ABORTION.......

CerealKiller wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Don't know how to explain it any better, Cereal.

The reason I think a woman has a choice is because it is her body that is being used as a host.

If the pregnancy is carried to term...WHICH I SEE TO BE STRICTLY HER CHOICE...a baby results.

The baby is the responsibility of the mother and father...and both should be made to endure the financial costs involved.

That simply is my opinion...and while it may differ from yours...I honestly do not see it as inconsistent. But if you do...I respect your right to do so.

Nothing wrong with your explanation Frank. I appreciate how well you explain things. Just trying to fully understand your logic and point out what I see as an inconsistency.

Would the following be a fair assessment of your point of view.

HER BODY --> HER CHOICE --> HER FETUS --> BIRTH ---> THEIR BABY

I would make an adjustment (all my opinion, of course):

Obviously it is her body....but the fetus is the product of insemination of her egg by his sperm...making the fetus their fetus...being housed in her body.

It is her choice whether to continue to host the fetus.

At birth a baby results...the baby is biologically their baby.

Quote:

and if so what magically happens at birth to make the following inaccurate:

HER BODY --> HER CHOICE --> HER FETUS --> BIRTH ---> HER BABY

See above.

The determination of the status of the baby which results at birth...is a function of biology.

Or at least, that is my opinion.

0 Replies

Frank, why exactly do you not see the fetus, as a human?

0 Replies

thunder_runner32 wrote:

Frank, why exactly do you not see the fetus, as a human?

Because it is a fetus, Thunder. That is why you referred to it as a fetus.

It is not "a human." It is not "a living human being."

It is a fetus.

0 Replies

Well I didn't give birth to fetuses. I gave birth to babies each born with a temperament that was obvious to me well before they were born. I don't think I have ever heard a woman say that she just felt her fetus kick for the first time. And I don't recall any woman ever saying that she is expecting a fetus.

I think they're babies long before they draw their first breath of air outside the womb.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Well I didn't give birth to fetuses. I gave birth to babies each born with a temperament that was obvious to me well before they were born. I don't think I have ever heard a woman say that she just felt her fetus kick for the first time. And I don't recall any woman ever saying that she is expecting a fetus.

I think they're babies long before they draw their first breath of air outside the womb.

How very interesting.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Well I didn't give birth to fetuses. I gave birth to babies each born with a temperament that was obvious to me well before they were born. I don't think I have ever heard a woman say that she just felt her fetus kick for the first time. And I don't recall any woman ever saying that she is expecting a fetus.

I think they're babies long before they draw their first breath of air outside the womb.

This is too logical. Of course, you are absolutely right, but Frank will find fault with this logic.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
Well I didn't give birth to fetuses. I gave birth to babies each born with a temperament that was obvious to me well before they were born. I don't think I have ever heard a woman say that she just felt her fetus kick for the first time. And I don't recall any woman ever saying that she is expecting a fetus.

I think they're babies long before they draw their first breath of air outside the womb.

This is too logical. Of course, you are absolutely right, but Frank will find fault with this logic.

I don't find fault with it.

It simply doesn't have significant impact on what we are discussing.

If you think in some way that it does...I would point out to you that the expression "a fetus is a fetus" is a tautology...and arguing against a tautology is absurd.

A fetus is a fetus.

An acorn is an acorn.

An egg is an egg.

A fetus is not a child; an acorn is not an oak tree; and an egg is not a chicken.

Live with it.

0 Replies

Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus? You cannot equate an egg with a fetus just as you cannot equate sperm with a fetus.

A fetus is already on it's way to being a child.

A acorn must be planted and nurtured before it can become anything other than an acorn.

A egg must be fertilized before it can become anything... chicken, turtle, snake, bird etc.

Live with it.

0 Replies

Right an egg is not a chicken and neither is a human egg a baby. But at some point the acorn sprouts and starts shooting its first forming leaves to the surface. At that point it is no longer an acorn. It is an oak tree.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus? You cannot equate an egg with a fetus just as you cannot equate sperm with a fetus.

A fetus is already on it's way to being a child.

A acorn must be planted and nurtured before it can become anything other than an acorn.

A egg must be fertilized before it can become anything... chicken, turtle, snake, bird etc.

Live with it.

Of course you are correct about this Intrepid.

Semantics cannot hide the fact that the unborn is a human being.

It would be as logical to say 'Obviously a human is not a person because those are two different words, as anyone can see.'

0 Replies

Intrepid and RealLife, I know you see it clearly.

That first growth emerging from the ground may be called a 'shoot' or "sapling' before it takes on all the characteristics of a tree, but it is an oak tree nonetheless, and not an acorn any more.

The insect egg that hatches to become a caterpiller that ultimately emerges from a cocoon as a butterfly was not called a butterfly until it was a winged creature. Nevertheless, if we killed all the caterpillers there would be no butterflies.

The baby is no less human because biological scientists gave it other names.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus?

Do you agree that a cancer cell which is a cancer cell is a living cancer cell???

Quote:

You cannot equate an egg with a fetus just as you cannot equate sperm with a fetus.

A fetus is already on it's way to being a child.

So make it a fertilized egg. A fertilized egg is a fertilized egg...it is not a chicken.

(Why go over this again?)

Quote:

A acorn must be planted and nurtured before it can become anything other than an acorn.

A egg must be fertilized before it can become anything... chicken, turtle, snake, bird etc.

Live with it.

And an egg (whether fertilized or not) is an egg and an acorn an acorn. The egg is not a chicken...and the acorn is not an oak tree.

And a fetus is not, as has been asserted, a living human being.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus? You cannot equate an egg with a fetus just as you cannot equate sperm with a fetus.

A fetus is already on it's way to being a child.

A acorn must be planted and nurtured before it can become anything other than an acorn.

A egg must be fertilized before it can become anything... chicken, turtle, snake, bird etc.

Live with it.

Of course you are correct about this Intrepid.

Semantics cannot hide the fact that the unborn is a human being.

It would be as logical to say 'Obviously a human is not a person because those are two different words, as anyone can see.'

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Intrepid and RealLife, I know you see it clearly.

That first growth emerging from the ground may be called a 'shoot' or "sapling' before it takes on all the characteristics of a tree, but it is an oak tree nonetheless, and not an acorn any more.

The insect egg that hatches to become a caterpiller that ultimately emerges from a cocoon as a butterfly was not called a butterfly until it was a winged creature. Nevertheless, if we killed all the caterpillers there would be no butterflies.

The baby is no less human because biological scientists gave it other names.

Bottom line: A fetus is a fetus.

Try to live with it, folks.

And try to live with this: A pregnant woman should have the right to terminate her pregnancy for any reason she deems proper. Any of us may disagree with her...but she should have the right to do so...without any of you or our government telling her that she must carry her pregnancy to term.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:
Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus?

Do you agree that a cancer cell which is a cancer cell is a living cancer cell???

Quote:
You cannot equate an egg with a fetus just as you cannot equate sperm with a fetus.

A fetus is already on it's way to being a child.

So make it a fertilized egg. A fertilized egg is a fertilized egg...it is not a chicken.

(Why go over this again?)

Quote:
A acorn must be planted and nurtured before it can become anything other than an acorn.

A egg must be fertilized before it can become anything... chicken, turtle, snake, bird etc.

Live with it.

And an egg (whether fertilized or not) is an egg and an acorn an acorn. The egg is not a chicken...and the acorn is not an oak tree.

And a fetus is not, as has been asserted, a living human being.

Does that cancer cell have the opportunity to be born as a living baby?

A fertilized egg is on it's way to being a chicken or whatever species the egg is from.

You told us early in the thread that you were responsible for a couple abortions. I am now wondering if this whole thing is about an inner guilt rather than the "rights of a woman over her body" Why else would you constantly drag on with the same things about what a fetus is? We know what a fetus is. Apparently, you do not.

0 Replies

Intrepid wrote:

Does that cancer cell have the opportunity to be born as a living baby?

No.

But my comment was an appropriate response to your comment: "Do you agree that a fetus which is a fetus is a living fetus?"

So tell me, Intrepid...Do you agree that a cancer cell is a living cancer cell?

Quote:

A fertilized egg is on it's way to being a chicken or whatever species the egg is from.

But a fertilized egg is not a chicken...or a snake or any other animal from which the egg came.

A fetus...is a fetus.

Quote:

You told us early in the thread that you were responsible for a couple abortions. I am now wondering if this whole thing is about an inner guilt rather than the "rights of a woman over her body"

Sounds as though you realize your arguments are shallow...and unconvincing. Wonder whatever you choose...for whatever rationalizations you find it necessary to do so.

Quote:

Why else would you constantly drag on with the same things about what a fetus is?

Normally I wouldn't...but apparently in this thread I am dealing with people with closed minds who simply cannot grasp the point.

Quote:

We know what a fetus is.

Good. Then you know a fetus is a fetus...that could become a living human being if allowed to continue its growth. But if a pregnant woman decides she wants to terminate her pregnancy...it will never be anything other than a fetus.

Quote:

Apparently, you do not.

Gosh...how can you assert that? I know exactly what a fetus is...and have been trying to explain it to you. Now, in a moment of utter desperation...you are asserting that it is apparent that I do not know.

You be careful now, Intrepid...or Implicator is gonna get on you about your poor use of logic.

0 Replies

I think you have something there, Intrepid - about Apisa's muleishness on this subject being partially because of his personal history. It follows - if I had been party to two abortions, the last thing I want to consider is that the two lives I ended were on their way to becoming real live people.

And since the alternative is that Apisa really is just as dense and unfeeling as one would have to be to close one's mind to even the possibility that late term fetuses are young people - let's hope you are right.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I think you have something there, Intrepid - about Apisa's muleishness on this subject being partially because of his personal history. It follows - if I had been party to two abortions, the last thing I want to consider is that the two lives I ended were on their way to becoming real live people.

Excuse me while I laugh at this silly strawman.

Let me make this perfectly clear: The two abortions to which I was a party were instances of women deciding they did not want to continue their pregnancies. I attempted to talk both women out of their move...and asked both of them to carry their pregnancies out to term....with assurances that I would carry out the responsibilities that would accrue to me if they did. (By the way...as in every pregnancy...there was absolutely no way I could know with certainty that I was the inseminator of the egg.)

Each preferred not to do so for reasons I am not willing to share here...but I understood their reasons and have no real problem with their decision as they made it.

I have absolutely no problem at all acknowledging that the fetuses destroyed in these abortions would have, if carried to term, resulted in human beings being born.

I have acknowledged that in at least a half dozen threads over in Abuzz (this was discussed at length in Abuzz)...and I think in one here in A2K.

I have also acknowledged that if there is a God...and if that God would require me to answer for what I have done...I would face that.

Anyone wanting to know how I felt about that could easily have asked a question about it before making the kind of silly, pseudo-psychological profile on me that Snood did here.

Quote:

And since the alternative is that Apisa really is just as dense and unfeeling as one would have to be to close one's mind to even the possibility that late term fetuses are young people - let's hope you are right.

Oh, gosh...another strawman to laugh at.

ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

I've given my opinions on what I see to be the most likely. I am not, like some of the close-minded people in this thread...close-minded about the possibility of either scenario in this issue.

Egad...talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

0 Replies

All the rationalizations in the world won't make an acorn again out of the oak tree that has sprouted. "Fetus" was once a word for a particular stage of human development. It has now apparently become a word for a 'non person'. But no amount of redefined words can tell me that once the egg and sperm have successfully united, it is not a human being that has formed and is growing.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

All the rationalizations in the world won't make an acorn again out of the oak tree that has sprouted. "Fetus" was once a word for a particular stage of human development. It has now apparently become a word for a 'non person'. But no amount of redefined words can tell me that once the egg and sperm have successfully united, it is not a human being that has formed and is growing.

There you go. What you want to do is to define a fertilized egg...often no more than a clump of undifferentiated cells as a living human being...

...and to give that clump of undifferentiated cells rights that cause a woman to lose her rights.

Fanatics like you would give imagined rights of eight cells priority over the rights of a grown woman.

My guess is that will never happen.

I am delighted that the laws of this land consider your argument to be nonsense, Foxfyre...and I am confident, even though people like you would love to see the Supreme Court stacked with people who might travel that sick avenue...that it will never happen.

0 Replies

ABORTION.......

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know