Political Crossfire Forums

[Saf]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4905892.stm

Quote: Foetuses cannot feel pain because it requires mental development that only occurs outside the womb, says a report in the British Medical Journal.

Dr Stuart Derbyshire, of the University of Birmingham, said a baby's actions and relationships with carers enabled it to process the subjectivity of pain.

Pro-life groups say foetuses respond to stimuli from 20 weeks.

The US is considering legislation to make doctors tell women seeking an abortion it will cause the foetus pain.

It is also being suggested that, if the pregnancy is over 22 weeks, foetuses should be given pain-relieving drugs.

Dr Derbyshire, who is linked to pro-choice groups, said there were various stages of a foetus' gestation at which certain parts of the body's pain "alarm system" developed.

He concludes that pathways in the brain needed to process pain responses and hormonal stress responses are in place by 26 weeks.

But he says the crucial factor is the environmental difference between the womb - where the placenta provides a chemical environment to encourage the foetus to sleep - and that of a newborn baby, who is exposed to a wide range of stimuli and environments...

[Demonic Spoon]

Umm...whopdedoo?

Flies can feel pain too. Pain is necessary for animal life. That doesn't mean we will stop killing flies. Pain means nothing.

[steen]

Demonic Spoon wrote: Umm...whopdedoo?

Flies can feel pain too. Pain is necessary for animal life. That doesn't mean we will stop killing flies. Pain means nothing. Hmm, are you sure flies feel pain? Could you provide the evidence for this, please?

[Prole]

steen wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Umm...whopdedoo?

Flies can feel pain too. Pain is necessary for animal life. That doesn't mean we will stop killing flies. Pain means nothing. Hmm, are you sure flies feel pain? Could you provide the evidence for this, please?
They have a functioning nervous system. Of course they feel pain, or at least have the ability to recognize stimuli and the reaction be "this is bad."

[steen]

Prole wrote: steen wrote: Demonic Spoon wrote: Umm...whopdedoo?

Flies can feel pain too. Pain is necessary for animal life. That doesn't mean we will stop killing flies. Pain means nothing. Hmm, are you sure flies feel pain? Could you provide the evidence for this, please? They have a functioning nervous system. Of course they feel pain, or at least have the ability to recognize stimuli and the reaction be "this is bad." How much of a neocortex do they have? They can instinctively reach to threats that limits their survival, but outright "feeling" anything is not likely.

[Prole]

Just pin down a fly an watch it struggle; it certainly is sensate. This is a chemical reaction saying "bad" just as a human's reaction is. Flies are much more reliant on sight and smell (and taste?) than anything else, but they still are sensate.

[sgtshortness]

Maybe a fly was the wrong example...

[steen]

Prole wrote: Just pin down a fly an watch it struggle; it certainly is sensate. This is a chemical reaction saying "bad" just as a human's reaction is. Flies are much more reliant on sight and smell (and taste?) than anything else, but they still are sensate. Again, that is an instinct. Fight or Flight. Ever heard off it? Please provide evidence of a fly's ability to have a conscious sensation when they don't even have a neocortex.

[Nicholas]

steen wrote: Prole wrote: Just pin down a fly an watch it struggle; it certainly is sensate. This is a chemical reaction saying "bad" just as a human's reaction is. Flies are much more reliant on sight and smell (and taste?) than anything else, but they still are sensate. Again, that is an instinct. Fight or Flight. Ever heard off it? Please provide evidence of a fly's ability to have a conscious sensation when they don't even have a neocortex.

Or put it this way. A fly is on a block, you approach the fly as you are going to squash it with your hand. As you put your hand near the fly, it's very likely to escape before you make the reaction. Of course, a fly is occupied by sensation and conscious of its surroundings. A fly has to survive like every other human, plant, insect and animal specimens.

[Saf]

Demonic Spoon wrote: Umm...whopdedoo?

Flies can feel pain too. Pain is necessary for animal life. That doesn't mean we will stop killing flies. Pain means nothing.
I agree, but this is just one more shot at the pseudo-science that the anti-feminists use to try to take away every woman's right to control of her own body.

[Kumar]

Both the doctor in charge of the study and the pro-life spokesperson point out that this has little relevance to the abortion debate. What it does have relevance to is the use of painkillers during pregnancy.

I happen to agree with them. I wouldn't stab a man if he is anaesthetized and immune to the sensation of pain. It does nothing to alter the moral equation.

[Prole]

Kumar wrote: Both the doctor in charge of the study and the pro-life spokesperson point out that this has little relevance to the abortion debate. What it does have relevance to is the use of painkillers during pregnancy.

I happen to agree with them. I wouldn't stab a man if he is anaesthetized and immune to the sensation of pain. It does nothing to alter the moral equation.
While on a political level the abortion debate is more about the right to life versus right to bodily autonomy, and the actual characeristics of a fetus are very rarely addressed, I disagree that this does nothing to alter the moral equation.

Being able to feel and experience and react is what truly makes us human in the moral sense. It is quite clear that without any ability to react to pain (or any other stimuli), that a fetus has none of these characteristics. Nothing you do to a fetus can make it happy or sad, or anything else at all. It is an unaware, emotionless entity, and thus not imo deserving of any moral or legal protection.

[Kumar]

Prole wrote:
While on a political level the abortion debate is more about the right to life versus right to bodily autonomy, and the actual characeristics of a fetus are very rarely addressed, I disagree that this does nothing to alter the moral equation.

Being able to feel and experience and react is what truly makes us human in the moral sense. It is quite clear that without any ability to react to pain (or any other stimuli), that a fetus has none of these characteristics. Nothing you do to a fetus can make it happy or sad, or anything else at all. It is an unaware, emotionless entity, and thus not imo deserving of any moral or legal protection.
We disagree, then, on the importance of pain and other sensations to a fetus' worth. My view is that, as a life, it doesn't matter if it lacks these perceptions. It is a case of it being immature and in a developmental phase. And, to me, life by itself is the ultimate basis of being human.

What are your thoughts on those confined to hospital beds in a vegetative state?

[steen]

Prole wrote: While on a political level the abortion debate is more about the right to life versus right to bodily autonomy, and the actual characeristics of a fetus are very rarely addressed, I disagree that this does nothing to alter the moral equation. Nope. Nobody have the right to use a person's bodily resources against their will. So regardless of how "person-like" you seek to make the embryo or fetus, it will not get past that point. The status of the fetus is utterly and completely irrelevant. pro-lifers like to talk about the embryo or fetus, and per your desperation over this not having any effect, the movement have started exaggerating, making up deceptive terminology and outright lying about embryology and fetal development. So this mindless focus on the embryo/fetus has instead hurt your credibility in a serious way. It has become very easy for us to dismiss any "pain" spouting pro-lifer as a histrionic, lying fundie, as that is the track record.

Quote: Being able to feel and experience and react is what truly makes us human in the moral sense. And THAT is where your argument sinks. Because the brain's cortex doesn't receive ANY signal whatsoever before the end of the 26th week of pregnancy.

So per that pro-life argument, abortions are not even a big deal to pro-life until after the 26th week of pregnancy. (yes, I and others have provided the scientific evidence for this numerous times.) Guess what. That leaves you with only a couple hundred abortions to worry about, almost exclusively for very serious medical complications that will kill or maim the woman without an abortion. Your argument hurts the pro-life cause in a serious fashion.

Quote: It is quite clear that without any ability to react to pain (or any other stimuli), that a fetus has none of these characteristics. Nothing you do to a fetus can make it happy or sad, or anything else at all. It is an unaware, emotionless entity, and thus not imo deserving of any moral or legal protection. Well, then abortions up until the 26th week of pregnancy are irrelevant to pro-lifers. If this truly is the pro-life yardstick for how acceptable abortions are, then you can all go home, because you have no argument left.

[Prole]

Kumar wrote: Prole wrote:
While on a political level the abortion debate is more about the right to life versus right to bodily autonomy, and the actual characeristics of a fetus are very rarely addressed, I disagree that this does nothing to alter the moral equation.

Being able to feel and experience and react is what truly makes us human in the moral sense. It is quite clear that without any ability to react to pain (or any other stimuli), that a fetus has none of these characteristics. Nothing you do to a fetus can make it happy or sad, or anything else at all. It is an unaware, emotionless entity, and thus not imo deserving of any moral or legal protection.
We disagree, then, on the importance of pain and other sensations to a fetus' worth. My view is that, as a life, it doesn't matter if it lacks these perceptions. It is a case of it being immature and in a developmental phase. And, to me, life by itself is the ultimate basis of being human.
I suppose we do. To each their own. On what grounds do you believe that speciation alone dictates moral worth?

Kumar wrote: What are your thoughts on those confined to hospital beds in a vegetative state?
I believe they are not deserving of any moral protection by themselves, but that their life and what is to be done with it is the responsibility of others; ideally the person's family, but barring that, the responsibility should fall to the state.

[Plodder]

Quote: believe they are not deserving of any moral protection by themselves, but that their life and what is to be done with it is the responsibility of others; ideally the person's family, but barring that, the responsibility should fall to the state ok ill go and kill you once you need to be spoon fed if that s ok with you? you are turning life into property, its like slavery once agin except that now you are property if you are really young or really old.

[cap'n queasy]

http://www.ppl.org/cg3.html

Fetuses feel pain as early as the 56th day.

[steen]

cap'n queasy wrote: http://www.ppl.org/cg3.html

Fetuses feel pain as early as the 56th day. The claim of your source is outright false.

[Plodder]

Ummm. these are specialists on the subject and you are a 40 yr old man who sits in his couch eating tatoe chips.

Quote: Dr. Collins writes that the unborn child's ability to feel pain comes quite early in pregnancy:

Functioning neurological structures necessary for pain sensation are in place as early as 8 weeks, but certainly by 13-1/2 weeks...By 13-1/2 weeks, the entire sensory nervous system functions as a whole in all parts of the body (except in the skin or the back of the head) (7).


its prettery self explanatory here

[steen]

Plodder wrote: Ummm. these are specialists on the subject and you are a 40 yr old man who sits in his couch eating tatoe chips.

Quote: Dr. Collins writes that the unborn child's ability to feel pain comes quite early in pregnancy:

Functioning neurological structures necessary for pain sensation are in place as early as 8 weeks, but certainly by 13-1/2 weeks...By 13-1/2 weeks, the entire sensory nervous system functions as a whole in all parts of the body (except in the skin or the back of the head) (7).


its prettery self explanatory here The claim is stiull false, as none of the signals can reach the brain's cortex until the end of the 26th week of pregnancy anyway.