Political Crossfire Forums

[AllAmericanMan]

You used to be one. Are they indeed not human? Prove it.

[PseuesoFlo]

I cannot argue with the fact that I was once a embryo, we all were. But is an abortion any different from wearing a condom or using birth control? Is that not denying a potential life its chance to live? How about a women's monthly period, all those are potential lives that were 'thrown away' according to you. We all were embryos at one point, but if it's murder to kill an embryo, then it should be murder to take that birth control pill. That is why I am pro-choice.

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote: But is an abortion any different from wearing a condom or using birth control? One prevents life from being conceived, hence controception. The other kills the newly conceived human life.



Quote: How about a women's monthly period, all those are potential lives that were 'thrown away' according to you No not at all. Never said menstration or ejaculation of sperm is equal to that of abortion it is not. Only upon conception is a new human life formed.

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: You used to be one. Are they indeed not human? Prove it.

I was human as soon as I drew my first breath. Before that, I have no memory, no awareness, no sentience, and no emotion. I felt no hunger, nor thirst, and I neither bled nor cried. I was a member of the human species, but I was not yet human. Just as a child is a member of the tribe, but not a hunter until his first kill. I drew my breath, and made my kill.

Now, I am man. My breath is my trophy, and my blood is my sign of life. I create fists, thoughts, emotions, and ideas all within me. Something that I did not yet do before my trophy breath. As I inhale, I am alive, and I exhale, I am alive. As I hold my breath, I await my turn to live. As I draw my breath, I await my turn to die. My breath is my trophy, and my value is the world around me. Without my environment, I am nothing. Without me, my environment is nothing. Life is a paradox, and breath is the trophy.

[LostSoul3412]

Was feeling poetic, so I figued I'd give a poetic answer. 8:)

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote: I was human as soon as I drew my first breath. Before that, I have no memory, no awareness, no sentience, and no emotion Actually its been proven that a baby has sentience before it is born. There are even studies that show the baby recognizes the voice of its mother while in the womb.
That being said, sentience is a result of age and will continue to develop all the way into adulthood along with age. Age does nto make something human, conception does. If the embryo is not human, what species is it. It is clearly a sperate life, while dependant on the mother, it is itself an individual.

[sgtshortness]

At what part of the pregenancy?

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Actually its been proven that a baby has sentience before it is born.

Proof?

AllAmericanMan wrote: There are even studies that show the baby recognizes the voice of its mother while in the womb.

Proof?

AllAmericanMan wrote: That being said, sentience is a result of age

Wait, didn't you just say that sentience occurs within the mother's womb?

AllAmericanMan wrote: and will continue to develop all the way into adulthood along with age.

Which is it, adulthood, or before birth? Because you are claiming two contradictory things...

AllAmericanMan wrote: Age does nto make something human, conception does.

Now I am truly confused... Are you claiming that sentience occurs at conception, before birth, or adulthood?

AllAmericanMan wrote: If the embryo is not human, what species is it.

It is a potential human, just as an apple seed is a potential apple tree.

AllAmericanMan wrote: It is clearly a sperate life, while dependant on the mother,

... You just contradicted yourself within the same sentence...

AllAmericanMan wrote: it is itself an individual.

Proof?

[AllAmericanMan]

Below is a link to a simple chart of a pregnancy. Looking at the chart most basically you can see that a pregnancy is depicted by a spiral. The spiral represents a developing baby beginning at the embrionic stage. The symbol for the child is a visual of what it looks like. Notice at each stage it changes form.


http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html

That is because the development of the child is a constant process. Meaning, there is no drastic change at any one time in the development. It is a steady moving process. It clearly shows that it is a single individual life growing slowly and steadily without any interference from the mother.

That baby continues to develop at the same rate outside the womb that it did just before it came out. In fact it will continue to develop its brain over the next couple decades. Therefor, it is only logical to deduce that the baby had the same abilties it has immediately upon birth that it had in the womb. There is no radical increase of growth just before birth. There also is no radical spurt of growth at ANY one stage in the single constant process. One must conclude that the single act of sexual intercourse, was the determining factor in the start of this process. This process that does not change drastically at any point in a persons life until death. Be it from the moment of conception, to when it is burried in the ground. All human life in this steadily moving process, should be given the most basic chance at life. We like to point out how inconvenient this is for those of us who are born already. How there is no way we could adopt a million children a year. That simply put is an addiction and dependence on the murder of those so young they can not possibly speak up for themselves. That is why I will speak up for them where I can. Each one of these unique developing lives has special genetic blueprints that when killed are people that will never have the chance at being born into existence. Show me how this steadily moving process is not human even well after it has begun. Better yet, show me how this steadily moving process is not human from the MOMENT it begins!

[AllAmericanMan]

A seed does not grow until a miracle happens, the miracle of life!

Abortion is the rape of the natural world. The destruction of precious life.

If you require more facts I could compile a list of sources.

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Below is a link to a simple chart of a pregnancy. Looking at the chart most basically you can see that a pregnancy is depicted by a spiral. The spiral represents a developing baby beginning at the embrionic stage. The symbol for the child is a visual of what it looks like. Notice at each stage it changes form.


http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html

That is because the development of the child is a constant process. Meaning, there is no drastic change at any one time in the development. It is a steady moving process. It clearly shows that it is a single individual life growing slowly and steadily without any interference from the mother.

That baby continues to develop at the same rate outside the womb that it did just before it came out. In fact it will continue to develop its brain over the next couple decades. Therefor, it is only logical to deduce that the baby had the same abilties it has immediately upon birth that it had in the womb. There is no radical increase of growth just before birth. There also is no radical spurt of growth at ANY one stage in the single constant process. One must conclude that the single act of sexual intercourse, was the determining factor in the start of this process. This process that does not change drastically at any point in a persons life until death. Be it from the moment of conception, to when it is burried in the ground. All human life in this steadily moving process, should be given the most basic chance at life. We like to point out how inconvenient this is for those of us who are born already. How there is no way we could adopt a million children a year. That simply put is an addiction and dependence on the murder of those so young they can not possibly speak up for themselves. That is why I will speak up for them where I can. Each one of these unique developing lives has special genetic blueprints that when killed are people that will never have the chance at being born into existence. Show me how this steadily moving process is not human even well after it has begun. Better yet, show me how this steadily moving process is not human from the MOMENT it begins!

That chart only shows the biological development of an embryo, we are debating the intellectual capacity, self-awareness, and sentience of an embryo...

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote: That chart only shows the biological development of an embryo, we are debating the intellectual capacity, self-awareness, and sentience of an embryo... No were not. Were debating that an embryo is a person. The fact that a fetus has sentience was brought up but is not the focal point of anything. Read the post again it ties it all together.

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: A seed does not grow until a miracle happens, the miracle of life!

Just add water. :lol:

AllAmericanMan wrote: Abortion is the rape of the natural world.

... I thought that was deforestation...

AllAmericanMan wrote: The destruction of precious life.

Actually, it's the prevention of "precious life".

AllAmericanMan wrote: If you require more facts I could compile a list of sources.

Your source does nothing to prove your points. You provided a source that analyzed the biological development of an embryo, not the sentience of it. I was arguing the sentience of the embryo with you, and I am not doubting that a sudden biological change occurs during the pregnancy. However, you have yet to provide proof for your claims of sentience before birth.

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote:
AllAmericanMan wrote:
it is itself an individual.


Proof?


I just offered you proof and you ignored it. Instead you claim we are arguing the sentience of an embryo which is not what this post is about. I made a quick refrence to a fetus havign sentience and that much is pretty common knowledge. Heres some quotes for you.


Quote: Even during birth, babies are having their own experience. Babies feel the pressure of the contractions, and use all their energy, and their hands and feet to help push their way out. When mom has a hard time during labor, the baby may have a hard time emotionally, feeling scared. When someone at the birth can be there for the emotional needs of the baby, explaining what is happening, mirroring and reassuring, the emotional trauma of birth for the baby is greatly reduced.



There the fetus has awareness before it has birth. I could go on if I cared to spend time researching this basic fact. The truth is it is irrelevent to this thread. An embryo is a person. That is the claim!



Quote: Human embryos are (just as more mature human beings are) whole human organisms, and, as such, living (albeit immature) members of the species homo sapiens; somatic cells are not. Human embryos have the epigenetic primordia for internally directed maturation as distinct, complete, self-integrating human individuals; somatic cells do not. Thus, the "potential" of somatic cells is nothing remotely like the potential of the embryo. Like sperm and ova, somatic cells, though they themselves are not distinct, self-integrating human organisms (but are rather parts of other, larger human organisms), can contribute constituents to a process that brings into being a new, distinct, self-integrating human organism — a human embryo. By contrast, an embryo — whether brought into being by sexual union or cloning — is already a human being. That human being, given nothing more than an hospitable environment, will actively develop itself from the embryonic through the fetal, infant, and adolescent stages of his or her life and into adulthood with his or her unity and identity fully intact. That is why it is true to say that you or I was once an embryo, just as we were once adolescents, infants, etc. A fully mature human being who came into existence by cloning, however, was never a somatic cell, just as adult human beings who were brought into existence by sexual reproduction were never sperm cells or ova.



http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-george073001.shtml

Quote: A human life begins when a diploid complement of human DNA is initiated to begin human development. Therefore, a life can be initiated by the fusion of sperm and egg or by the introduction of a diploid nucleus into an enucleated egg (ie, “cloning”).



A human life is the experience of a human being until its death. It begins with a single cell that has a diploid complement of human DNA, programmed for human development.


http://www.cogforlife.org/clonedebate.htm

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: No were not. Were debating that an embryo is a person. The fact that a fetus has sentience was brought up but is not the focal point of anything. Read the post again it ties it all together.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, considering all prior posts were on the issue of sentience...

I suppose a topic change is in order whenever you find yourself losing an argument...

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote:
AllAmericanMan wrote:
it is itself an individual.


Proof?


I just offered you proof and you ignored it. Instead you claim we are arguing the sentience of an embryo which is not what this post is about. I made a quick refrence to a fetus havign sentience and that much is pretty common knowledge. Heres some quotes for you.

You offered proof for something that was not in question: the biological development of a child. Quite honestly, I feel as if you wasted your time trying to prove something to me that I already know. I brought up the issue of sentience, and you challenged it, and so I continued the debate on the issue.

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: Even during birth, babies are having their own experience. Babies feel the pressure of the contractions, and use all their energy, and their hands and feet to help push their way out. When mom has a hard time during labor, the baby may have a hard time emotionally, feeling scared. When someone at the birth can be there for the emotional needs of the baby, explaining what is happening, mirroring and reassuring, the emotional trauma of birth for the baby is greatly reduced.

There the fetus has awareness before it has birth. I could go on if I cared to spend time researching this basic fact. The truth is it is irrelevent to this thread. An embryo is a person. That is the claim!

Anyone can write something in quote brackets... source please. And it is not a basic fact, if it was, you would be able to provide clear evidence to prove such a claim. Also, that source references the embryo's awareness during brith, not during the pregnancy.

AllAmericanMan wrote: Quote: Human embryos are (just as more mature human beings are) whole human organisms, and, as such, living (albeit immature) members of the species homo sapiens; somatic cells are not. Human embryos have the epigenetic primordia for internally directed maturation as distinct, complete, self-integrating human individuals; somatic cells do not. Thus, the "potential" of somatic cells is nothing remotely like the potential of the embryo. Like sperm and ova, somatic cells, though they themselves are not distinct, self-integrating human organisms (but are rather parts of other, larger human organisms), can contribute constituents to a process that brings into being a new, distinct, self-integrating human organism — a human embryo. By contrast, an embryo — whether brought into being by sexual union or cloning — is already a human being. That human being, given nothing more than an hospitable environment, will actively develop itself from the embryonic through the fetal, infant, and adolescent stages of his or her life and into adulthood with his or her unity and identity fully intact. That is why it is true to say that you or I was once an embryo, just as we were once adolescents, infants, etc. A fully mature human being who came into existence by cloning, however, was never a somatic cell, just as adult human beings who were brought into existence by sexual reproduction were never sperm cells or ova.



http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-george073001.shtml

Quote: A human life begins when a diploid complement of human DNA is initiated to begin human development. Therefore, a life can be initiated by the fusion of sperm and egg or by the introduction of a diploid nucleus into an enucleated egg (ie, “cloning”).



A human life is the experience of a human being until its death. It begins with a single cell that has a diploid complement of human DNA, programmed for human development.


http://www.cogforlife.org/clonedebate.htm

You have already referenced those quotes in different threads, so I will not address them again here.

[AllAmericanMan]

I made the damn thread I think I determined the topic very early on too.

Quote: You used to be one. Are they indeed not human? Prove it.

Quote: One prevents life from being conceived, hence controception. The other kills the newly conceived human life.


Heres where it became derailed

Quote: I was human as soon as I drew my first breath. Before that, I have no memory, no awareness, no sentience, and no emotion
Actually its been proven that a baby has sentience before it is born. There are even studies that show the baby recognizes the voice of its mother while in the womb.
That being said, sentience is a result of age and will continue to develop all the way into adulthood along with age. Age does nto make something human, conception does. If the embryo is not human, what species is it. It is clearly a sperate life, while dependant on the mother, it is itself an individual Still the topic I argue after your baseless claim is the fact that an embryo is a distinct human individual, or a person if you will.
I explain that sentience is a result of age, not in the term you think of age. But age from conception, the beginning of the new life.
Then here I explain the entire process as clearly having a beginning, WHICH YOU IGNORED to continue to rant about sentience.

Here, refute what I say here.

Quote: Below is a link to a simple chart of a pregnancy. Looking at the chart most basically you can see that a pregnancy is depicted by a spiral. The spiral represents a developing baby beginning at the embrionic stage. The symbol for the child is a visual of what it looks like. Notice at each stage it changes form.


http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html

That is because the development of the child is a constant process. Meaning, there is no drastic change at any one time in the development. It is a steady moving process. It clearly shows that it is a single individual life growing slowly and steadily without any interference from the mother.

That baby continues to develop at the same rate outside the womb that it did just before it came out. In fact it will continue to develop its brain over the next couple decades. Therefor, it is only logical to deduce that the baby had the same abilties it has immediately upon birth that it had in the womb. There is no radical increase of growth just before birth. There also is no radical spurt of growth at ANY one stage in the single constant process. One must conclude that the single act of sexual intercourse, was the determining factor in the start of this process. This process that does not change drastically at any point in a persons life until death. Be it from the moment of conception, to when it is burried in the ground. All human life in this steadily moving process, should be given the most basic chance at life. We like to point out how inconvenient this is for those of us who are born already. How there is no way we could adopt a million children a year. That simply put is an addiction and dependence on the murder of those so young they can not possibly speak up for themselves. That is why I will speak up for them where I can. Each one of these unique developing lives has special genetic blueprints that when killed are people that will never have the chance at being born into existence. Show me how this steadily moving process is not human even well after it has begun. Better yet, show me how this steadily moving process is not human from the MOMENT it begins! You can not refute it at all. The human is clearly human at the embryonic stage. This is completely ignored by pro death advocates and instead they try to focus on how far along its developed. Examples: If its implanted in the uterus wall, If it has the shape of a fetus, if it has awareness. This is how you determine value and it is biologically incorrect. The human is the same individual he was without awareness, he was just too young to have developed it.

[AllAmericanMan]

Quote: You offered proof for something that was not in question: the biological development of a child. Quite honestly, I feel as if you wasted your time trying to prove something to me that I already know. I brought up the issue of sentience, and you challenged it, and so I continued the debate on the issue.
Is sentience not biologically advanced to? I proved the advancement as slow and steady, not magically appearing at birth.

Quote: You have already referenced those quotes in different threads, so I will not address them again here. You have nto addressed them in the other thread. Im making my case here in my thread.

[LostSoul3412]

AllAmericanMan wrote: I made the damn thread I think I determined the topic very early on too.

Quote: You used to be one. Are they indeed not human? Prove it.

As so I did.

Quote: One prevents life from being conceived, hence controception. The other kills the newly conceived human life.


AllAmericanMan wrote: [Heres where it became derailed

Quote: I was human as soon as I drew my first breath. Before that, I have no memory, no awareness, no sentience, and no emotion

You didn't like my answer? I don't think that's your right to place value on my answer considering it's about my life and my experiences.

AllAmericanMan wrote: [Actually its been proven that a baby has sentience before it is born. There are even studies that show the baby recognizes the voice of its mother while in the womb.

You keep saying that, but haven't provided any sources...

AllAmericanMan wrote: That being said, sentience is a result of age and will continue to develop all the way into adulthood along with age. Age does nto make something human, conception does. If the embryo is not human, what species is it.

You have asked that many time, and I will provide you with the same answer:

An embryo is a potential human, just as a seed is a potential flower.

AllAmericanMan wrote: Still the topic I argue after your baseless claim is the fact that an embryo is a distinct human individual, or a person if you will.

Baseless claim? It's about my life, I think I'm the most qualified one to determine that.

AllAmericanMan wrote: [I explain that sentience is a result of age, not in the term you think of age. But age from conception, the beginning of the new life.
Then here I explain the entire process as clearly having a beginning, WHICH YOU IGNORED to continue to rant about sentience.

I did not ignore your explanation, I simply stated that it explained the wrong thing. You are arguing the biological start of an embryo, while I (and as far as I knew, this thread) was arguing the mental and emotional "life" of an embryo. Also, I am not ranting, but I am starting to get tired of your attacks against my character.

AllAmericanMan wrote: [Here, refute what I say here.

Quote: Below is a link to a simple chart of a pregnancy. Looking at the chart most basically you can see that a pregnancy is depicted by a spiral. The spiral represents a developing baby beginning at the embrionic stage. The symbol for the child is a visual of what it looks like. Notice at each stage it changes form.


http://www.visembryo.com/baby/index.html

That is because the development of the child is a constant process. Meaning, there is no drastic change at any one time in the development. It is a steady moving process. It clearly shows that it is a single individual life growing slowly and steadily without any interference from the mother.

That baby continues to develop at the same rate outside the womb that it did just before it came out. In fact it will continue to develop its brain over the next couple decades. Therefor, it is only logical to deduce that the baby had the same abilties it has immediately upon birth that it had in the womb. There is no radical increase of growth just before birth. There also is no radical spurt of growth at ANY one stage in the single constant process. One must conclude that the single act of sexual intercourse, was the determining factor in the start of this process. This process that does not change drastically at any point in a persons life until death. Be it from the moment of conception, to when it is burried in the ground. All human life in this steadily moving process, should be given the most basic chance at life. We like to point out how inconvenient this is for those of us who are born already. How there is no way we could adopt a million children a year. That simply put is an addiction and dependence on the murder of those so young they can not possibly speak up for themselves. That is why I will speak up for them where I can. Each one of these unique developing lives has special genetic blueprints that when killed are people that will never have the chance at being born into existence. Show me how this steadily moving process is not human even well after it has begun. Better yet, show me how this steadily moving process is not human from the MOMENT it begins! You can not refute it at all. The human is clearly human at the embryonic stage. This is completely ignored by pro death advocates and instead they try to focus on how far along its developed. Examples: If its implanted in the uterus wall, If it has the shape of a fetus, if it has awareness. This is how you determine value and it is biologically incorrect. The human is the same individual he was without awareness, he was just too young to have developed it.

You argue that since the rate of development is the same, that the embryo has all of the abilities as a child does. I now ask you this:

Does an embryo feel pain? Is an embryo flawed with emotion and desires? Does the experience of the adult count for nothing? Does self-awareness have no value? I am not concerned with the shape of an embryo, or the look of a human. We are what we are on the inside, not the outside. You point is not ignored, only mute. Your claims are valid, yet superficial.

[LostSoul3412]

(Congratulations on 2,000 posts, by the way. :clap:)

AllAmericanMan wrote: Is sentience not biologically advanced to? I proved the advancement as slow and steady, not magically appearing at birth.

You have shown that biological advancement as slow and steady, yet nothing was mentioned of the embryo's thoughts of feelings. I don't believe that sentience and biology are mutual components of life.]