Abortion: can a mother hurt the embryo?

[leroy]

None of your comment above is of interest to me. There was a time in our discussions when that wouldn't have been a factor. If it was of interest to you, I would respect that and try to give you a clear answer to your post. But since you wouldn't extend the same courtesy in return, I lost interest in what you want several days ago. Now, you've added personal insults. My reply will address only matters of interest to me. Here are three such things:

• Cornered? You flatter yourself. You reply to almost nothing written to you, you can't make an argument, and you can't rebut one made to you. You're not the player you think you are.

• I resent your disrespectful demeanor. Your unwillingness to cooperate was an enigma, but it didn't diminish my willingness to be of service to you if I could. I had been nothing but polite and supportive to you. But, as you can see from this post, that ship has sailed. I feel no duty to consider your feelings any longer.

• Perhaps you should have considered the advice I gave you about thinking about what others want from you in return for them showing interest in your questions and comments. I told you explicitly what I need from you to continue giving you what you want from me, and you blew it off. What did you think would happen if you kept ignoring that? Then you added insult. How did you think that that would affect future relations between us?

Again more exuses to avoid an answer.

Even if you are correct and even if I am horrible person that is not worthy of your time or your respect, or your knowledge, .. that is not an excuse to lie and claim that you have answered the question when you haven’t.

You reply to almost nothing written to you, you can't make an argument, and you can't rebut one made to you. You're not the player you think you ar

If you think I haven respond to an argument, why don’t y you simply quote it or ask again?........how can I possibly be more polite?... Imagine how dishonest would it be if I would have responded in the same dishonest way that you did.

Imagine how dishonest would I have sounded if we would have had this hypothetical conversation

Me: your questions have been answered

You: No you haven´t

Me: yes I did

You: well care to quote your answer? Care to answer again? (perhaps I simply missed the answer)

Me: No no I will not do that, I already answered and I lost interest in you

Wouldn’t I sound like a Jerk if this conversation wound have been real?

--

If I ASK a question you are free to decide if you want to answer or to ignore it, but please do not lie and claim that you already answered the question.- …


BTW if you quote your answer to that question I would be the first to apologize

 

[Sheldon]

That would be a decision for the woman and her doctor to make, not me.

Fair play, nailed it....to recap it's not an individual - topologically connected, sharing an immune system, and a metabolism, and receiving all nutrients and oxygen through the blood of the woman.

1. Not sentient.
2. Not able to feel pain.
3. In the vast majority of cases nothing more than a clump of insentient cells.
4. Until birth, not a person.

5. Lastly I don't care if it's in there writing poetry, it cannot trump the rights to bodily autonomy, that every single anti-choicer has demonstrated they want for themselves.

 

[crossfire]

SO just to be clear,

The mother can kill the fetus if she wants regardless if

1 He is conscious or nor}t

2 is sentient or not

3 has 6 senses or not

Is this your view?

My view is that a pregnant person should be able to either manage her pregnancy or end her pregnancy. The details regarding this would be between her and her doctor. It is not my place to make that decision for her.

Consciousness: the state of being awake aware of one's surroundings and your own existance.

I would call this sentience. (You need senses to be aware of your surroundings. )

What about beings that are not sentient in this moment, but will be in the future? People in comma,for example?

People in comas have once been sentient and would have had to opportunity to convey their wishes either informally to those close to them or formally via a living will.

Pre-sentient embryos have never had the capacity to understand living and dying, much less form any thoughts or wishes about it.

yes some embryos die soon, so what?

Indeed. So what?

 

[KWED]

you are lagerly confused

We've all been there!

 

[KWED]

Personally, I value sentient beings the most.

@leroy has admitted that he values his pet over someone else's 3 year old child, so you can ignore pretty much every claim he makes about "person/value".

 

[crossfire]

@leroy has admitted that he values his pet over someone else's 3 year old child, so you can ignore pretty much every claim he makes about "person/value".

He is obviously a sentient being who is worthy of compassion, as sentient beings can be recognized by their capacity for delusion.

 

[leroy]

My view is that a pregnant person should be able to either manage her pregnancy or end her pregnancy. The details regarding this would be between her and her doctor. It is not my place to make that decision for her.

Ok so the whole discussion on weather if the fetus is a person not or if the fetus has the same value as a child, is irrelevant, you are in favor of abortion anyway………….is that a correct representation of your view?


Do I have the right to kill any person who is causing the same level of “suffering” that an unwanted fetus causes to a pregnant woman? (obviously not)……… so why giving pregnant woman a special right to kill innocent people







1 had no conscious in the past

2 is not conscious today

3 but will be conscious in the future

You would say that this is not a person worthy of human rights? Is this a correct representation of your view?

People in comas have once been sentient and would have had to opportunity to convey their wishes either informally to those close to them or formally via a living will.

Pre-sentient embryos have never had the capacity to understand living and dying, much less form any thoughts or wishes about it.

So, if someone

1 had no conscious in the past

2 is not conscious today

3 but will be conscious in the future

You would say that this is not a person worthy of human rights? Is this a correct representation of your view?

Indeed. So what?

Some embryos die soon, so what? what is your point? why did you mentinoed that fact? is that suppose to be an argument?

 

[leroy]

@leroy has admitted that he values his pet over someone else's 3 year old child, so you can ignore pretty much every claim he makes about "person/value".

Do you have pets? (lets say you do)

I have a 3yo daughter, so please instead of wasting money on your pet (say $10usd a week) please send me the money so that I can buy food and clothes for my daughter.

By your logic, you should value more my daughter than your pets, so please send your money or else admit that you value more your pet than my 3yo daughter.

o you can ignore pretty much every claim

Yes once your arguments have been refuted by me and once you are cornered and there is no rational way to save your pro choice view // your best option is to ignore me

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Again more excuses to avoid an answer.

I don't need excuses not to answer you. It would be very easy to write out the answer you seek in a sentence or two, and a little more effort to scour the RF archives for examples from the past, but I won't do it for you. I've told you why, but as is always the case, it's as if I'm talking to myself. My posts to you have the same effect as if I never hit the Post Reply button. I've explained to you that because of your unbelievable and extreme indifference to what others want from you, I've lost interest in what you want from me.

Hopefully, this is what you were going for. Hopefully, it was your plan to steadfastly refuse to cooperate in our discussions despite repeated requests that you deliberately chose to not even acknowledged, and to ignore what is written to you until I just lost interest in what you want. Because there was no other place for this to end up. I would prefer to think that you were aware of all of that, and that that was your plan, rather than it being something that surprised you.

Ok so the whole discussion on weather if the fetus is a person not or if the fetus has the same value as a child, is irrelevant, you are in favor of abortion anyway………….is that a correct representation of your view?

Now I'm jealous. Did you actually just read somebody's words, try to understand them, and remember them in order to make a responsive comment that indicates that that happened? Did you just show a glimmer of interest in the words of another? You've never done that for me. I can't think of a single declarative sentence I've written to you that I know you've read and understood. You certainly haven't understood my last few posts to you, the ones that explain that what you want from me is no longer of interest to me. Go ahead and give me a third or fourth volley of insults revealing that you have no idea why your request is denied, and asking me again to show you where I posted something or to explain myself again.

 

[crossfire]

Ok so the whole discussion on weather if the fetus is a person not or if the fetus has the same value as a child, is irrelevant, you are in favor of abortion anyway………….is that a correct representation of your view?

I am pro-choice. Pregnancy is a medical condition that can either be managed or ended according to the pregnant person's choice.

Do I have the right to kill any person who is causing the same level of “suffering” that an unwanted fetus causes to a pregnant woman? (obviously not)……… so why giving pregnant woman a special right to kill innocent people

If you have an embryo inside your body you don't want there you have the right to have it removed. No special rights involved here.

1 had no conscious in the past

2 is not conscious today

3 but will be conscious in the future

You would say that this is not a person worthy of human rights? Is this a correct representation of your view?






So, if someone

1 had no conscious in the past

2 is not conscious today

3 but will be conscious in the future

You would say that this is not a person worthy of human rights? Is this a correct representation of your view?

not relevant if it is inside someone else's body.

Some embryos die soon, so what? what is your point? why did you mentinoed that fact? is that suppose to be an argument?

Embryos that die before they become conscious will not be conscious in the future. (Blinding flash of the obvious.)

 

[leroy]

I don't need excuses not to answer you. It would be very easy to write out the answer you seek in a sentence or two, and a little more effort to scour the RF archives for examples from the past, but I won't do it for you. I've told you why, but as is always the case, it's as if I'm talking to myself. My posts to you have the same effect as if I never hit the Post Reply button. I've explained to you that because of your unbelievable and extreme indifference to what others want from you, I've lost interest in what you want from me.

Hopefully, this is what you were going for. Hopefully, it was your plan to steadfastly refuse to cooperate in our discussions despite repeated requests that you deliberately chose to not even acknowledged, and to ignore what is written to you until I just lost interest in what you want. Because there was no other place for this to end up. I would prefer to think that you were aware of all of that, and that that was your plan, rather than it being something that surprised you.



Now I'm jealous. Did you actually just read somebody's words, try to understand them, and remember them in order to make a responsive comment that indicates that that happened? Did you just show a glimmer of interest in the words of another? You've never done that for me. I can't think of a single declarative sentence I've written to you that I know you've read and understood. You certainly haven't understood my last few posts to you, the ones that explain that what you want from me is no longer of interest to me. Go ahead and give me a third or fourth volley of insults revealing that you have no idea why your request is denied, and asking me again to show you where I posted something or to explain myself again.

So you basically don’t have time/interest in answering a simple question (perhaps just 1 or 2 sentences)

But you do have the time and the interest to right 3 paragraphs of the same stuff that you have said like 5 or 6 times earlier.

DO you understand why this alleged lack of interest, seems to be an excuse for not answering the question?

 

[Sheldon]

....and around and around we go. Yet the fact remains, not one antichoicer would accept losing their own bodily autonomy to prevent another sentient human dying needlessly, thus the ludicrous claim women should, and for an insentient clump of cells, has no credible logical or moral credence. No matter how many lies are peddled about abortions, or about blastocysts and foetuses.

 

[leroy]

I am pro-choice. Pregnancy is a medical condition that can either be managed or ended according to the pregnant person's choice.



If you have an embryo inside your body you don't want there you have the right to have it removed. No special rights involved here.

not relevant if it is inside someone else's body.

Well if a person is an obstacle in my life and produces the same level of suffering than an embryo would to a pregnant woman, why cant I just kill that person?? What is so special about “being inside the body”? why is the location of the fetus relevant?....... why is it that I people only get to kill people inside once body?

Embryos that die before they become conscious will not be conscious in the future. (Blinding flash of the obvious.)

Sure, killing an embryo that will never become conscious wouldn’t be wrong (this would be like killing a person in comma that will never wake up) despite any efforts you do to save him.............
So if you have some sort of time machine and you´d know with 100% certainty that a woman would have a natural abortion next week,(and nothing can be done to prevent it) then it could be argued that a guided abortion in a clinic would be justified in that situation.



But again so what?

(Blinding flash of the obvious.)

it´s not obvious to me, care to develope the argumnet?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

So you basically don’t have time/interest in answering a simple question (perhaps just 1 or 2 sentences)

I have the time, but not the interest. You know what I'm interested in, or you should. I've told you repeatedly.

Why are you so fixated on this issue? What difference does it make to you how I answer any question, even the answers you read? Answer this for me however you like: "The reason is consider aborting an embryo but not a child ethical is ..." You should already know the answer based on previous posting both to you and others in this thread and other threads in which you and I discussed abortion, about the same time as the thread about resurrection. But even if you never read any of that or never understood it or couldn't remember it by the next day, you should be able to finish the sentence yourself anyway. What could the missing words possibly be? Probably not because I want all birth to cease. Probably not because I have a use for the dead embryos. Probably not to honor Satan.

And if you really did want those answers (again), why did you choose a course of action that pretty much guaranteed that you wouldn't get my cooperation? Do you not see what you're doing here, asking me the same questions over and over while disregarding what is written to you other than that I'm done answering your questions for you? Did you really think that that would elicit the answers you sought rather than that it would have the opposite effect?

This is what interests me - human behavior, psychology. I can't escape the idea that what you do makes sense to you from your perspective. I can't escape the idea that there are principles that direct you to make the choices you do - some misconception, some fear or insecurity, some type of trolling - some idea that if I knew what it was, I could say, "I don't agree with that, but if I believed what he did, I might behave the same way."

Maybe you're terrified of answering questions including why you're afraid. I can't think of anything that would cause a person to behave as you. I'm searching for an answer if it's possible to get one. What has to be going through a person's mind for them to post as you have, to make those choices seem like the right ones?

But you do have the time and the interest to right 3 paragraphs of the same stuff that you have said like 5 or 6 times earlier.

Yes, I do have the time, and writing those paragraphs interests me. I described it to you earlier as tapping the glass. Do you remember that and what was meant?

DO you understand why this alleged lack of interest, seems to be an excuse for not answering the question?

Yes. I consider the conclusion ill-formed, but understand why you hold it. It's the only answer you can conceive of for my posting choices despite having been given the correct answer "5 or 6 times earlier."

 

[crossfire]

Well if a person is an obstacle in my life and produces the same level of suffering than an embryo would to a pregnant woman, why cant I just kill that person?? What is so special about “being inside the body”? why is the location of the fetus relevant?....... why is it that I people only get to kill people inside once body?

See posts #367, #371, and #634.

Sure, killing an embryo that will never become conscious wouldn’t be wrong (this would be like killing a person in comma that will never wake up) despite any efforts you do to save him.............
So if you have some sort of time machine and you´d know with 100% certainty that a woman would have a natural abortion next week,(and nothing can be done to prevent it) then it could be argued that a guided abortion in a clinic would be justified in that situation.

It will never become conscious if it is expelled from the body before it is viable, by whatever means.

But again so what?


it´s not obvious to me, care to develope the argumnet?

Which part of not ever becoming conscious do you not understand?

 

[leroy]

I have the time, but not the interest. You know what I'm interested in, or you should. I've told you repeatedly.

Why are you so fixated on this issue? What difference does it make to you how I answer any question, even the answers you read? Answer this for me however you like: "The reason is consider aborting an embryo but not a child ethical is ..." You should already know the answer based on previous posting both to you and others in this thread and other threads in which you and I discussed abortion, about the same time as the thread about resurrection. But even if you never read any of that or never understood it or couldn't remember it by the next day, you should be able to finish the sentence yourself anyway. What could the missing words possibly be? Probably not because I want all birth to cease. Probably not because I have a use for the dead embryos. Probably not to honor Satan.

And if you really did want those answers (again), why did you choose a course of action that pretty much guaranteed that you wouldn't get my cooperation? Do you not see what you're doing here, asking me the same questions over and over while disregarding what is written to you other than that I'm done answering your questions for you? Did you really think that that would elicit the answers you sought rather than that it would have the opposite effect?

This is what interests me - human behavior, psychology. I can't escape the idea that what you do makes sense to you from your perspective. I can't escape the idea that there are principles that direct you to make the choices you do - some misconception, some fear or insecurity, some type of trolling - some idea that if I knew what it was, I could say, "I don't agree with that, but if I believed what he did, I might behave the same way."

Maybe you're terrified of answering questions including why you're afraid. I can't think of anything that would cause a person to behave as you. I'm searching for an answer if it's possible to get one. What has to be going through a person's mind for them to post as you have, to make those choices seem like the right ones?



Yes, I do have the time, and writing those paragraphs interests me. I described it to you earlier as tapping the glass. Do you remember that and what was meant?



Yes. I consider the conclusion ill-formed, but understand why you hold it. It's the only answer you can conceive of for my posting choices despite having been given the correct answer "5 or 6 times earlier."

I am only interested in you answering the question and having a conversation around you answer. Don’t expect me to deal with other stuff.

 

[leroy]

See posts #367, #371, and #634.

post 634
Alright, if geography does not matter when determining personhood:

Fertility clinics deal with blastocytes all the time. The owners of said blastocytes can choose to:

1. use them immediately
2. freeze them for later use
3. donate them to others seeking fertility treatments
4. donate them to science for research
5. have the clinic dispose of them

If these blastocytes are persons, then options 3 and 4, and possibly option 5, would be human trafficking.

If these blastocytes outside of a woman's body are not persons, then neither are blastocytes inside a woman's body, because geography does not matter!


That doesnt answer my question.

If pregnant woman have the right to kill a fetus even if the fetus where a sentient person (like a child)

Why isn’t it ok to kill any other person that is producing the same level of suffering that a fetus causes to the mother?

Porst 634 doesn’t answer to the question...........shuld I also reed post #367, #371,or are these just other 2 random posts that dont answer to the question ether?

Which part of not ever becoming conscious do you not understand?

I don’t understand how do you go from

1 some embryos die before being concous

To

2 therefore it is ok to kill embryos


There are obviously some missing premises in the argument, so which premises are these?

Fertility clinics deal with blastocytes all the time. The owners of said blastocytes can choose to:

1. use them immediately
2. freeze them for later use
3. donate them to others seeking fertility treatments
4. donate them to science for research
5. have the clinic dispose of them

Yes, which is why fertility clinics are horrible and as a pro-lifer I am against them.[/QUOTE]

 

[Subduction Zone]

@leroy , I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. I will assume that you are not debating dishonestly. Your problem may be one of severe cognitive dissonance. Since your reasoning is never consistent. Perhaps your problem is that you seem to lack a compass. What do you base your beliefs upon? Why do you believe that abortion is wrong? And you may be asked further questions for clarification. There is no doubt that you have been refuted in every claim that you made, even though you are one of the few people that do not see it. Perhaps your problem is that you resent people having sex. One of the problems of the Christian Bible is that it tried to turn a perfectly normal and healthy activity into a shameful one and that has scarred many people for life.

If we get down to the whys and wherefores of your beliefs we may understand your position more clearly and you might even be able to debate more properly.

 

[crossfire]

post 634
Alright, if geography does not matter when determining personhood:

Fertility clinics deal with blastocytes all the time. The owners of said blastocytes can choose to:

1. use them immediately
2. freeze them for later use
3. donate them to others seeking fertility treatments
4. donate them to science for research
5. have the clinic dispose of them

If these blastocytes are persons, then options 3 and 4, and possibly option 5, would be human trafficking.

If these blastocytes outside of a woman's body are not persons, then neither are blastocytes inside a woman's body, because geography does not matter!


That doesnt answer my question.

If pregnant woman have the right to kill a fetus even if the fetus where a sentient person (like a child)

Why isn’t it ok to kill any other person that is producing the same level of suffering that a fetus causes to the mother?

Porst 634 doesn’t answer to the question...........shuld I also reed post #367, #371,or are these just other 2 random posts that dont answer to the question ether?

She has the right to either manage her pregnancy or end her pregnancy, just like any other medical condition.

I don’t understand how do you go from

1 some embryos die before being concous

To

2 therefore it is ok to kill embryos


There are obviously some missing premises in the argument, so which premises are these?

It was addressing your claim that you can't terminate a pregnancy because embryos are potential consciousness. You can't lose what you never had.

Yes, which is why fertility clinics are horrible and as a pro-lifer I am against them.

Does closely examining the circumstances regarding human reproduction make you squeamish?

 

[KWED]

post 634
Alright, if geography does not matter when determining personhood:

Fertility clinics deal with blastocytes all the time. The owners of said blastocytes can choose to:

1. use them immediately
2. freeze them for later use
3. donate them to others seeking fertility treatments
4. donate them to science for research
5. have the clinic dispose of them

If these blastocytes are persons, then options 3 and 4, and possibly option 5, would be human trafficking.

If these blastocytes outside of a woman's body are not persons, then neither are blastocytes inside a woman's body, because geography does not matter!


That doesnt answer my question.

If pregnant woman have the right to kill a fetus even if the fetus where a sentient person (like a child)

Why isn’t it ok to kill any other person that is producing the same level of suffering that a fetus causes to the mother?

Porst 634 doesn’t answer to the question...........shuld I also reed post #367, #371,or are these just other 2 random posts that dont answer to the question ether?







I don’t understand how do you go from

1 some embryos die before being concous

To

2 therefore it is ok to kill embryos


There are obviously some missing premises in the argument, so which premises are these?



Yes, which is why fertility clinics are horrible and as a pro-lifer I am against them.

You are absolutely and unequivocally a troll who has no interest in honest debate.
I am baffled as to what you think you are achieving here. You only serve to weaken the anti-abortion position.
Well done!