A parasitic twin applies to a only conjoined twin that stops forming properly in utero. This is a very specific case and an example of multiple uses of a term. Just like the big bang is not an actual explosion, regardless of the popular term used.
As the typical fetus does not stop developing in utero - this definition does not apply in this case.
True parasitism is a form of symbiosis which, by definition involves different species.
quote:YOU ARE WRONG AND YOUR DEFINITION IS WRONG... I'M RIGHT
Actually, no I'm not and shouting about it doesn't prove it.
Don't you understand that maybe people don't want to prove you wrong because they agree with you to some extent?
The mother gains no physical advantage and many disadvatages from the foetus, while the foetus gains much from the mother for it's own use and protection. In that sense it is akin to a parasite.
However, in normal usage a parasite does tend to be of a different species. When humans and domesticated animals are parasitised we tend to treat them to get rid of the parasite. We don't tend to do that with pregnant women. That tells you that no-one thnks of a foetus as a truly parasitic being.
As for parasitic twins, yes they are the same species, but the parasitic twin cannot live without the sibling, yet is slowly killing the sibling and itself.
I shall clarify. A fetus is pretty much a parasite biologically,as I said a while back. However, is a fetus a parasite philosophically? Direct answer please. And no cop-outs. I know you loathe those, so I wouldn't dream of such a thing happening. I'll await your answer..
It seems your second attempt is a little more fruitful, if still problematic.
i wish i quote, it doesn't give me the option.
the definition is not vague, because it applies to all organism.
"As I understand it, a parasite survives on a host of a different species."
then what's a parasitic twin? it's a organism of the same species as its host... its brother, so YOU ARE WRONG AND YOUR DEFINITION IS WRONG... I'M RIGHT.
First, a parasitic twin is not a parasite, but a twin behaving in a manner similar to a parasite, hence "parasitic" modifies "twin" -- rather than a twinish parasite, with "twinish" modifying "parasite" -- so no, you are not right.
Second if you wish to make quotes the process is simple:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:quotes are easy
Message 1: ... my thread "Is the human fetus a parasite according to symbiosis ?" was about info proving that the bible supported abortion, the law supports abortion, and the human fetus is a parasite according SYMBIOSIS-- being as crude, crass and unapologetic as it IS was suppose to start a DEBATE of why society romanticize pregnancy and the LIES of the religious to keep this ideology alive with all the anti-choice legislation lately.
So you support the rights of parents to decide whether or not they should have an abortion, as opposed to religious groups intruding into the decision with their religious agenda, yes?
... and the human fetus is a parasite according SYMBIOSIS ...
Again, the terminology is not quite correct: in symbiosis both species benefit from the other. An example is lichen, which is a symbiotic relationship between an algae and a fungus:
quote:Lichens ... are composite organisms consisting of a symbiotic organism composed of a fungus (the mycobiont) with a photosynthetic partner (the photobiont or phycobiont), usually either a green alga (commonly Trebouxia) or cyanobacterium (commonly Nostoc).
One provides energy through photosynthesis, the other uses the energy to obtain nutrients from the substrate they inhabit (which can include rocks). Often with symbiotes, if one is killed the other dies as well: they need each other.
... and the human fetus is a parasite ...
Parasitic, yes, parasite, no. A different analogy you might try would be to use a budding body, such as found in yeasts, but this too is inaccurate. A better analogy would be a cancerous body\tumor, growing from the cells of the individual, as this would have the same DNA material as the host, and tumors can be either benign or malignant: the malignant tumor will kill the host, while the benign one will just affect the general health (inhibit immune systems etc).
... I'M RIGHT.
Curiously, I find that when people assert that they are right, that this just expresses their opinion rather than reality. Opinions have been found to be rather ineffective in affecting reality in any objectively noticeable manner. Assertions have a way of encouraging responses that show the assertion is false, so it would be better to avoid them where possible.
So, the deeper existential meaning behind every fetus is to be a parasite and leech of it's mother/host? That's what you're saying there. Is this all that there is to it? If you truly believe this, argue when you come back
Why should I try to prove your "facts" wrong? Why should I care? So far you've displayed the mind of a brat and the manners of a pig.
I assume you are, say...15. You're like the kid who comes down to dinner with FUCK scrawled on his forehead: you think you're a courageous warrior, and everyone else thinks you're just a rude punk.
I don't know what kind of mother would raise a kid with the decorum of a pile of steaming crap, or who should be more ashamed--you of your mother, or her of you. I can see how the question of fetus-as-parasite came up early in your family life.
Still, you amuse me. I'll drop by from time to time for giggles and to see if you've learned how to behave like a human being.
Everyone is laughing at you, galerouth, laughter of derision mixed with pity.
Formulate a paragraph (look it up) with a thesis sentence that presents the position which you think is incontrovertible; write a bridge paragraph that lays out your supporting evidence, then finish with a paragraph that ties it all together--maybe someone will engage you in a genuine debate.
Wash your hands. Change your underwear.
Wipe your nose.
"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."
Thanks for finishing what I only had time to start (needed to leave for work about ten minutes before I started the reply). Actually, you explained it more completely than I would have. Here - have a smiley stamp
I was going to respond in a PM - as you sent me one with roughly the same content, but since you decided to try and sidestep moderation I'll make this public.
The point of forum is to express ideas
I agree wholeheartedly.
thus, my thread was about info proving the bible supported abortion, the law supports abortion, and the human fetus is a parasite according SYMBIOSIS-- this post being as crude, crass and unapologetic as it IS was suppose to start a DEBATE of why society romanticize pregnancy and the LIES of the religious to keep this ideology... alive
I'm not really a fan of scattergun posting all over the place. It is an indication that a person is not looking for in depth discussion of their ideas.
but instead of, waiting to I got back to the forum to explain why i created this thread in first place... you pulled a "a typical fundamentalist christian card" closed the thread as a form of censorship, just like the nazis.
Just like the nazis? That's a little bit of hyperbole isn't it? If you want to discuss abortion with us, you are more than welcome to. But we do have standards here, and your OP didn't meet them. Having editorial standards is not the same as censorship, as practiced either by Nazis or typical fundamentalist christians (which I am assuredly, neither).
you would see my debating people, but i can't spend all day of forums... i have life and a job!
As do the rest of us. Did you think we were lifeless jobless bums or something?
Your problem is that your topic is a rambling barely coherent collection of words with incomplete sentences and poorly developed ideas.
I'm going to close this thread again, as nobody else seems to be able to discern your point either. If you want to discuss abortion issues then you are welcome to do so, but remember that this forum is not specifically about abortion. Our primary focus is on Evolution and Creationism. So if you are going to stick around, it'd be nice to see you participating in that debate.
Like the fundamentalist Christian nazi that I am, I changed my mind. I'm moving this to Free For All, just in case anyone is genuinely interested in trying to discuss the parasitic nature of fetuses with Gale.