Legal Death, Legal Life, Personhood and Abortion

a temporary closing if this keeps up? riVeRrat has acknowledged (msg 164) that he is done with the debate, so the current need to keep it open is over.thanks

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you realize of course that this makes your previous claim of the argument being full of holes to be invalidated?you only raised on issue and we not able to show that the argument in the essay was invalid on that point, you have now finished with that, and have no other points to raise.just want to be sure.thanks.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

Life.

---

Riverrat.As I said before, the above response does not make sense in the English language.The health risks involves in carrying a pregnancy to term, giving birth, and postpartum are not "life".Do the following sentences make sense to you?"The health risks a woman takes on while pregnant, giving birth, and postpartum are; life. She is risking life."That is meaningless gibberish, riverrat, you will have to do better.Now, since you seem to want to completely avoid even thinking about the health riskes to a woman during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum, let alone do a little research, I will list some of them for you.http://www.healthsquare.com/fgwh/wh1ch25.htmEctopic Pregnancy
Molar Pregnancy (requires surgery)
Gestational Diabetes
Gestational High Blood Pressure
Kidney Disease
Chronic vomiting for the first three months of gestation
Bleeding
Too much amniotic fluid which causes shortness of breath because the lungs cannot expand properly. May require hospitalization.
Placenta Previa, which causes excessive bleeding.
Placental abruption, which causes severe bleeding, nausea, and vomiting
Multiple births
Postmaturity of the fetusAdditionally, women with preexisting diabetes mellitus, heart disease, kidney disease sickle cell anemia, lupus, thyroid imbalance, high blood pressure, kidney disease, PKU, epilepsy, depression and other mental disorders, and who are younger than 20 and older than 35 all face increased risks to their own health from carrying a pregnancy to term, giving birth, and postpartum.COMMON SOURCES OF DISCOMFORT IN AN UNCOMPLICATED PREGNANCYDigestive problems, such as heartburn
Dizziness
Emotional upset
Excessive body warmth
Fatigue
Gas, constipation
General aches
Headaches
Hemorrhoids
Increased or decreased desire for sex
Increased urination
Nausea and vomiting
Pelvic pressure
Sleeping problems
Sore nipples and breasts
Stuffy nose
Swollen ankles and feet
Swollen or bleeding gums
Varicose veins
Especially in late pregnancy:
Back pain
Leg cramps
Shortness of breath
Unsteady balancePostpartum Hemorrhage in Emergency Medicine: Practice Essentials, Background, PathophysiologyPostpartum HemorrhageFrequency:In the US: The exact incidence of PPH is difficult to determine. A reasonable consensus is that 1-10% of pregnancies are complicated by PPH, with the actual number in the range of 2-4%.Mortality/Morbidity:PPH can cause severe morbidity and mortality.Possible complications include exposure to blood products, the need for surgical intervention, and the need for permanent sterilization to control bleeding.One study of more than 2,000 women in the United States revealed that obstetric hemorrhage is the cause of 13% of maternal deaths. PPH is thought to be the cause in one third of these cases.Risk factors include the following:
Prolonged third stage of labor
Preeclampsia
Mediolateral episiotomy
Previous PPH
Multiple gestation
Arrest of descent
Maternal hypotension
Coagulation abnormalities
Lacerations of the cervix, vagina, or perineum
Asian or Hispanic ethnicity
Delivery with forceps or vacuum
Augmented laborNulliparity, multiparity (20-fold increase in risk), and polyhydramniosTell me, rat, how does the above compare to "walking across the street" in your mind?Please explain how the risks to health are similar.Be specific.This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-13-2005 09:03 AM

Why, because you won't admit your wrong, or because you said so?I made my claim, I backed it up throughly, I'm done.

WOW! sounds bad, kind of sounds like life to me.Maybe people shouldn't have sex, unles they are willing to take all that risk.

Like I said, you made a claim of numerous large holes, and were not able to show one existed, even while concentrating on only one. All you showed was your opinion, unsubstantiated by any other source of information.That is not backing it up.And not because I say so, but because the logic of the argument says so.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

In other words because you say so.

quote:

---

WOW! sounds bad, kind of sounds like life to me.

---

You didn't answer my question.Can you please explain how the risks of carrying a pregnancy to term, giving birth, and postpartum are similar to "walking across the street", as you previously claimed?Or, perhaps you would like to change your mind regarding this comparison?Why are you so snottily stonewalling me here, rat?Why are you so afraid to address the reality of what women risk to their health during pregnancy, giving birth, and postpartum?

quote:

---

Maybe people shouldn't have sex, unles they are willing to take all that risk.

---

My point, rat, is that abortion is not simply done for convenience, and that even "normal, uncomplicated" pregnancies are far from trivial and ALWAYS greatly affect a woman's body and ALWAYS expose her to greater risk of death, infertility, and maiming.You pass judgement upon and wish to restrict women who choose abortion when there is nothing detectably wrong with the pregnancy, but, as I have demonstrated, there is ALWAYS meaningful danger to the woman's health to carry a pregnancy to term, give birth, and postpartum.

quote:

---

In other words because you say so.

---

No, the rules of logic say so.Do you want someone who is formally trained in logic to evaluate your argument, since you don't seem to accept RAZD's or holmes' evaluation of your argument?I think there are several people with thoses qualifications here on the board...Rrhain and Percy, I think.

Just to let you know I am formally trained in logic. While I have an extensive (up to grad level) education in chemistry and geology, as well as an undergrad minor in Sociology... my degree is in Philosophy (emphasis logic, and "applied" logic).Some here pretend to be, but I am the real deal. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm always right...

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)"...don't believe I'm taken in by stories I have heard, I just read the Daily News and swear by every word.."(Steely Dan)

Yea, maybe they shouldn't screw around then.So having said that which will piss a lot of people off. Let's see some numbers. How many woman actually die during perfectly normal pregnacies, where there was no apparent risk?The other number I'd like to see is the percentage of reasons that women get abortions.But somehow the following fictional story based on what your saying doesn't seem right to me:Doctor Abortor: Hi there Ms.Jones, you would like an abortion today?Ms.Jones: Why yes I would, I got pregnant by accident
(lol), and I really don't mind raising kids, but I just don't want to risk all the things that go along with pregnacy. So go ahead and rip it out, because there is no risk in that.

Rhain?
His logic is that absolutly worst logic I have ever seen in my life.Listen, I am more than logical without any "training"One cannot just say there is no logic in what I say, they must prove it. I replied from the very begining with plenty of counter arguements, that explain the flaw in RAZD's way of thinking. I have not been proven wrong.Beyond a shadow of a doubt, the statement that he basis his whole way of thinking, the core of his arguement, I refuted, and proved wrong.Then as I attacked other positions of his essay, I was called out to using strawmen.So if I can't pick apart his essay bit by bit, then what's the point of me debating, I can never win, the judge seems to also be the defense.It's all BS, not worth my time.

They did, the fact that you don't understand that is like a boxer not understanding that the ten count meant KO, and so is angry because he got back up to fight on eleven. We keep trying to explain what is happening but you don't seem to get it. No you didn't. While you could certainly aim at that plank as well as others, you were missing what it was saying and arguing against your assumed argument rather than his actual argument. Yes, that is it exactly. You were arguing against a position which was not actually RAZD's position. I will cut you enough slack to say I see how you made the mistake, but at this point you should have figured it out.You made a mistake, figure out his actual argument and begin again.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)"...don't believe I'm taken in by stories I have heard, I just read the Daily News and swear by every word.."(Steely Dan)

If I prove that his usage of the legal definition of life is wrong, can we drop this?

Funny, first you say I cannot point out all the holes in your essay, calling it a strawman, now you say I must.Where's the logic in that?