Abortion (Pro-life/pro-choice/both)?
- Thread starter MrBishop
- Start date
Everytime you have unprotected sex...as in 100% unprotected there is a 6% chance on average that you will get pregnant, with "Plan B" (morning after pill) that is reduced by 75-80% so now we're at just over a 1% chance that one will be pregnant...there have been 2 occasions when I have felt I should take the morning after pill...both times the doc said I SHOULD be ok without it but I took it anyway, both times cause I missed ONE birthcontrol pill and ended up not using a condom...now...missing one pill is no big deal but I wanted to be SURE.
I REALLY don't think ANYONE can say I don't do everythign I can to prevent it...(short of not havign sex of course)...but like I said..SOME things happen.
I REALLY don't think ANYONE can say I don't do everythign I can to prevent it...(short of not havign sex of course)...but like I said..SOME things happen.
Professur
Well-Known Member
Soooo.... you'd play russian roulette if the chances of backstopping a bullet were how low? 1 in 100? 1 in 1000?
I'm just trying to understand the mind set.
Because, you've already admitted that birth control is falible. And you're doubling up (for which I applaude you). but all you've done is make that risk smaller. It hasn't gone away.
I'm just trying to understand the mind set.
Because, you've already admitted that birth control is falible. And you're doubling up (for which I applaude you). but all you've done is make that risk smaller. It hasn't gone away.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
For clarity sake.
First off I never professionally cut-up a frog. Second, ‘professional anything’ would indicate we had professional or educational relationship, which we have neither. Third it would indicate that you are going to pay (Pony up brother
.) Finally, it would be a foolish violation of ethos to go there; twice I have professionally acted as mandated by federal law over the internet. (My wife served as the ethics chairperson on a professional board for 2 years. She received +100 retaliatory ethic complaints from disgruntled forum wackos. These all go into your professional file)
I will however spew personal blather.
Autonomic reaction to stimuli = conscious thought, I did not say that, I said it equivocates as life.
In reply:
True, but over simplified for this topic. The frog is no longer a living system, which is what we are, systems. The ~basic living template is the cell.
Destroy the hypothalamus and medulla oblongata, heart still beats. Sever the nerves, the heart still beats. Cut the heart out hold it in the palm of your hand, the heart still beats. Those damn things will beat for +5 minutes sometimes! In the palm of your hand, a beating heart, is it alive? YES! . . . and no. It’s no longer functioning as a part of a system, but at a cellular level it is alive.
You’re mixing the somatosensory and autonomic systems; there are crossovers between the two at different points in the life cycle.
By your statements right to life should be removed in final stage of Alzheimer’s since they have less function then a 30 week in utero.
We can go all over the place with this. Hell, if you want to have fun debate that certain rare forms of cancer should be protected by the endangered species act.
The simplest case for me is this.
Sperm>Egg. We can begin human life in jar, it will divide and grow, it will have its own unique DNA.
It can then be placed into a womb to mature, any ol’ healthy womb will do.
I think the day will come when we no longer need a natural womb to mature the child.
So yes, I would see it as a life unto its own.
First off I never professionally cut-up a frog. Second, ‘professional anything’ would indicate we had professional or educational relationship, which we have neither. Third it would indicate that you are going to pay (Pony up brother
.) Finally, it would be a foolish violation of ethos to go there; twice I have professionally acted as mandated by federal law over the internet. (My wife served as the ethics chairperson on a professional board for 2 years. She received +100 retaliatory ethic complaints from disgruntled forum wackos. These all go into your professional file) I will however spew personal blather.
Autonomic reaction to stimuli = conscious thought, I did not say that, I said it equivocates as life.
In reply:
True, but over simplified for this topic. The frog is no longer a living system, which is what we are, systems. The ~basic living template is the cell.
Destroy the hypothalamus and medulla oblongata, heart still beats. Sever the nerves, the heart still beats. Cut the heart out hold it in the palm of your hand, the heart still beats. Those damn things will beat for +5 minutes sometimes! In the palm of your hand, a beating heart, is it alive? YES! . . . and no. It’s no longer functioning as a part of a system, but at a cellular level it is alive.
You’re mixing the somatosensory and autonomic systems; there are crossovers between the two at different points in the life cycle.
By your statements right to life should be removed in final stage of Alzheimer’s since they have less function then a 30 week in utero.
We can go all over the place with this. Hell, if you want to have fun debate that certain rare forms of cancer should be protected by the endangered species act.
The simplest case for me is this.
Sperm>Egg. We can begin human life in jar, it will divide and grow, it will have its own unique DNA.
It can then be placed into a womb to mature, any ol’ healthy womb will do.
I think the day will come when we no longer need a natural womb to mature the child.
So yes, I would see it as a life unto its own.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
I hate my twin brother, I wish he would die.
I am the stronger twin, I am healthy and smart.
He is weak, retarded, and in poor health. He needs dialysis several times a week and only has one leg,
I hate going every where him, I hate it!
You see my brother and I are Siamese twins. We are joined at the abdomen.
Separation is an option; we share no organs or systems, but he is reliant on my bones.
They say I have 90% chance at survival; my brother only has 60% chance.
I want him removed from body; I am willing to take that risk.
My brother is afraid of dying and willnot agree to the risk.
It’s my body; I should be able to do what I want with it and I want him off.
With out the permission of my brother they will not separate us, I wish he would just die.
I am the stronger twin, I am healthy and smart.
He is weak, retarded, and in poor health. He needs dialysis several times a week and only has one leg,
I hate going every where him, I hate it!
You see my brother and I are Siamese twins. We are joined at the abdomen.
Separation is an option; we share no organs or systems, but he is reliant on my bones.
They say I have 90% chance at survival; my brother only has 60% chance.
I want him removed from body; I am willing to take that risk.
My brother is afraid of dying and willnot agree to the risk.
It’s my body; I should be able to do what I want with it and I want him off.
With out the permission of my brother they will not separate us, I wish he would just die.
so how bout this one.
we don't mind blowing holes into a deer or a bear, or smucking them with a car, or wiping out entire populations cause they're pesky...but aborting a cluster of cells...this is a heinous act?
fuck that thought, humans really just aren't that important. we're just another animal running around on a planet...and thinning animal populations out apparently isn't such a horrible thing, so here too...preventing yet another fucked up human from making a whole bunch of people miserable 20 years from now.
we don't mind blowing holes into a deer or a bear, or smucking them with a car, or wiping out entire populations cause they're pesky...but aborting a cluster of cells...this is a heinous act?
fuck that thought, humans really just aren't that important. we're just another animal running around on a planet...and thinning animal populations out apparently isn't such a horrible thing, so here too...preventing yet another fucked up human from making a whole bunch of people miserable 20 years from now.
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
ResearchMonkey said:For clarity sake.
First off I never professionally cut-up a frog. Second, ‘professional anything’ would indicate we had professional or educational relationship, which we have neither. Third it would indicate that you are going to pay (Pony up brother
An assumption based on your earlier statement.
- what exactly is your related study? I don't know about you, but basic HS biology usually includes desection of fetal pigs, frogs, worms etc...to help i the study of organisms and structure. If you're in Medecine or a medical related field...HS biology is mandatory.RM said:
You say that you've never disected a frog...OK..I was wrong, but you must admit that you got the gist of my arguement.
ResearchMonkey said:
No...you said that teh reaction of a fetus to stimuli during abortion equates it with consciousness...I'm paraphrasing, of course.
ResearchMonkey said:
Too early...plants have living systems, based on cells. They eat, breathe, grow and die. They don't have rights though.
ResearchMonkey said:
That's a thread on Euthanasia, in and of itself. Yet another example of comeone making a life/death decision for someone else who cannot make sure a decision for themselves.
Actually...that'd be very interesting. Less inflamatory too, I'd betResearchMonkey said:
how about virii, bacterium, fungii etc... THough, I'm assuming that you're mentioning cancer because it's part of the body and growing within it. It's different in that it will kill the host nearly 100% of the time if left unchecked. Fetuses don't have that kind of kill-rate, thank God. ResearchMonkey said:
Potentiality doesn't equal actuality. Individual sperm and ova have the potential for life...likewise, fertilized ova in a womb have the potential for life.
Natural abortions happen all the time..still births and miscaries. There is less of an impact when this happens because it happens naturally, and well out of our control, right? What if I were to say that medically, we should ensure that a foetus does not miscarry by forcing the mother-to-be to be bed-bound throughout her pregnancy, and control her diet etc...in order to protect the unborn child?
Force mothers to stop smoking, drinking, driving and sports because they increase the risk of miscarries. Ask them to move outside of city limits because polution increases the chances of miscarry etc..
At which point should an unborn child/foetus be afforded the same rights as the person who is carrying it?
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Leslie said:
Leslie said:
Why not just store the genetic materials and save it for time when we can repopulate them in a better controlled world?
We have the know how to do that?
Just because we can doesn’t mean we should.
Your premise of a cluster of cells is wrong, they are a developing system, they are not complete. Cancer on the other hand is complete in its development.
You are not yet complete per your DNA, you are still developing. Have you reached the DNA directive of menopause yet? Has your hair turned classic grey? You have not fully developed into the final human you are destined to be either. Your DNA still has secrets for you in your future.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Not in itself, but those legs in you avatar do make you far more special than my goat