When Does Life Begin?

real (in desperation) wrote: "...even when the unborn has measurable brain waves you still are in favor of killing him."

real, Your imagination is again escaping your brains. Show me where I've ever made this statement or imiplied such? PLEASE.

0 Replies

What I've been saying, and I'll repeat it here, is that the mother and her doctor should make the decision. Not an imbecile who doesn't care what happens to that baby after it's born.

0 Replies

Diest TKO,
Funny stuff with the fruit!

CI,
RL must stick to his ideology, and I can understand that.

The strange thing is, I'm not convinced the Christian bible actually takes any clear position on abortion, nor any clear position as to what constitutes a human being.

That would mean RL is adding moral relativism to absolutist Christian morals

That would mean RL is adding a relativistic interpretation as to what constitutes a human being, because he claims a fertilized egg is a human being, but a non-fertilized egg is not a human being.

Both those positions are an anathema to absolutist Christian morals.

0 Replies

Good points Chumly.

real life, when a soul splits into twins, where does the extra soul come from?

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

RL must stick to his ideology, and I can understand that.

Unfortunately for you and for CI, I have based the position I have stated regarding abortion on the medical status of the unborn.

Chumly wrote:

Both those positions are an anathema to absolutist Christian morals.

Are you saying that a Christian cannot take either position?

Aren't you a little confused?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

real (in desperation) wrote: "...even when the unborn has measurable brain waves you still are in favor of killing him."

real, Your imagination is again escaping your brains. Show me where I've ever made this statement or imiplied such? PLEASE.

Do you support legalization of abortion up to the point of birth?

0 Replies

I support the woman's right to choose with her doctor.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Unfortunately for you and for CI, I have based the position I have stated regarding abortion on the medical status of the unborn.

Ok, you are relying on the medical community to assess what constitutes a human being and you are not relying on Christian morals. Given that the medical community regularly performs abortions your position is pretty funny.

real life wrote:

Are you saying that a Christian cannot take either position?

Aren't you a little confused?

What are these two positions?
Why do you allege I'm confused?
What makes you think I am saying a Christian cannot take either position?
What does your above response have to do with the plain facts below that you contradict yourself and try and confuse the issue with multiple logical faliicies?

As such, the facts of the matter remain:

RL must stick to his ideology, and I can understand that.

The strange thing is, I'm not convinced the Christian bible actually takes any clear position on abortion, nor any clear position as to what constitutes a human being.

That would mean RL is adding moral relativism to absolutist Christian morals.

That would mean RL is adding a relativistic interpretation as to what constitutes a human being, because he claims a fertilized egg is a human being, but a non-fertilized egg is not a human being.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

real life wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
real (in desperation) wrote: "...even when the unborn has measurable brain waves you still are in favor of killing him."

real, Your imagination is again escaping your brains. Show me where I've ever made this statement or imiplied such? PLEASE.

Do you support legalization of abortion up to the point of birth?

I support the woman's right to choose with her doctor.

Are you afraid to plainly and unequivocally say that you support legalization of abortion up to the point of birth?

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

real life wrote:
Unfortunately for you and for CI, I have based the position I have stated regarding abortion on the medical status of the unborn.
Ok, you are relying on the medical community to assess what constitutes a human being and you are not relying on Christian morals. Given that the medical community regularly performs abortions your position is pretty funny.

Since the 'medical community' is not a monolithic entity , all sharing the same view, your statement carries little value.

Obviously some in the 'medical community' would agree with my position, and some in the 'medical community' would not.

If some in the 'religious community' agreed with your position, would that make you a theist? Hardly.

You see how flimsy your comparison is.

0 Replies

Sure RL that's why the medical community performs abortions, because you claim some would agree with you.

A much more plausible explanation as to why the medical community performs abortions is that they do not care about your religious position, and you have no merited "medical status" argument to make.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Since the 'medical community' is not a monolithic entity , all sharing the same view, your statement carries little value.

Obviously some in the 'medical community' would agree with my position, and some in the 'medical community' would not.

If some in the 'religious community' agreed with your position, would that make you a theist? Hardly.

You see how flimsy your comparison is.

So basically by saying that the medical community is not monolithic is to say that the medical community is more about relativity than absolutes, but we already knew that.

You've destroyed your own arguement, but we already knew that too.

Seems like you're more in favor of relativist thought than you're willing to admit. I'm unimpressed.

Moving on.

You've tried to make this about "whether or not the unborn is a living human being." You have recieved an audience willing to talk about it. It has been discussed, your case was incredibly weak.

Better to talk about peoples PERSONAL desicions on whether or not to have an abortion. Talk about the circumstances, and related issues on the topic. Oh yeah and then there is stem cell cultivation, something totally different than abortion. Maybe we can talk about the bigger issues.

You've had your audience, now move on.

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

Sure RL that's why the medical community performs abortions, because you claim some would agree with you.

A much more plausible explanation as to why the medical community performs abortions is that they do not care about your religious position, and you have no merited "medical status" argument to make.

Actually an increasing number of physicians will not perform abortions and will not refer to abortion providers either.

One thing that is throwing pro-aborts into a tizzy is that even in areas where abortion is legal, it is increasingly difficult to find abortion providers to do the bloody deed.

0 Replies

real wrote: Actually an increasing number of physicians will not perform abortions and will not refer to abortion providers either.

That's what I've been saying all along; let the mother and doctor decide.
You have a problem in that you want to impose your "choice" into the mix from the very first day of pregnanacy. It's absolutely "none of your business" what the mother and doctor decides.

0 Replies

Eorl wrote:

Good points Chumly.

real life, when a soul splits into twins, where does the extra soul come from?

I haven't a clue what you are talking about, Eorl. When does a soul split into twins, and where did you get this idea?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

real wrote: Actually an increasing number of physicians will not perform abortions and will not refer to abortion providers either.

That's what I've been saying all along; let the mother and doctor decide.
You have a problem in that you want to impose your "choice" into the mix from the very first day of pregnanacy. It's absolutely "none of your business" what the mother and doctor decides.

Actually the 'pro-choice' community regards the fact that fewer doctors are choosing to perform abortions as bad news. Ironic, ain't it?

The 'pro-choice' lobby is also trying to force medical schools which choose not to train physicians in the practice of abortion to do so anyway.

So, CI, are you ready to 'fess up?

Do you or do you not support the legalization of abortion up to the point of birth? (I know you do. Why won't you admit it? Are you embarrassed by your own position? You have good reason to be.)

0 Replies

real, When are you going to understand what I say? I said it's between the mother and her doctor. I'm nowhere near trying to influene their decision one way or the other, because it's none of my business. What the medical schools do about this issue is their concern, not mine.

I personally don't "lose" anything by either the mother or the doctor's choice. As a matter of fact, I don't give a schet.

Got that?

0 Replies

No, you don't 'lose' anything. You've already been born, so abortion doesn't affect you.

You want to feign indifference, yet you relentlessly support and advocate the MOST extreme pro-abortion position possible, i.e. that abortion should be legal up to the point of birth.

Even partial birth abortions are ok with you, aren't they CI?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Actually an increasing number of physicians will not perform abortions and will not refer to abortion providers either.

If that is true, I wonder if being attacked, shot at, bombs exploded in their clinics, property vandalized and having their families threatened by "pro-lifers" had anything to do with their decision?

Performing abortions does not provide physicians with the incentives most probably want from their profession and could more readily find in other specialties: making use of myriad medical skills, lots of money from insurance companies, love from patients and families for whom miracles were perfomed, and high social status in the community.

0 Replies

real life, your argument about "abortions to the point of birth" is a straw man. A sane woman wouldn't endure 9 months of pregnancy and then arbitrarily demand the abortion of a healthy fetus, and no doctor would perform it. Third trimester abortions are done FOR MEDICAL REASONS such as to preserve the life or health of the mother or remove a non-viable fetus, and legal restrictions are unnecessary if you trust women and doctors to make the decision for each individual case. Preachers, politicians, and pro-lifers have no right to restrict other people's choices in private medical issues.

If a late-term abortion is going to be performed, why shouldn't it be done in whatever way causes the least trauma to the woman? "Partial birth" abortion may be distasteful to you and your ilk, but then you've never tried to push a fetal head through an opening that is too small for it to fit through, have you? Do you know how many millions of women died because the baby's head was too big to be born? Did you ever have your obstetrician discuss skull crushers with you when you were on the operating table getting an involuntary ceasarian section? I had that experience. Until you do, you have NO RIGHT to decide what medical procedures will be used for anyone else.

0 Replies

When Does Life Begin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know