Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8870 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-15-2018 11:30 PM
288 online now:
(288 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: paradigm of types
Post Volume:
Total: 840,321 Year: 15,144/29,783 Month: 1,088/1,502 Week: 86/492 Day: 49/37 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2223
24
2526
...
30Next
Author Topic:   Evangelical Switch from Pro-choice to Anti-abortion
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 346 of 441 (837897)
08-10-2018 5:48 PM


How satisfying it is to see someone else made the target of the sophistry for a change, the multiplication of irrelevancies, the semantic hairsplitting, the evasive tactics, the accusations, the misinterpretations, the general mind-gemushening weirdness. Good luck getting an acknowledgement of the obvious, Tangle.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


    
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 347 of 441 (837898)
08-10-2018 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 345 by Tangle
08-10-2018 2:17 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
e forget conception, forget continuums of harm, just answer me this

I don't really intend to or need to. I personally am of the opinion, that there is, in fact, some point before birth during which we are talking about a human life. For me, though that does not end the inquiry about the balance of harms, and folks can disagree about when an abortion is or is not appropriate. I'm not a doctor, so when I am not involved, I believe that the situation is always one to be decide by a doctor and the patient at all times prior to birth.

So I think I reach the same conclusion other folks reach without adopting their reasoning.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by Tangle, posted 08-10-2018 2:17 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 348 by Tangle, posted 08-10-2018 6:29 PM NoNukes has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6178
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 348 of 441 (837907)
08-10-2018 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 347 by NoNukes
08-10-2018 5:52 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
NoNukes writes:

I don't really intend to or need to. I personally am of the opinion, that there is, in fact, some point before birth during which we are talking about a human life.

Thank you, that's all I'm trying to point out.

For me, though that dotes not end the inquiry about the balance of harms, and folks can disagree about when an abortion is or is not appropriate.

It's a moral question that does not [ABE] have a final, unambiguous, objectively testable answer and people will have different answers. Nevertheless, we must decide.

I'm not a doctor, so when I am not involved, I believe that the situation is always one to be decide by a doctor and the patient at all times prior to birth.

We can't lay the burden of these life and death decisions wholly on individual doctors. Nor can we leave it to the arbitrary beliefs of individuals. Doctors need to work within parameters defined by our institutions. We all have a responsibilty here.

So I think I reach the same conclusion other folks reach without adopting their reasoning.

I think we two are in violent agreement, but I still have no clue about Jar and Percy.

Both say they don't know. Both say it's the woman's choice. But both absolutely and flatly refuse to discuss why and will not think about the edge implications of taking that view.

They both don't know but then both say that it's mother's choice. That's a certainty and a decision. But how can that conclusion be reached from a position of don't know?

Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by NoNukes, posted 08-10-2018 5:52 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 350 by kjsimons, posted 08-10-2018 9:47 PM Tangle has responded
 Message 355 by NoNukes, posted 08-11-2018 3:47 PM Tangle has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 17736
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 349 of 441 (837921)
08-10-2018 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 343 by Tangle
08-10-2018 11:53 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Tangle writes:

Percy writes:

Actually I think it is more useful than "alive" because you were intermingling two different senses of the word alive. etc


You've just said all the same stuff all over again in a slightly different way and completely avoided answering any of the questions I asked you.

It seemed to me that you repeated all your same questions in a slightly different way while ignoring the answers already provided. I think if you look through the questions in your Message 338 and then reread my Message 336 you'll find the answers already there, but I don't mind going back through your message and composing responses to everything you said. All the following quoted text is from your Message 338.

The distinction you are making is that the baby is alive outside of the woman but inside the woman it's not - or at least you don't know. This, being outside the woman is presumably your understanding of 'personhood' and 'living'.

This really does feel like I'm just repeating what I already said, but anyway, concerning "living", I had suggested that the concept of "personhood" was more helpful. This avoids confusion of the sense of alive possessed by a cell or organ that is part of a living creature, versus the sense of alive possessed by the living creature itself. Another way to say the same thing is that living tissue is alive in one sense, while a living plant or animal is alive in another. "Personhood" avoids this confusion that I think had infected some of your points.

I asked you whether the baby - because it is now a fully developed human baby - is 'alive' the moment before birth.

"Alive" in what sense?

You say you don't know.

I don't. Neither do you. You feel - you don't know.

I say that is observably absurd.

I already know you feel this way.

The only way the baby is different at the moment before birth is that it is still dependent on the mother for its food supply, waste management and oxygen.

You left out one crucial way it is different before birth: it is unborn.

Artificially removed from the mother the baby would behave exactly like a newborn baby.

"Artificially removed from the mother" just means a caesarian section - of course it would behave exactly like a newborn baby. That's what it is.

Is it the fact that the mother is providing the life support the thing that doesn't make it alive or a person?

I'm trying to avoid the term "alive" because of the confusion I described above. The reason I don't know whether it is a person is because it is unborn. And as mentioned earlier, jurisdictions are inconsistent as to whether and to what degree they extend the rights of personhood to the unborn. That is, opinions vary. In the absence of facts I choose not to have an opinion.

I don't think I've said anything so far that I haven't already said - I hope this is helping.

If so does the mother have the right to remove the life support of a premature baby?

The baby having been born, no, she does not.

Does the baby only become a person at full term? If not, why not?

I'm not sure what you mean by "at full term." Looking this up for clarification I see that a full term baby is one that is born between 39 weeks and 40 weeks, 6 days. Unfortunately that doesn't help me tell whether you meant before or after birth by "at full term." I'll answer both ways.

If by "at full term" you mean the baby has been born then the answer is yes, once born the baby is a person.

If by "at full term" you mean the fetus has not been born then the answer is I don't know whether the fetus is a person prior to birth.

All modern western societies give the unborn rights, and I expect others do too. Why do you think they do that?

I think those that do do it because they feel it is a person.

And btw, harm does not extend only to 'persons'; smashing a window is a harm, kicking a dog is a harm. Killing a baby just before birth without medical necessity is a serious crime that would likely result in imprisonment. Why would that be if it was not a harm?

That would be because they feel the fetus has been harmed.

I find it difficult to even imagine that the baby just before term is not alive and a person.

I know.

But if I take your position of 'not knowing' shouldn't we at least use the precautionary principle and assume that it is?

I haven't objected to that, but we should acknowledge that we're acting not out of knowledge but in reaction to our feelings. You already acknowledged that the "abortion just prior to birth" scenario is a thought experiment that isn't really possible. Under most circumstances all you can do after about six or seven months is induce, which causes birth, not an abortion. The decision you've been trying to force people to make about whether abortion just prior to birth is murder would never really come up, not even remotely.

Moving on to your current Message 343...

You seems overly concerned about a time when the foetus does not exist, while refusing to think about when it is a fully formed baby about to born.

It isn't that I haven't thought and read about it. It is that I admit what I do not know.

There is no equivalence here. All this stuff about grandfathers is irrelevant, we're only factually concerned about abortion and life, nothing else.

I think you use the word "we" more often than is justified.

There can not be life, in the ways that we're meaning - human life - unless and until the cells from two individuals fuse.

Neither can there be new human life without sperm and egg existing first, and the producers of sperm and egg, and so forth. Labels like "absurd" and "irrelevant" are expressions of how you feel, not things you've demonstrated.

All actions before that are irrelevant and reduce the argument to the absurd.

I know you feel this way.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 343 by Tangle, posted 08-10-2018 11:53 AM Tangle has not yet responded

    
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 660
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003


(5)
Message 350 of 441 (837922)
08-10-2018 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by Tangle
08-10-2018 6:29 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Tangle writes:

It's a moral question that does have a final, unambiguous, objectively testable answer and people will have different answers. Nevertheless, we must decide.


I beg to differ. If people have different answers than there is obviously not an "final, unambiguous, objectively testable answer". Each case is different, no one size fits all.

The thing that sticks in my craw is all the attention to the "unborn" and no attention to the already born and the pregnant mothers. If we are serious about reducing abortions than we need to get serious about supporting birth control initiatives, pregnant woman and their post born children! Republicans don't seem to want to do either.

Edited by kjsimons, : No reason given.

Edited by kjsimons, : changed their to there


This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Tangle, posted 08-10-2018 6:29 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 351 by Faith, posted 08-11-2018 2:21 AM kjsimons has not yet responded
 Message 353 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 1:33 PM kjsimons has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 29820
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 351 of 441 (837931)
08-11-2018 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 350 by kjsimons
08-10-2018 9:47 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
The thing that sticks in my craw is all the attention to the "unborn" and no attention to the already born and the pregnant mothers. If we are serious about reducing abortions than we need to get serious about supporting birth control initiatives, pregnant woman and their post born children! Republicans don't seem to want to do either.

I don't know about "Republicans" but Christian churches have been doing a lot to support pregnant women for many decades and I've been suggesting this is the direction we need to go in as we make it clear that abortion really is the killing of a human life. That's the bottom line: killing a human life simply cannot be a mere "right." But since that is denied that is why we have all the focus on the unborn. This thread is testimony to how hard people work to deny that we're talking about a living human being in the making. Yes, promote birth control, promote social services that give relief to pregnant women, provide adoption services too for those who don't want to keep the child and so on. But first let is face the fact that we ARE talking about a human being in formation in the womb, that at all stages under normal circumstances would inevitably continue to full human personhood if we don't kill it.

If you want to define the point at which it becomes alive and human enough before which you would support abortion but after which you wouldn't, I do wish someone would do that. I can't because I see it as inevitably a human being from conception, but I'm not going to fight with those who come up with a later date -- well, within some limits: if it can live outside the womb with modern care I couldn't support aborting it. That might be where I would draw such a line though to my mind even that is arbitrary. I'm still feeling nauseated at the thought of letting a crying baby die that LNA reported on a while back. Anything that would end the wholesale destruction of unborn babies and sharply reduce abortion would probably get my support.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by kjsimons, posted 08-10-2018 9:47 PM kjsimons has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by ringo, posted 08-11-2018 11:58 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
ringo
Member
Posts: 15398
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 352 of 441 (837959)
08-11-2018 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 351 by Faith
08-11-2018 2:21 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Faith writes:

... the point at which it becomes alive and human....


That's two points. Alive is <= human but beyond that there's a lot of ambiguity.

And our geese will blot out the sun.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 351 by Faith, posted 08-11-2018 2:21 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6178
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.0


(1)
Message 353 of 441 (837963)
08-11-2018 1:33 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by kjsimons
08-10-2018 9:47 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
kjsimons writes:

If people have different answers than there is obviously not an "final, unambiguous, objectively testable answer". Each case is different, no one size fits all.

There should have been a 'not' in that sentence. Of course there's no final, unambigious answer. That was the point I was trying to make, had I not made a complete horlicks of it.

But given that obvious point, we - society - still have to arrive at an unambiguous decision about it.

The thing that sticks in my craw is all the attention to the "unborn" and no attention to the already born and the pregnant mothers. If we are serious about reducing abortions than we need to get serious about supporting birth control initiatives, pregnant woman and their post born children!

Of course.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by kjsimons, posted 08-10-2018 9:47 PM kjsimons has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 2:02 PM Tangle has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30920
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 354 of 441 (837966)
08-11-2018 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 353 by Tangle
08-11-2018 1:33 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Tangle writes:

But given that obvious point, we - society - still have to arrive at an unambiguous decision about it.]

Why?


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 1:33 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 356 by Phat, posted 08-11-2018 3:56 PM jar has responded
 Message 359 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 4:53 PM jar has responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 355 of 441 (837976)
08-11-2018 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 348 by Tangle
08-10-2018 6:29 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
It's a moral question that does not [ABE] have a final, unambiguous, objectively testable answer and people will have different answers. Nevertheless, we must decide.

No, Tangle. 'We' don't have to decide. The people involved have to decide for themselves with some possible input or advice from others. What I expressed about the life of the unborn is my opinion and not a fact even if you agree with me.

You are just as authoritarian as any fundamentalist. It does not matter if your opinions are not religious. Your opinions are not science-based either, so where does the moral authority for your own positions come from?

I think we two are in violent agreement, but I still have no clue about Jar and Percy

We share the same opinion about one aspect of the discussion, but we don't come to the same conclusion. As I said, my conclusion about what "We" should do lines up with Percy and Jar and not you.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith

No it is based on math I studied in sixth grade, just plain old addition, substraction and multiplication. -- ICANT


This message is a reply to:
 Message 348 by Tangle, posted 08-10-2018 6:29 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 362 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 5:12 PM NoNukes has responded
 Message 366 by Faith, posted 08-11-2018 7:51 PM NoNukes has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 356 of 441 (837980)
08-11-2018 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by jar
08-11-2018 2:02 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Because he wants a law in place to keep the action from crossing the line into the murder of the unborn. Obviously leaving it arbitrarily up to the parent(s) and Doctors on a case by case basis might cross that line.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 2:02 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 4:31 PM Phat has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 30920
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 357 of 441 (837983)
08-11-2018 4:31 PM
Reply to: Message 356 by Phat
08-11-2018 3:56 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Phat writes:

Because he wants a law in place to keep the action from crossing the line into the murder of the unborn. Obviously leaving it arbitrarily up to the parent(s) and Doctors on a case by case basis might cross that line.

What line?

The problem is that any line will be dependent on the specifics of each individual case and only the mother, possibly the father and the medical staff involved in that particular case would have those specifics.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 356 by Phat, posted 08-11-2018 3:56 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 358 by Phat, posted 08-11-2018 4:48 PM jar has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 358 of 441 (837984)
08-11-2018 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by jar
08-11-2018 4:31 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
perhaps Tangle believes that the moment when the "life" becomes sacred is a definite non-negotiable state and that society needs to protect the rights of the fetus.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 4:31 PM jar has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 363 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 5:20 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 6178
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 359 of 441 (837985)
08-11-2018 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by jar
08-11-2018 2:02 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Jar writes:

Why?

Because no decision is also a decision.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 2:02 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 360 by Phat, posted 08-11-2018 4:57 PM Tangle has not yet responded
 Message 361 by jar, posted 08-11-2018 5:07 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 11300
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 360 of 441 (837986)
08-11-2018 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 359 by Tangle
08-11-2018 4:53 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
do you thus believe that society has an obligation to make a law that protects the rights of the unborn?

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

This message is a reply to:
 Message 359 by Tangle, posted 08-11-2018 4:53 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
2223
24
2526
...
30Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018