Political Crossfire Forums

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

Burning fertility clinic, you only have time to save one embryo before the oxygen tank in the corner explodes. Do you grab the stacks of petri dishes in the freezer filled with embryos (possibly saving hundreds of them), or do you grab the 2 year old toddler wailing in the lobby?

Reasons, please.

antonio62 · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:21 pm Post subject:

I'd probably just run out leaving them all in there. I doubt when your in a burning building your first thought it save the embryos though. I doubt I would think save the child either though.

alclarkey · Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 1344

Please tell me what is the point of this question? Obviously the 2 year old is the first choice, but that does not make the embryos less human. If the child were not there I would save them embryos. Besides you don't hear any pro-lifers calling for the deaths of 2 year olds as opposed to embryos do you?

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

alclarkey wrote: Please tell me what is the point of this question? Obviously the 2 year old is the first choice, but that does not make the embryos less human. If the child were not there I would save them embryos. Besides you don't hear any pro-lifers calling for the deaths of 2 year olds as opposed to embryos do you? Why is it obvious that the 2 year old is the first choice? It is not obvious to me.

alclarkey · Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 1344

Human feelings would you save the 2 year old first, as the two year old seems more human than the embryos in jars. Therefore more worthy of being saved. However this scenario doesn't apply to the abortion debate because no-one (that I know of) is advocating the murder of 2 year old children, only fetus'. Being a pro-lifer, if I thought 2 year olds were being legally murdered you'd better believe I would worrying about that before I worry about abortions.

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

alclarkey wrote: Human feelings would you save the 2 year old first, as the two year old seems more human than the embryos in jars. Therefore more worthy of being saved. However this scenario doesn't apply to the abortion debate because no-one (that I know of) is advocating the murder of 2 year old children, only fetus'. Being a pro-lifer, if I thought 2 year olds were being legally murdered you'd better believe I would worrying about that before I worry about abortions. Seems more human? Explain.

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

Come on people, vote! Explain your reasoning, even if it is simple.

Addison · Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 126

I'd grab the fire extinguisher and save them all? Or possibly phone the fire department? Are those options? I hope so.

On my way out, I'm certain I'd grab the cash out of the register, if there is one.

alclarkey · Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 1344

ReelBigSpikey wrote: alclarkey wrote: Human feelings would you save the 2 year old first, as the two year old seems more human than the embryos in jars. Therefore more worthy of being saved. However this scenario doesn't apply to the abortion debate because no-one (that I know of) is advocating the murder of 2 year old children, only fetus'. Being a pro-lifer, if I thought 2 year olds were being legally murdered you'd better believe I would worrying about that before I worry about abortions. Seems more human? Explain.

I really need to explain that to you? Anyways a 2 year old walks and talks and asks questions and has a personality and an embryo... doesn't.

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

alclarkey wrote: ReelBigSpikey wrote: alclarkey wrote: Human feelings would you save the 2 year old first, as the two year old seems more human than the embryos in jars. Therefore more worthy of being saved. However this scenario doesn't apply to the abortion debate because no-one (that I know of) is advocating the murder of 2 year old children, only fetus'. Being a pro-lifer, if I thought 2 year olds were being legally murdered you'd better believe I would worrying about that before I worry about abortions. Seems more human? Explain.

I really need to explain that to you? Anyways a 2 year old walks and talks and asks questions and has a personality and an embryo... doesn't. So you are saying that a 2 year old has more moral value than hundreds of embryos?

Enoch · Joined: 29 Aug 2005 Posts: 8780

ReelBigSpikey wrote: alclarkey wrote: ReelBigSpikey wrote: alclarkey wrote: Human feelings would you save the 2 year old first, as the two year old seems more human than the embryos in jars. Therefore more worthy of being saved. However this scenario doesn't apply to the abortion debate because no-one (that I know of) is advocating the murder of 2 year old children, only fetus'. Being a pro-lifer, if I thought 2 year olds were being legally murdered you'd better believe I would worrying about that before I worry about abortions. Seems more human? Explain.

I really need to explain that to you? Anyways a 2 year old walks and talks and asks questions and has a personality and an embryo... doesn't. So you are saying that a 2 year old has more moral value than hundreds of embryos?

I don't know if alclarkey is saying that, but I am.

The two-year old is a living, breathing, autonomous, fully-functioning person with feelings, emotions, senses, intellect, and the ability to reason.

The embryos are what? Something that, if medically implanted in a woman, may grow in to the aforementioned?

Yes, the two-year old does have more moral value than the embryos.

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2246 Location: Edinburgh

I would save the two-year-old, for the exact same reasons as UrielsFyre. If I could, I'd save both; I'm sure someone wants them for something. But the welfare of the two-year-old as well as myself infinitely outweigh that of an entity devoid of any of the characteristics that truly make one human. (This is of course ommitting some of the extremes that might make me act differently; is the two-year-old going to die in a day of terminal cancer, is the two-year-old in a coma, etc).

I believe the point of this hypothetical, alclarkey, was to illustrate how the lives of grown, developed humans vastly outweigh the lives of those who are biologically human but have not any of the traits which many including myself would argue truly make one human. If a two-year-old's welfare and happiness is "obviously" so much more valuable than many embryos, then should not the same hold true for the mother? Unless the mother (or mother to be, if you prefer) is somehow less deserving of welfare and happiness than the two-year-old, then should not her rights supercede those of many embryos, let alone one or in rare cases more?

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

What about a thousand embryos? What about 10,000? Is there a point where you would grab the frozen petri dishes over the crying 2-year old?

Snarf · Joined: 10 Jan 2005 Posts: 5289

Real life before potential life...

galba · Joined: 23 Nov 2005 Posts: 675 Location: Texas

ReelBigSpikey wrote: Burning fertility clinic, you only have time to save one embryo before the oxygen tank in the corner explodes. Do you grab the stacks of petri dishes in the freezer filled with embryos (possibly saving hundreds of them), or do you grab the 2 year old toddler wailing in the lobby?

Reasons, please.

Well, being Catholic and opposed to vitro....

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2246 Location: Edinburgh

galba wrote: ReelBigSpikey wrote: Burning fertility clinic, you only have time to save one embryo before the oxygen tank in the corner explodes. Do you grab the stacks of petri dishes in the freezer filled with embryos (possibly saving hundreds of them), or do you grab the 2 year old toddler wailing in the lobby?

Reasons, please.

Well, being Catholic and opposed to vitro....
I thought Catholics opposes vitro because so many embryos died in the process compared to "natural" conception? (And therefore allowing them to survive for IVF would be preferable so they could have their 5% chance of survival/growth compared to their 0% chance if they are consumed by the fire). Or is it because it is unnatural? I honestly do not know.

alclarkey · Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 1344

Look everyone, when the mother's or "impregnee's" if you will, life is in danger then I support the termination, however I do not support the termination as a matter of convenience.

But when the choice does come between a grown woman and a unborn child I choose the grown woman. But that scenario is rare.

beingsrk · Joined: 09 Mar 2006 Posts: 5

like in any form is important, dont we kill a bug that comes near our baby, i do.....2 year old child. Potential life...........

ReelBigSpikey · Joined: 13 Feb 2005 Posts: 1877

I find it interesting that no one has voted to save the hundreds of embryos yet. Is there no one out there that believes that hundreds of embryos are equivalent to one 2 year olds life?

alclarkey · Joined: 12 Jul 2005 Posts: 1344

Give it a rest Spike.

No-one is playing.

In a forced situation like a fire people are going to choose the 2 year old. In a forced situation like an ectopic (tubal) pregnancy people are going to choose the grown woman. Even pro-lifers.