Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 61/28 Hour: 3/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evangelical Switch from Pro-choice to Anti-abortion
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 385 of 441 (838094)
08-13-2018 8:56 PM
Reply to: Message 384 by NoNukes
08-13-2018 8:49 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
You are wrong and you are being duplicitous.
Wikipedia writes:
Science had discovered that conception inaugurated a more or less continuous process of development, which would produce a new human being if uninterrupted. Moreover, quickening was found to be neither more nor less crucial in the process of gestation than any other step. Many physicians concluded that if society considered it unjustifiable to terminate pregnancy after the fetus had quickened, and if quickening was a relatively unimportant step in the gestation process, then it was just as wrong to terminate a pregnancy before quickening as after quickening.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 384 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2018 8:49 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2018 9:19 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


(1)
Message 389 of 441 (838120)
08-14-2018 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by NoNukes
08-13-2018 9:19 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
NN writes:
Let's examine your quote in a couple of chunks.
Science had discovered that conception inaugurated a more or less continuous process of development, which would produce a new human being if uninterrupted.
All that is certain about this statement is that the process produces a human being. This does not say that we have a human being at the start of the process.
This is what I mean by sophistry. There is no way the process to becoming a human being could be inaugurated except by something that had all the stuff for making a human being already present. What is conception but the formation of a cell that immediately begins to divide and multiply and soon differentiate into limbs and organs and functions that ultimately becomes a recognizable human being.
It is never at any point something OTHER than a human being, it is always the same biological stuff at different stages of development, having from the start the whole genetic program of a human being. It is biologically/genetically human. It could not eventually produce a recognizable human being if it were not.
And I read that paragraph to be saying that once conception was scientifically recognized this fact was also recognized, that there is no point at which it is not a human being: that is why the medical profession drew the conclusion that it is "just as wrong to terminate a pregnancy before quickening as after quickening," quickening being the former subjective standard at which human life was judged to begin. If it was not in the same sense human at conception as it is at quickening they would not have come to this conclusion.
And in fact, the statement is an inescapable denial that such a thing is true. It does not say that the process is the development of a human being, it says that the process produces a human being at some point along the way.
This is sophistry, a mere play on words to deny the obvious facts I laid out above. At all stages biologically speaking it is the exact same stuff in different stages of development.
NN writes:
Wikipedia writes:
Moreover, quickening was found to be neither more nor less crucial in the process of gestation than any other step. Many physicians concluded that if society considered it unjustifiable to terminate pregnancy after the fetus had quickened, and if quickening was a relatively unimportant step in the gestation process, then it was just as wrong to terminate a pregnancy before quickening as after quickening.
The quoted statement's conclusion is not about science but about physicians following what society dictated and not about science, exactly as I said before.
This is more sophistry and duplicitousness. The only mention of science is to say science is what showed what happens when an egg is fertilized and how that is the true beginning of life that will inevitably produce a human being if uninterrupted. From this one scientific fact the rest follows: quickening is exposed as a mere subjective standard now that it is known that objectively life begins at conception, and therefore, based on this new knowledge it is clear that if it was considered wrong to terminate a pregnancy after quickening it is now clearly wrong to terminate it before quickening since life begins well before quickening. That is the point of the scientific fact, NN, it's all the science mentioned in the paragraph and the entire basis for the judgment that follows.
Further, quickening occurs well after attachment to the uterus, so it is not relevant to my own position.
Attachment is just as artificial a dividing point as is any other biologically speaking. It is just as human biologically or genetically speaking before attachment as it is after attachment. Biologically nothing changes in the developing embryo at attachment.
You are clearly looking for some stage before which you would support abortion but not after and my point has been that you can do that but you can't do it on the basis of humanness. I believe it is clear that biologically speaking it is always a human life from conception, so that whatever stage is chosen necessarily must interrupt the development of a human being.
Nevertheless it is true that the developing fetus has historically been granted lesser rights than born human beings and that there are certainly stages at which it does not look human and has not yet developed important functions that we identify as human. It is going to have to be on the basis of this sort of fact that you choose your dividing line, it cannot be on the basis of its humanness because from conception it is clearly BIOLOGICALLY/GENETICALLY and inexorably human.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2018 9:19 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by ringo, posted 08-14-2018 11:46 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 392 by Stile, posted 08-14-2018 12:13 PM Faith has replied
 Message 394 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2018 12:37 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 397 of 441 (838146)
08-14-2018 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 394 by NoNukes
08-14-2018 12:37 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
There are no brains or heart or lungs right after attachment either, it is you who are making no sense. I am not "ignoring" that the potential does not make you human, I am correctly using the term human in the biological/ genetic sense and in that sense the fertilized egg is a human life. It is a POTENTIAL human being if you are measuring it by some stage of development you may choose to define, a stage where brains, lungs, heart are developed perhaps. But it is no less a human life before those organs have developed, biologically genetically and just based on the fact that it will inexorably develop into a full human being if we leave it alone.
That is the whole point made in the article though you want to deny it. Why else would scientific knowledge of what happens at conception cause the medical profession to change their understanding of when the fetus becomes human?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 394 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2018 12:37 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 399 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2018 2:19 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 398 of 441 (838147)
08-14-2018 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Stile
08-14-2018 12:13 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
I haven't called it a "human being," I've been calling it a human life. The point is that GENETICALLY it is a human life. You are talking about stages of development, fine, but genetically, biologically it is a human life from conception.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by Stile, posted 08-14-2018 12:13 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 407 by ringo, posted 08-14-2018 9:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 400 of 441 (838149)
08-14-2018 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 399 by NoNukes
08-14-2018 2:19 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
I've been asking for people to designate a stage at which they consider the fetus human in the sense that they would not abort it. Genetically it is a human life from conception but there are stages at which it is more easily identified as human than others, and that's where you should be focused.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 399 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2018 2:19 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 401 by jar, posted 08-14-2018 3:03 PM Faith has not replied
 Message 403 by Stile, posted 08-14-2018 3:36 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 405 of 441 (838162)
08-14-2018 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 403 by Stile
08-14-2018 3:36 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
You can determine humanness by its biology or genetics as I'm doing, which can only start at conception, or you can determine it some other way. I'm not the one who wants to determine it some other way although I've suggested some grounds that might be considered. If there is no way to make such a determination then I guess it does have to be decided on a case by case basis whether circumstances warrant abortion or not. I'm assuming normal healthy conditions for the development from conception to birth of a normal healthy embryo- to-infant in everything I've said.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 403 by Stile, posted 08-14-2018 3:36 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by jar, posted 08-14-2018 8:50 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 408 of 441 (838167)
08-14-2018 10:19 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by jar
08-14-2018 8:50 PM


Re: abortion should consider all of the facts in each case
the point is that I'm talking about normal healthy development and not specific cases, that is I'm speaking in general about the normal experience of pregnancy and birth. In my personal experience that is the typical situation, in which complications are unusual or relatively easily dealt with and physical problems at the level that would necessitate abortion nonexistent.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by jar, posted 08-14-2018 8:50 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by jar, posted 08-15-2018 6:39 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 410 of 441 (838170)
08-15-2018 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 403 by Stile
08-14-2018 3:36 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
This usage of the term "human life" makes the term "human life" useless in determining when it becomes a difficult-moral-question in ending the life of the baby.
I personally don't find it difficult at all. Although in the earliest stages it isn't yet a recognizable human being and it lacks many functions, the fact that it has all the genetic stuff from the very start for developing into a human being if we leave it to nature, that is, the fact that it IS already a human life though not yet a full human being, means to me that morally we are wrong to kill it unless there is some dire medical reason to do so. So to my mind it's not a "difficult" moral question at all if it is a human life and it is.
But you can use other standards if you like. These are practically impossible to determine it seems, since nobody here has come up with a clearcut dividing line. I've suggested some point at which it is recognizably human; or the point at which it has whatever functions you want to define as making it human; or there's the point of viability outside the womb. All these to my mind are well beyond any point I could consider abortion to be morally justified without some dire medical reason, but I'm trying to suggest some criteria different from my own to help get it established what people think allows for abortion to be justifiable.
Perhaps there simply isn't any such biological point, perhaps you have other standards entirely, such as the family and social situation into which the baby would be born, the ability of the mother to care for it and so on.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 403 by Stile, posted 08-14-2018 3:36 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 417 of 441 (838183)
08-15-2018 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 414 by Tangle
08-15-2018 7:44 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
They feel it's wrong'. Of course they feel that it's wrong! You can't prove that first degree murder is wrong or rape is wrong either. Or that anything is wrong for that matter. These are all moral decisions based on our feelings about harm. Scientific proofs aren't possible in forming these judgements.
Yes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Tangle, posted 08-15-2018 7:44 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 425 of 441 (838221)
08-16-2018 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 424 by Tangle
08-16-2018 11:11 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Are you aware of the practice of "partial birth abortion?"
The Facts of Partial-Birth Abortion
Percy is just one of those justifying barbarities these days.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 424 by Tangle, posted 08-16-2018 11:11 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 426 by Tangle, posted 08-16-2018 11:37 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 427 of 441 (838225)
08-16-2018 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 426 by Tangle
08-16-2018 11:37 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
And LNA described this barbarity in Message 272
Ron Paul recounted something disturbing he - by chance - saw during medical school, by telling about how he accidently wandered into a room where he encountered a baby that had just been removed in a surgical abortion and it was crying, but he was told to let it alone as it was just aborted and it would die, and he quickly left the room he wandered into to get to his proper destination.
I ['d like to] think I would have grabbed the crying baby and run screaming down the halls for help.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 426 by Tangle, posted 08-16-2018 11:37 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 428 by Tangle, posted 08-16-2018 12:11 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 429 of 441 (838228)
08-16-2018 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 428 by Tangle
08-16-2018 12:11 PM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
At this point I'd be happy if the more barbaric practices were forbidden and only very early abortion was justified although I can't really justify that either. But anything that sharply reduced the mass slaughter that has been going on for decades would be welcome. But I'd like to see it accompanied with a strong message that it means ending a human life, or what would become a human being or however that needs to be worded, to replace the propaganda that says it's not alive, not human or whatnot. Increase the pitch for contraception. Step up the services to help get women through an unwanted pregnancy and improve their prospects by schooling or work or whatever. ANYTHING that would help cut this bloody evil by huge numbers.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 428 by Tangle, posted 08-16-2018 12:11 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 435 of 441 (838257)
08-17-2018 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 433 by Tangle
08-17-2018 4:17 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
Hey Tangle, he's equating you with me, shouldn't that set a fire under you to make a huge effort to blast him out of the park? Hey I understand, dealing with Percy is like trying to nail Jello to the wall (Do you have Jello in the UK?) and all you get for your trouble is accusations upon accusations. But since you aren't a fundamentalist you might have a better chance to get the stuff nailed than I would. I'll pray for you to get a second wind, herculean level patience and some good pithy rejoinders.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 433 by Tangle, posted 08-17-2018 4:17 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 436 by Tangle, posted 08-17-2018 9:55 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 438 of 441 (838264)
08-17-2018 10:39 AM
Reply to: Message 437 by Percy
08-17-2018 10:10 AM


Re: If abortion is understood to be ending a human life, THEN we can talk alternatives
If we're in any sense whatever "besties" it can only be because you are the common denominator. Otherwise we disagree on everything else.
Oh except abortion. How refreshing to have such agreement with a nonChristian on this.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 437 by Percy, posted 08-17-2018 10:10 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1434 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 440 of 441 (838324)
08-19-2018 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 439 by Percy
08-19-2018 7:11 AM


Re: Side Issue: Is the World Getting Better or Worse
Is this perhaps an indirect argument in favor of abortion? If so it's SO indirect I can't be sure. If your aim is to cut population how about putting all your efforts toward contraception rather than killing the unborn?
As for whether the world is getting better or worse biblical Christians see it as morally worsening practically by the minute these days and many of the things you support we see as the moral problems that are the real cause of disasters, the huge numbers of abortions being a major one. Gay marriage is another. These are the causes of God's judgments on this nation and the world, and it is these moral problems, plus many others, and their consequent judgments by God which are the REAL cause of all the physical earthly disasters that are coming. The causes are always spiritual. Emphasizing physical causes is only a distraction.
There is a solution to such things in obedience to God's laws and prayer to Him for guidance and mercy. But since the majority are going in the opposite direction the minority who seek God in these ways, though we have a restraining effect, can't stop the tide that is powered by the immoralities.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 439 by Percy, posted 08-19-2018 7:11 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024