What's wrong with this picture?

It is what those cells become that is important.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Well, by this logic, there should be a law that requires the menstrual fluid of all women to be collected and searched for fertilized eggs that did not implant and were in the process of being flushed out of the body. At least half of all ofhese fertilized eggs end up this way.Similarly, IUD's should be banned because they prevent implantation of fertilized eggs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------But what about that one? Any way you are looking at it a soon to be baby, YES A BABY, dies... Wheres the logic in that?------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

Man Asgara you have a lot of peeves when it comes to this issue... ------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the shit really hits the fan, even the pro-lifers get abortions when they really, really need them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Untrue.------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

quote:

---

But what about that one? Any way you are looking at it a soon to be baby, YES A BABY, dies... Wheres the logic in that?

---

So, what are you saying?Do you think that all of the menstrual fluid of every women should be collected and searched to find all the unimplantes fertilized eggs?Do you believe that IUD's should be banned, so that women will be more likely to have unwanted pregnancies?Tell me, how many unwanted children have you adopted?Do you support forcing girls and women to carry all pregnancies to term regardless of their desire or ability to do so?Do you support the death penalty? Additionally, do you support the death penalty for women who "murder" by having abortions, or for the doctors who perform them, and the nurses and other workers who assist (they are acessories to "murder").Do you support a massive social program whereby all of these unwanted children will be fed, housed, given medical treatment, and educated? This will raise your taxes significantly, seeing as we don't do that for the people who are here already.Do you support spending tax dollars providing thorough and early sex education to all children and free, easily-available contraceptives to all people who ask for them in order to greatly reduce the need for abortions?Please answer.

When the shit really hits the fan, even the pro-lifers get abortions when they really, really need them.

quote:

---

Untrue.

---

Read the message I was responding to.Mr. H's former employer was a Catholic and a serious pro-lifer, yet when it came down to it, he and his wife chose to terminate because to carry the pregnancy to term meant that there was a good chance both the mother and the baby would die.Also in this thread, Lizard Breath, obviously a pretty rabid pro-lifer, told us that his wife had to have an abotion as well.So, that's two examples of pro-lifers getting abortions when they really, really needed one.That makes them pro-choice, actually.Let me ask you, though. If a recent widdow just found out she was pregnant but carrying the pregnancy to term would seriously threaten her life, thus making the child an instant orphan, would you be able to look her in the eye and say that she should die rather than have an abortion?

Actually if you actually read my posts, the only thing I have listed as a "peeve" is people calling the debate pro-life/pro-abortion. I think most people consider one thing to be "a lot".------------------
Asgara
"An unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates via Plato

I don't know why Pro-life bothers you, maybe the truth hurts a little .------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

quote:

---

Those were 2 very good but very tough questions and I've probably not really answered either one of them sufficiently for you.

---

I appreciate the honesty and sincerity with which you answered the questions. I hope that this appreciation isn't lost in my reply.Just a quick note on the topic of sex education:
I was taught in public school. I graduated high school less than ten years ago. The education I got from my sex ed classes is not accurately described as you have described it. It probably varies from school to school. However, the fact of the matter is that when I was faced with the prospect of having sex I was informed. Not encouraged. I knew that abstinence was the only fulproof birth control method, I knew the potential consequences of my actions, etc. etc. These classes led me to make better decisions because they simply presented information to me. An anectode, it proves nothing, but I just wanted to note that I don't agree with your characterization of sexual education in the classroom.Back to scene:

quote:

---

My arguement lies in the act of trying to judge one act - abortion as good in some cases but the similiar act of euthenizing as bad in all cases. Either embrace all human life as sacred or cut loose with the concept and focus on the good of society as a whole and de-emphasize the rights of individual life just like the ants and monarch butterflies. I can't understand why that's so hard if we are only evolved forms of these common life forms with a few million years of DNA trial and error the only separating factor.

---

If all human life is sacred then:Can we execute people for heinous crimes?
Can we ever ever ever under any circumstances instigate a potentially fatal struggle or even fight back with the intent to kill other people if someone else should attack us?and closer to home: If a mother (who is unquestionably human) finds her life in danger from a growing collection of cells in her uterus that, assuming they survive the developmental process, will also be unquestionably human... which is more sacred?Secondly, I disagree with what you've hinted at here and said more explicitly elsewhere in this thread. Accepting that humans are a makeup of molecules and DNA without a soul does not mean that they're no longer special, or that there is no purpose to feelings or emotion or that there is no value in preserving someone who seemingly contributes nothing to society. It does not imply that we immediately proceed to sacrifice those who we feel are a drain on our societies because it is the most logical course of action. Of the many things that humans have developed over time is an advanced social structure whose rules and order defy logic and sense and reasoning many times over. To reject the sacredness of life is not to reject the specialness of life. And rejecting sacredness in favor of an informed awareness of how special it is leads one to make better, more informed decisions when one has to decide whether or not to euthanize their mother who is no longer able to feel anything but excruciating pain while hooked up to a machine without which she couldn't live OR destroy a collection of cells that if left unchecked will develop into a human being whose responsibility will fall on your own unready shoulders.

So, what are you saying?Do you think that all of the menstrual fluid of every women should be collected and searched to find all the unimplantes fertilized eggs?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Nope.

quote:

---

Do you believe that IUD's should be banned, so that women will be more likely to have unwanted pregnancies?

---

There is a fine line between stopping a pregnancy then destroying one. And By the way, I think if they were banned, women would be more careful and unwanted pregnancies would decrease.

quote:

---

Tell me, how many unwanted children have you adopted?

---

Actually I think that is illegal considering I am turning 15 on the 28th.

quote:

---

Do you support forcing girls and women to carry all pregnancies to term regardless of their desire or ability to do so?

---

I think women should think about this before it happens. And if it is out of their control, (or some complication happens threatening their lives, or the babies) I think that it is in God's hands, and when her life is threatened it comes down to who she would rather let live the baby or herself.

quote:

---

Do you support the death penalty? Additionally, do you support the death penalty for women who "murder" by having abortions, or for the doctors who perform them, and the nurses and other workers who assist (they are acessories to "murder").

---

I do not support the death penalty, I feel that everyone deserves forgiveness. Just as God willingly forgives those who sin... What sin is, would be not in my judgement. I do know that certain things are sin because of the laws of God, given to us in the Bible.

quote:

---

Do you support a massive social program whereby all of these unwanted children will be fed, housed, given medical treatment, and educated? This will raise your taxes significantly, seeing as we don't do that for the people who are here already.

---

Yes.

quote:

---

Do you support spending tax dollars providing thorough and early sex education to all children and free, easily-available contraceptives to all people who ask for them in order to greatly reduce the need for abortions?

---

Do I support spending tax dollars to provide sex education? Yes.Would I rather support money going to teaching God's view on sex? Yes.Although contreceptives are are good in the sense of reducing abortions, they shouldn't be needed for the most part if only sex occurred after marriage. When the two married would be bonded so closely that a child would probably be great.Now since I took the time to answer these questions, can you answer them, I would love to see you view on this matter.------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

Actually if you actually read my posts, the only thing I have listed as a "peeve" is people calling the debate pro-life/pro-abortion. I think most people consider one thing to be "a lot".-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Two things. ------------------
"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." -JesusJohn 3:3

Lizard Breath:A question in three parts.For the first part, I'll be succinct: What every last one of these arguments boils down to is whether a just fertilized egg - something without even a single nerve cell - is of the same moral worth or even a relatively close moral worth to that of the mother. You need to evidence why this is so - that is the only issue in dispute here, really.Part two: I'll re-present the argument that I gave before, and would like a response to:1) Do you have any problem with killing human cells? I.e., if you had your spleen removed because of a car accident, would that be some sort of moral wrong?2) Do you have any problem with killing unique combinations of DNA that don't have complex thought processes? I.e., if you crushed a dandelion or a spider, would you see that as a moral wrong?If your answer to both of these is "No", how do you combine them to reach a great moral wrong? "Humanity" doesn't lie in DNA - it lies in human minds. Something without nerve cells has no mind, let alone a functioning human mind. DNA is a blueprint, no more than a skyscraper blueprint is not the skyscraper itself. DNA contains no memories, no thoughts, no dreams, no hopes, no fears, no desires - just a self-replicating chemical reaction that lays out how to develop such a mind that can eventually gain these things. It is *not* the mind itself. Just like if you destroy a blueprint you need only to print out or draw another copy, DNA is easily created.Your response?Also, one last question: Women have "cast out" embryos throughout recorded history. I know a girl who, after being raped at age 13, starved herself to terminate a pregnancy so that her parents wouldn't have to find out what happened to her (because she knew that her father would have gone out and killed the guy who did it, and ended up in jail for the rest of his life). Is "casting out" through herbal (such as Queen Anne's Lace seeds) or more brutal methods (such as starvation) a better alternative? Because that's what you need to choose here - people will abort pregnancies whether or not they can go to a clinic. They've done it throughout history, and they'll keep doing it.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 11-11-2003]

According to my point of view, abortion is either murder or something very close to it. On the other hand this is one of the few cases where I agree with concept of "lesser evil" which I really hate otherwise. But here we have enough data to conclude that definitely more evil is done with abortion banned.[This message has been edited by Raha, 11-11-2003]

Um, I need them in my marriage.What, you think being married suddenly means that two people have the financial wherewithal to support children - and without BC, we're talking a lot of children - when they didn't have it before?I know it sounds outrageous, but it is possible to not want to have kids, or to not want them until later. Abstinence just isn't an option, nor should it have to be for married people. (Or unmarried people, for that matter. Abstinence just doesn't work at preventing pregnancy.)

To the first part of the question I'll stand on what I said that once the egg has been fertilized by male sperm then it's technically a human being at that point. It's not a grown-up, teen ager, adolecent, toddler or infant, just a newly developing human being.I'll base my own criteria on this by watching to see how the woman's own body reacts to the fertilization event. As soon as that happens, her own chemistry starts to change very abbruptly and different hormones begin to be secreted to perform all sorts of functions to enhance the enviorment to maximize chances for the developing human to make it to birth.You can by an EPD at any drug store for $8.00 and it can tell you with astounding accuracy (the exact stats I admit I don't have) that the homone levels have changed radically in the blood stream, so much so that it's detectable in the urine. The hormone changes corrolate to what the women's body is trying to accomplish in maximizing chances for survival so if the body is saying that it is a developing human almost imediatly, then my own judgement would parellel.Chop my logic to bits but it doesn't change the sequence of events imidiatly after fertilization, and the body doesn't debate what to do next using intelect, just chemistry.

quote:

---

I'll base my own criteria on this by watching to see how the woman's own body reacts to the fertilization event. As soon as that happens, her own chemistry starts to change very abbruptly and different hormones begin to be secreted to perform all sorts of functions to enhance the enviorment to maximize chances for the developing human to make it to birth.

---

Our "chemistry" changes monthly, Lizard. Want a graph of how dramatic estradiol levels fluctuate each month? And it is not an instantaneous thing at conception, either, it takes time.

quote:

---

You can by an EPD at any drug store for $8.00 and it can tell you with astounding accuracy (the exact stats I admit I don't have) that the homone levels have changed radically in the blood stream, so much so that it's detectable in the urine.

---

Yeah, you have to wait over week though (you don't seem very familiar with them) - again, not concurrent with conception. In fact, even a blood test typically takes over 7 days to detect a clear change. Also, don't take too much stock in steroid hormones such as HCG being detectable in urine - for example, there's always estrogens in the urine, all that changes is the quantity. In fact, one type of estrogen replacement (Premarin) is made from distilled horse urine (no joke!).

quote:

---

Chop my logic to bits but it doesn't change the sequence of events imidiatly after fertilization, and the body doesn't debate what to do next using intelect, just chemistry.

---

Seing as it takes time for the body to clue in that there's a fertilized egg, that's hardly supportive of your "miraculous moment" notion of brainless humanity.BTW, you completely and utterly skipped two questions (and the thing that you answered wasn't really a question, just a statement of fact as to what is up for debate here), so you really need to try again.------------------
"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."[This message has been edited by Rei, 11-11-2003]