Political Crossfire Forums

[esight]

I will never understand the abortion arguments. Science has somehow figured out a way to determine when an embryo is considered "human" and sentient.

The way I see it, an egg cell, once fertilized, is destined to be a human being. Regardless of what stage of growth it's at, it is undeniable what it will become. So I don't see the point of even determining when a fetus is considered abortable or not.

We are a country that heavily penalizes an accused for premeditated murder. I find it hard to see abortion as anything but such. In fact, it is the worst kind of premeditated murder, because a mother premeditates on killing her baby who can't defend himself/herself either by speech or action.

Having said that, I certainly wouldn't know how to respond to a woman who was raped and was resultantly impregnated. Clearly this issue isn't entirely black or white. But it certainly isn't as gray as people want to make it.

[Snake]

Everybody kills, or is responsible for death. We pay taxes, so our money goes to the war effort, we eat the flesh of animals, so our money goes to the slaughter of countless cows, pigs, chickens, and their eggs (which are unhatched chikens), etc. We buy leather, from nice jackets, to shoes, to the interiors of our cars and the furniture in our homes, so there's some cows and lambs off to the saughter house. We remain indifferent to the genocides in Darfur, so there's a s**t load of people dead, and nobody gives a f**k, not to mention the countless murders over money, women, jealousy, hatred. And lest we forget about our cars, and our need for energy. Forrests cut down, species displaced, oil spilt, countless things dead from the Exxon Valdez spill, and other catastrophies, including Chernobyl. So why should anyone care if an undevoloped thing in a womans belly be disposed of? They will grow, enter the world, and act as we do, carrying on our future wars and unwaranted killings, allowing genocide, eating animals, then using their skins for mere decoration and fashion, continuing the battle to gain supremecies and the struggle to conquer precious oil feilds. Abortion is merely the act of killing a member of an overpopulated and overly aggresive/murderous species, nobody sheds a tear for a wolf, or a snake, or even a vulture. Murderers are murderers, and we all have blood on our hands. There is no sanctity to life, there's nothing special about it, people are murdered in the streets, and the surrounding people just watch and go about their day as if nothing happened. We see bodies on our televisions then switch the channel to Sanford and son, or Mtv when a message of morals pops up. Why is abortion any different?

[JDHURF]

esight wrote: I will never understand the abortion arguments. Science has somehow figured out a way to determine when an embryo is considered "human" and sentient.
That is not the argument at all, it is still a grey area regarding when precisely a fetus becomes a sentient being, however, it is indisputable that in early development there is no level of sentience, a zygote for instance.
esight wrote: The way I see it, an egg cell, once fertilized, is destined to be a human being. Regardless of what stage of growth it's at, it is undeniable what it will become. So I don't see the point of even determining when a fetus is considered abortable or not
That’s a poor argument. You do realize that twenty percent of all recognized pregnancies end in natural miscarriage? A fertilized egg cell is not “destined” to necessarily become a fully developed sentient human being. Meaning that by your argument – if you believe in god – god is the most prolific abortionist of all.
esight wrote: We are a country that heavily penalizes an accused for premeditated murder. I find it hard to see abortion as anything but such. In fact, it is the worst kind of premeditated murder, because a mother premeditates on killing her baby who can't defend himself/herself either by speech or action.
This is a non-sequitur. You have stated outright that abortion is the murder of a baby, yet you ignore the fact that a zygote and underdeveloped fetus are both not babies and that the surgical procedure, in many cases, of having no more than an amalgam of cells scraped off of ones uteral wall is not parallel, in any perversity of the term, to murder. Your argument is, essentially, abortion is murder because abortion is the killing of a baby; that is what is known as a non-sequitur. It would be parallel to me making the argument “esight is an ignorant fool because esight is an idiot.” You cannot support a conclusion with the conclusion itself, that is nonsensical.

You seem to be confused, a fetus is not a baby, abortion is not murder and women are not incubators. It is so thoroughly depressing to see so many individuals so thoroughly ignorant regarding embryology and developmental psychology wage the most emotionally charged, fallacious, unscientific and hyperbolic arguments against a legitimate surgical procedure which they haven’t even begun to understand. I always find it very revealing when discussing this issue with a “pro-lifer” in person that when I ask: “based on the fact that you are fundamentally certain that abortion is the killing of a life, at what point does the organism develop a heart?” and the answer I receive is silence or a stuttering attempt to avoid answering the question. If you don’t know the first thing about embryology and developmental psychology then what the hell are you doing asserting that abortion is indisputably murder?

[LostSoul3412]

You're right, pro-abortion arguments are devoid of logic and reasonable thought.

Good thing I'm pro-choice instead. :wink:

[esight]

Indifference is a choice, and that is the choice you apparently have made. What bothers me though is that you seem to equate the death and destruction of plants and animals to death of a human being as no different.

I know you will disagree with what I'm about to say, but for me, killing a human being is drastically different from destroying chicken eggs and eating cow meat. The difference in sentience level among the objects of your comparisons should've provided a hint.

Think of someone you love and care for deeply. Imagine someone coming over and killing that loved one and telling you, "Heck, another death in this world to join the millions of other death instances in this world, don't fret."

My perspective is that a human being is a human being, regardless of what stage it's at. A fetus and an adult is not much different, except the former can't really defend itself yet.

Kamel wrote: Everybody kills, or is responsible for death. We pay taxes, so our money goes to the war effort, we eat the flesh of animals, so our money goes to the slaughter of countless cows, pigs, chickens, and their eggs (which are unhatched chikens), etc. We buy leather, from nice jackets, to shoes, to the interiors of our cars and the furniture in our homes, so there's some cows and lambs off to the saughter house. We remain indifferent to the genocides in Darfur, so there's a s**t load of people dead, and nobody gives a f**k, not to mention the countless murders over money, women, jealousy, hatred. And lest we forget about our cars, and our need for energy. Forrests cut down, species displaced, oil spilt, countless things dead from the Exxon Valdez spill, and other catastrophies, including Chernobyl. So why should anyone care if an undevoloped thing in a womans belly be disposed of? They will grow, enter the world, and act as we do, carrying on our future wars and unwaranted killings, allowing genocide, eating animals, then using their skins for mere decoration and fashion, continuing the battle to gain supremecies and the struggle to conquer precious oil feilds. Abortion is merely the act of killing a member of an overpopulated and overly aggresive/murderous species, nobody sheds a tear for a wolf, or a snake, or even a vulture. Murderers are murderers, and we all have blood on our hands. There is no sanctity to life, there's nothing special about it, people are murdered in the streets, and the surrounding people just watch and go about their day as if nothing happened. We see bodies on our televisions then switch the channel to Sanford and son, or Mtv when a message of morals pops up. Why is abortion any different?

[esight]

JDHURF wrote: esight wrote: I will never understand the abortion arguments. Science has somehow figured out a way to determine when an embryo is considered "human" and sentient.
That is not the argument at all, it is still a grey area regarding when precisely a fetus becomes a sentient being, however, it is indisputable that in early development there is no level of sentience, a zygote for instance.

You see, that's the thing. Who says sentience is a valid criterion? A human egg cell, once fertilized, and barring acts of God, will irrefutably become a human being. "Inevitable sentience" would be a more appropriate criterion, imho.

JDHURF wrote: esight wrote: The way I see it, an egg cell, once fertilized, is destined to be a human being. Regardless of what stage of growth it's at, it is undeniable what it will become. So I don't see the point of even determining when a fetus is considered abortable or not
That’s a poor argument. You do realize that twenty percent of all recognized pregnancies end in natural miscarriage? A fertilized egg cell is not “destined” to necessarily become a fully developed sentient human being. Meaning that by your argument – if you believe in god – god is the most prolific abortionist of all.

Perhaps I should've made my context more clear. When a pregnancy results in a natural miscarriage, there is no human choice; hence, it can't be premeditated. The context I was referring to were mothers who, for their own convenience, have decided not to have a baby and have it aborted. Such an act involves contemplation and intention, hence premeditation.

JDHURF wrote: esight wrote: We are a country that heavily penalizes an accused for premeditated murder. I find it hard to see abortion as anything but such. In fact, it is the worst kind of premeditated murder, because a mother premeditates on killing her baby who can't defend himself/herself either by speech or action.
This is a non-sequitur. You have stated outright that abortion is the murder of a baby, yet you ignore the fact that a zygote and underdeveloped fetus are both not babies and that the surgical procedure, in many cases, of having no more than an amalgam of cells scraped off of ones uteral wall is not parallel, in any perversity of the term, to murder. Your argument is, essentially, abortion is murder because abortion is the killing of a baby; that is what is known as a non-sequitur. It would be parallel to me making the argument “esight is an ignorant fool because esight is an idiot.” You cannot support a conclusion with the conclusion itself, that is nonsensical.

You seem to be confused, a fetus is not a baby, abortion is not murder and women are not incubators. It is so thoroughly depressing to see so many individuals so thoroughly ignorant regarding embryology and developmental psychology wage the most emotionally charged, fallacious, unscientific and hyperbolic arguments against a legitimate surgical procedure which they haven’t even begun to understand. I always find it very revealing when discussing this issue with a “pro-lifer” in person that when I ask: “based on the fact that you are fundamentally certain that abortion is the killing of a life, at what point does the organism develop a heart?” and the answer I receive is silence or a stuttering attempt to avoid answering the question. If you don’t know the first thing about embryology and developmental psychology then what the hell are you doing asserting that abortion is indisputably murder?

It is obvious that you rely heavily on Science for your contentions. But Science, in all its glory and string of successes, isn't perfect. The bulwark of your perspective is based on a field that once thought the world was flat. Don't get me wrong, I am not mocking science nor denigrating its value and significance to our society, but if you base your argument on an imperfect source, you come out with imperfect conclusions.

Refute this: "A fertilized egg, barring acts of God, will inevitably become a sentient human being."

You can call it a zygote, or an amalgam of cells, or any other high-fallutin scientific term you can think of, but I call it all a part of a process that will undeniably result in a sentient human being. Even Science can't disprove what I just said, nor can you. And I'm not using Science for my argument, just common sense. What I have stated is fact, and no amount of red herrings you can introduce will sway it one way or the other.

There is no non-sequiter. You and I just came from different perspectives.

[Snake]

what makes a human life more worthy of living than any other living thing?

Human death tolls are high, expescially in America. Murder, suicide, there's that pesky little war in Iraq. Death is everywhere. Why does a fetus being mangled and s*cked out through a hose draw special attention?

[esight]

Kamel wrote: what makes a human life more worthy of living than any other living thing?

Human death tolls are high, expescially in America. Murder, suicide, there's that pesky little war in Iraq. Death is everywhere. Why does a fetus being mangled and s*cked out through a hose draw special attention?

I have never met you, and probably never will. But if I were to choose between your life and that of a any other non-human living thing, I will always choose yours. Why? You are endowed with a very high-level of intelligence, much greater than any other living thing on the planet. Your unique innate intellectual capacity can change the world, and definitely lives of people around you; it is not unheard of for one single human being to effect a beneficial change on a global scale. Your intellectual superiority puts you in a position to determine the fate of other human and non-human living things.

That "mangled fetus that could have been s*cked out through a hose" was where you, a priceless human being, once was. If you were s*cked out through a hose, you wouldn't be here exchanging ideas with me. I am happy your mother didn't decide that fate on you, for you would not have been able to voice out your choice at that time. But look at you today, you are here discussing ideas with me. I appreciate you for it.

We were given immensely more power via our intellect over other non-human living things. With this power should come responsibility. Being responsible means not only looking out for oneself, but also others (even among non-human living things), because our actions will send ripples across everything around us; different actions only differs by the speed of the ripple.

[The Comrade]

LostSoul3412 wrote: You're right, pro-abortion arguments are devoid of logic and reasonable thought.

Good thing I'm pro-choice instead. :wink:

you and me both.

[esight]

LostSoul3412 wrote: You're right, pro-abortion arguments are devoid of logic and reasonable thought.

Good thing I'm pro-choice instead. :wink:

Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't pro-abortion and pro-choice in the same camp?

[The Comrade]

quite the cognitive little scamp.


i bet it would win at trivial persuit EVERY time.

[Snake]

esight wrote:
We were given immensely more power via our intellect over other non-human living things. I'm not too sure that's true, I work at Walmart, I've seen people that are dumber than howler monkeys.

I'm just saying that there's murder and genocide and war everywhere you look, what makes abortion stand out as something heinous and cruel? If anything it's humane and mercifull, the unborn child will never see the extent of the cruelty of his/her peers

edit: Animals are bread for the slaughter, from their birth, they are raised to be shot, gutted, beheaded, or any other means, only to have their bloody carcass carved into peices and wrapped in plastic so the the peices of flesh can be seared by fire and comsumed. Human beings are also livestock, being bread and raised to kill for their country, to design new horrific weapons, to make the stock market run smoothly, and to squeeze out votes. The human being is not sacred, or sanctified. If I were to die tommorrow, it would make little, if any difference. An aborted fetus is nothing more than biological waste with a potential to be one in 62 billion human lives.

[LostSoul3412]

esight wrote: Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't pro-abortion and pro-choice in the same camp?

No, see it's basic English.

Abortion is a completely different word than choice, and to attempt to equate the two shows a lack of communication abilities.

So, by even suggesting that they are exchangeable, you have effectively lost all ethos with me and I see no point to disprove your claims when you fail to grasp the basic concepts of language. If you cannot comprehend basic language principles, I can safely assume that you cannot comprehend complex arguments.

[esight]

LostSoul3412 wrote: esight wrote: Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't pro-abortion and pro-choice in the same camp?

No, see it's basic English.

Abortion is a completely different word than choice, and to attempt to equate the two shows a lack of communication abilities.

So, by even suggesting that they are exchangeable, you have effectively lost all ethos with me and I see no point to disprove your claims when you fail to grasp the basic concepts of language. If you cannot comprehend basic language principles, I can safely assume that you cannot comprehend complex arguments.

Ah, semantics. I have to admit I didn't read the thread entirely through. But one of these days, when you do decide to get off your pedestal and adopt a less almighty attitude, maybe I can see you for who you really are.

[Korimyr the Rat]

Kamel wrote: what makes a human life more worthy of living than any other living thing?

Because humans are the ones making all the value judgements-- as an extension of our higher cognitive capacity and our greater firepower.

[LostSoul3412]

esight wrote: Ah, semantics. I have to admit I didn't read the thread entirely through. But one of these days, when you do decide to get off your pedestal and adopt a less almighty attitude, maybe I can see you for who you really are.

:rotf:

Whatever you say Mr. Pot.

[esight]

Kamel wrote: esight wrote:
We were given immensely more power via our intellect over other non-human living things. I'm not too sure that's true, I work at Walmart, I've seen people that are dumber than howler monkeys.

Hehe, it's hard to argue with you on that one.

Quote: I'm just saying that there's murder and genocide and war everywhere you look, what makes abortion stand out as something heinous and cruel? If anything it's humane and mercifull, the unborn child will never see the extent of the cruelty of his/her peers

I think what's "humane and merciful" can be subjective. If we start extenuating one heinous act because of the prevalence of other heinous acts, that would mean we've become desensitized. I think that despite any atrocity that comes before us, we must never fail to neglect certain standards. I'm not talking about situations where you prefer blue while I prefer red. I'm talking about clearer situations where one side wants to murder, and the other side says "stop".

[Snake]

Point taken, noted, and filed as soon as I fill out the proper forms in triplicate. Sorry, manager humor

[Prog]

esight wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't pro-abortion and pro-choice in the same camp?

From the gist of your posts I believe it's safe to assume that you would emphatically choose not to abort your fetus given a relevant (hypothetical) situation and opportunity...am I correct?

In light of the choice that has been bestowed upon you and subsequently elected by you.....are you "in the same camp" as these pro-abortionists?

Pro-choicers advocate ...... a free-choice in regard to abortion, not necessarily abortion per se.

[esight]

Prog wrote: esight wrote:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but isn't pro-abortion and pro-choice in the same camp?

From the gist of your posts I believe it's safe to assume that you would emphatically choose not to abort your fetus given a relevant (hypothetical) situation and opportunity...am I correct?

In light of the choice that has been bestowed upon you and subsequently elected by you.....are you "in the same camp" as these pro-abortionists?

Pro-choicers advocate ...... a free-choice in regard to abortion, not necessarily abortion per se.

I see the semantic distinction. But going by the end result, the distinction fades.