|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: When does human life begin? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 831 days) Posts: 3193 Joined:
|
millions of murders take place each year in the name of convenience. You had me going there for a minute. Up until this sentence, I thought you were being completely rational. For the most part though, you were. Just how convenient is it to get an abortion? Do you honestly think that the majority of abortions are by young women who sleep around unprotected, get pregnant then use abortion as birth control? Do you have ANY idea what toll an abortion takes on a woman? Do you really think it is a decision ANY woman makes over her morning coffee? "Well, off to my abortion. Gonna go have some more unprotected sex right after"? Granted, there are people who do this, but for every one that does, there are a handful of other women who medically need the procedure or it is the most absolutely devistating decision they make in their entire life and only do so because of a mistake. I know two women who had abortions and trust me, it wasn't "convenient".Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Coragyps writes: Yes I do belive in a soul. I know of no physical evidence for a soul. A soul is a gift from God. It enters the human when the human becomes life. Am I wrong? Maybe. Are you wrong? Maybe. It just appears to me after living my life with a wonderful wife, loving children, a little girl who died in the womb at 7 months, and beautiful grandchildren, I don't want to error on the side of being wrong as to when life begins. I can't phantom ending a possible life that is conceived by the natural process of our evolutionary process.
Shadow, I would imagine that you think there is something called a "soul." I know the Catholic Church thinks so. Is there any evidence for souls, or any evidence as to when they enter a zygote/morula/blastula/embryo/fetus/infant
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1284 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I can't phantom ending a possible life that is conceived by the natural process of our evolutionary process. So you value the possible life of the fetus over the actual, extant life of the woman?Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate ...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
nwr writes: Is it your moral viewpoint that until about a few years after birth it's ok for the "moral agent" the mother to terminate the "life" she gave birth to?
If, on the other hand, "human life" refers to being a moral agent, then that agency slowly develops over the first few years after birth. It does not suddenly jump into existence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
-Panda writes:
The Justices did not make a decision about when life began.Their decision was based on foetal viability and the extent of the states power to intervene. This is from the wiki link you cited The Court later rejected Roe's trimester framework, while affirming Roe's central holding that a person has a right to abortion up until viability.[1] The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid," adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks."[2] that is making a decision as to when life begins. If the court had ruled that life began at conception, it could not have allowed abortion. Your are dealing in semantics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
a little girl who died in the womb at 7 months, I'm sorry to hear that. Clearly you felt (and feel) the loss of your unborn child. For what it's worth, this would be the third trimester and I would consider the fetus to be worthy of moral consideration - it would have a developed nervous system and have passed the point where brain waves can be detected, meaning it could potentially be aware of its own existence. However...your wife has almost certainly had many other eggs fertilized by your sperm, but fail to implant correctly in her uterine wall or otherwise naturally fail to proceed to a point where you could even tell she was pregnant. It's estimated that around 60% of all pregnancies end this way, without anyone even noticing. These embryos would not have had a distinct nervous system - there would be absolutely no way in known biology for them to have awareness of anything, in the same way that a clump of shed skin cells has no awareness because it too has no brain. The embryos would not have valued their own existence, because they would have been physically incapable of being aware of their own existence. Since I derive the moral weight of human life from self-awareness, I would not mourn their loss. I would not consider their failure to develop to even be sad (though perhaps frustrating, if my wife and I were trying to have children and failing), because a clump of not-aware cells is not worthy of any moral consideration. Did those embryos have "souls?" Did they carry (to you) the same moral weight as the daughter who died just 8 weeks before birth, or the children you were able to see grow? If not, then again, there is a massive and obvious inconsistency in your moral reasoning. This question is not rhetorical, I'd like to know your opinion.The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Rhavin writes: I don't attach any significance to chromosomes as life itself. I am saying that there is a point when life begins, and it appears the most logical point is when the new life has assumed all the necessary attributes to begin developing along the evolutinary pathway. So when life begins, It is my moral opinion that no one has the right to terminate that life.
Why do you believe moral weight is attached to chromosomes rather than minds? The skin cells I shed every day possess the same genetic code as the rest of me; their loss is a loss of "human life" in biologically the same sense as a fertilized egg that simply fails to implant. Why does one carry moral weight and the other not? What gives moral significance to a human being, in your opinion?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Straggler writes:
Can I ask if you believe in the existence of a soul? And if so when do you think the soul is formed? Yes I believe in the existence of a soul. I think it is implanted in a human being when life begins.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4046 Joined: Member Rating: 7.6 |
So when life begins, It is my moral opinion that no one has the right to terminate that life. Even the mother, if her life is at risk? Is the mothers life less morally worthy than the unborn child? Let's put it another way. You and I are trapped by a deranged supervillain, who gives us a diabolical choice: he will try to kill us both. There is a slim chance that we will both survive. However, one of us could sacrifice his life in a distraction that would almost certainly save the other person. Am I morally obligated to sacrifice myself to save you? Are you morally obligated to sacrifice yourself to save me? If our lives are equally valued (ie, we're both human beings), then while it would be morally praiseworthy to sacrifice oneself in defense of another, it is not morally obligatory. One can only be morally obligated to sacrifice oneself if the sacrifice would preserve more "moral weight" than the value of the sacrificed individual, such as sacrificing one for the lives of a hundred. Is a mother morally obligated to sacrifice herself to preserve the life of an unborn child? If so, then you must be placing more moral weight on a fetus than you place on the mother - which opens a number of other moral consequences as related to miscarriages, such as a pregnant woman becoming guilty of homicide if she has a miscarriage due to smoking, drinking, heavy exercise, or even just not staying in bed the entire time to make sure she can't fall. If not, then you must support abortion in the case of a threat to the life of the mother. Any other position is logically inconsistent. Which position do you take?The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. - Francis Bacon "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
JonF writes:
Where did you obtain your idea that "I would think the time of conception is when the sperm and egg have combined to form 46 human chromosomes that are implanted in the uterus and the human embyro is formed."? From a scientific paper or from somewhere else? One of my sources is Ernst Mayr "What Evolution is." p.106 "Each individual is a unique combination of the 2 sets of parental genes, and it is the phenotype, the product of the genotype (the recombined set of genes) that is ordinarily the natural target of selection... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2963 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
hooah212002 writes: I donot say one life is worth more than another. I say all lifes are equal and no man has the right to terminate a life. It is quite a different situation from having a miscarriage to making the intentional decision to terminate a life no matter in what stage that life may be.
In the unlikely event you say "well, if there are defects or problems, then abortion would be ok" where is your moral compass to say one life is worth more than another, regardless if there are defects? ALL (human) life is worth saving, right? What about a woman who falls and has a miscarriage? Should she be charged with murder, manslaughter or negligent homicide? The same goes for when the fertilized egg doesn't stick. Maybe we could contact DCFS when the fertilized egg gets implanted outside the uterus: we could charge her with a hostile living environment?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hooah212002 Member (Idle past 831 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: |
I say all lifes are equal So an unborn foetus that is 18 weeks old is just as valuable as the woman who is hosting this foetus?
and no man has the right to terminate a life. I'm not talking about men. I'm talking about the woman that is providing the life, without which there IS no child.
It is quite a different situation from having a miscarriage to making the intentional decision to terminate a life no matter in what stage that life may be. And yet, you've failed to actually provide any evidence or even reason for this other than your personal testimony.Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
nwr writes: If, on the other hand, "human life" refers to being a moral agent, then that agency slowly develops over the first few years after birth. It does not suddenly jump into existence. shadow71 writes:
No. And I'll thank you not to make such insinuations.Is it your moral viewpoint that until about a few years after birth it's ok for the "moral agent" the mother to terminate the "life" she gave birth to? The OP only asked about when life begins. It did not ask about terminating life. I responded only to what was asked. And you should have responded to only what I wrote.Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3965 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
A person in a coma still, generally, has brain waves similar to a person asleep, or at the very least, some brain activity. And you seem to be demonstrating my point precisely. That being that the "brain activity" argument -for person hood, put us in the precarious position to decide what exactly is considered viable brain activity. This of course sets us on a slippery slope to which its ultimate end is to judge ones worth based on mental ability. Who is worthy to make such a judgement?
When the brain activity stops, they are suually consaidered brain dead, and "pulling the plug" becomes either a matter of course, or at worst, a choice for the family to make. Indeed, even when there is still brain activity, but no hope for recovery, family or next of kin, generally choose to "pull the plug." This seems to argue that brain activity is a very common, and obvious choice for determining "personhood." Yes but you should note that in all cases where pulling "plugs" are even considered, the prognosis is always the deciding factor. There is not a single case where the doctor said the patient will make a full recovery within the next 9 months to a year, so you better decide now rather or not you want to pull the plug. Therefore though arguments for brain activity seem somewhat logical, they are not at all logical in any cases where it is known that the patient will absolutely achieve full mental function. Which of course is the known outcome to almost all fetuses.
Many conservative Christians view the mother as giving up her rights at the moment she has sex. After all, sex is for procreation, and if the mother does so, she should be willing to "suffer the consequences" of that choice. In reality, that view is very outdated and morally wrong, IMHO. Yes that is what many conservative Christians think. However I think I have adequately pointed out that the issue has nothing to do with religious values or morals etc.. and is solely about person hood. If it is not a person then the woman absolutely has the right to terminate it. If it is a person, then the woman has the right to do anything she wishes to her own body so long as it doesn't endanger the life of another person. If we can't determine if it is or isn't a person, then we need to error on the side of safety.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Just being real Member (Idle past 3965 days) Posts: 369 Joined: |
I would agree with your analysis. However, your analogy ignores the indisputable fact, a fact with which all intelligent people agree, that there is also another person involved; the woman carrying the fetus. No my analogy actually does take into account the life of the other person. In fact in the situation I described with the armed assailant, the "other life" was the Police Officer. My point was that given the possibility of harming someone innocent, the best "choice" was to error on the side of safety. You sit there and quote all kinds of stats on child birth, but the undeniable fact is the entire issue rests on rather it is a person or not. If not then by all means do with it as you wish. If it is a person, then as a person it has the right to live so long as that right doesn't impose an immediate threat to the mothers life. Likewise if we can't tell if it is a person or not then we must act as responsible beings and error on the side of safety.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024