumping off your post, sorry) that as omnivores, being "alive" clearly doesn't mean that it has any rights. Further, since different "grades" of human (fetus, child [birthed baby to tween], teen, young adult, adult, comatose but not brain-dead, brain-dead human) receive different rights and protections. So clearly we're not against delineating between one grade of human and another. So clearly we're not against the idea that some things are "more human" (on the basis of how many rights they get) than others.

So really if we're going to say "fetuses are alive" that's not the same as saying they're "human", because there are different grades of human. So if we are saying that "fetuses are alive, and therefore human" we need to clarify what grade of human they are. If they can't be matched up with an existing grade of human, then we need to create a grade.

Oh, entirely relevant by all means. We were just having a mini-discussion on whether you could consider a zygote alive or not, and whether considering a zygote alive implies that the semen and eggs are alive, as goblinpaladin was pretty staunch on not maliciously killing any living thing.

[Deleted]

Not exclusively, but it certainly includes murders.

The first isn't even a rule. Hell, the Bible doesn't even say "no lying". Lying is arguably a fundamental necessity. It doesn't "render language pointless", in any remote way.

That isn't one of the necessary hallmarks of "life".

possessing the ability to lie and kill, and even that those things occur do not detract from the fact that we have rules against those things, and those are the only universal rules all societies share, yes people break the rules, But they are rules.

there is no unequivocal definition of life, mitosis is one of them.

[Tradewind]

its not perpetual mitosis that is the definition its doing it.
A virus will never do it its not alive.
a sperm will never do it, its not alive.

mitosis isn't a requirement of being classified as alive...