Political Crossfire Forums

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2259 Location: Edinburgh

Do you believe that the recently deceased should be granted the same right to life as the living?

Being medically dead means that the heart has ceased to function, yet there is for some time afterwords living cells within a human body. Many anti-choice activists argue that simply by virtue of an individual having one living cell (a zygote), they are alive and a person. Yet a medically dead person has many living cells for some time afterwords; I'm guessing that it is probably a few hours, but could be days. On a somewhat seperate note, the heart begins functioning in fetal development around the third week, before surgical abortions are safe or practiced, and at the very beginning of when chemical abortions are practiced.

In any case, though, one who is medically dead would seem to be nonetheless alive according to the rational of those who believe that being alive (in that they have living cells) and human (in the scientific sense).

So do you believe a recently deceased person deserves the same treatment as a medically alive person, and as a preborn human? If not, then on what grounds?

PseuesoFlo · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 15

The argument a pro-life activist would give you is 'a medically dead person is not a potential living, breathing person, while a fetus is.'

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

Quote: Being medically dead means that the heart has ceased to function therfore when a person is put on the heart lung machine they are dead and deserve no rights seeing as their hearts are stopped.

Prole · Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 2259 Location: Edinburgh

Plodder wrote: Quote: Being medically dead means that the heart has ceased to function therfore when a person is put on the heart lung machine they are dead and deserve no rights seeing as their hearts are stopped.
A heart/lung machine helps the heart function; it does not replace it entirely.

I don't know enough about heart transplant surgery to say much more than that while the heart has stopped functioning, there is an artificial replacement. No pulse = medically dead, AFAIK; it doesn't really matter if the pulse is maintained by a natural or partly/entirely artificial heart.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

last time i checked the heart stops beating and the machine takes over.

Quote: potential living, breathing person, while a fetus is.'

nope I say that they are both alive.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 8237

Plodder wrote: last time i checked the heart stops beating and the machine takes over.

Which only proves just how much you know about medical issues. :roll:

PseuesoFlo · Joined: 07 May 2006 Posts: 15

Can you please explain how you view a dead person as alive? So you're saying that everyone who has ever killed a living cell is a killer? Ever burned your hand? I guess you're a killer. The only way a dead person is alive is if you clone their cells, which isn't natural, just like abortion.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

Quote: Can you please explain how you view a dead person as alive? So you're saying that everyone who has ever killed a living cell is a killer? Ever burned your hand? I guess you're a killer. The only way a dead person is alive is if you clone their cells, which isn't natural, just like abortion. there is an intrinsic difrence between an embryo and a skin cell. If you kill skin cells you destroy a component of a much much larger part such that that larger part is barely harmed. If you destroy an embryo though, there is no larger part as the baby is syill developing and only has one cell in its body.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

None of this is relevent. 2 humans have engaged in sexual intercourse and have conceived a new human life. Just because this life is just starting to develop does not make it subhuman. It makes it young.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

est Veritas.

It is the truth.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 8237

Plodder wrote: est Veritas.

It is the truth.

Why? Because you say so? :lol:

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 8237

Plodder wrote: Quote: Can you please explain how you view a dead person as alive? So you're saying that everyone who has ever killed a living cell is a killer? Ever burned your hand? I guess you're a killer. The only way a dead person is alive is if you clone their cells, which isn't natural, just like abortion. there is an intrinsic difrence between an embryo and a skin cell. If you kill skin cells you destroy a component of a much much larger part such that that larger part is barely harmed. If you destroy an embryo though, there is no larger part as the baby is syill developing and only has one cell in its body.

Then who is to say that a skin cell is not still developing? If you kill a skin cell, then the cell is dead, and there is not other part of it. If you are looking at the larger scope of things, then one life would be insignificant because the greater society is unharmed. Also, there is no "baby" in question, since the embryo is not yet born.

(Note: I do not agree with the individual to greater society analogy, but I use it to prove the opposition's logic false.)

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Quote: Then who is to say that a skin cell is not still developing? If you kill a skin cell, then the cell is dead, and there is not other part of it. If you are looking at the larger scope of things, then one life would be insignificant because the greater society is unharmed. Also, there is no "baby" in question, since the embryo is not yet born.
Skin cells do not grow into an adult human individual and are not the single result of conception.

LostSoul3412 · Joined: 11 Feb 2005 Posts: 8237

AllAmericanMan wrote: Skin cells do not grow into an adult human individual and are not the single result of conception.

Skin cells grow, for if they did not our skin would never stretch. Also, the skin of the embryo is a result from conception, so to denounce it as not the single result of conception, I can also say that an embryo is not the single result of conception because of the skin cells that are also created.

AllAmericanMan · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 3606

Quote: Skin cells grow, for if they did not our skin would never stretch. Also, the skin of the embryo is a result from conception, so to denounce it as not the single result of conception, I can also say that an embryo is not the single result of conception because of the skin cells that are also created. Fact remains were not talking about skin cells were talking about a developing human life. The single result of conception is a new human life, regardless of what skin cells that life may have.

Plodder · Joined: 01 Nov 2005 Posts: 803 Location: USA

skin cells do not grow, they reproduce. at any part of your body you have 2-7 layers of dead skin cells.