Abortion

[JoStories]

The fetus is actually breathing, as well, dear Jo, though not outside of the womb. Neveetheless, inside or out, that is still a woman's child, and the child is still a living human being. Riddle me this, if you would, if a child in the womb is not human, then to which species will it belong? Additionally, why is it that in every other case, the unborn child is regarded as a human being? What makes the issue of abortion any different concerning the status of the child?

The fetus does not breath. The fetus doesn't even have well differentiated lungs until the last trimester. This is particularly true of the 6th and 7'th months, The mother 'breaths' for the fetus. I'm not fond of childish 'riddle me this' remarks sir. And no matter how you term the fetus, it's still the woman's choice of whether to abort or not.

 

[viole]

Neither men not women have full bodily autonomy as a right. Compared. None of us, in the U.S. are allowed to inject ourselves with whatever drugs we wish, we don't have full sexual freedom to choose our partners until at least middle adolescence(depends on state), we don't even have the right to kill ourselves, why on earth should anyone think they have the right to kill another human for their own convenience. It is a sham, a mockery of the very concepts of rights and liberty, a disgrace of justice, and the desolation of our humanity and dignity as people that this is sanctioned.

What makes you think that a certain set of duplicating cells, for instance one day after fertilization, is a human being?

Let's have a look at how young embryos look like in their 4-cell form:

Would you call that a human being?

Ciao

- viole

 

[columbus]

What makes you think that a certain set of duplicating cells, for instance one day after fertilization, is a human being?

Look up "Life cycle of a placental mammal". It's very basic life science.
After that, the question is "Which human beings are persons?" History is littered with tragedies resulting from some human beings deciding that other human beings are not persons, and therefore expendable.

Tom

 

[McBell]

And this is the dictionary definition of a fetus:

"an unborn offspring of a mammal, in particular an unborn human baby more than eight weeks after conception."

Now try looking up the medical definition...

 

[McBell]

a. A person between birth and puberty.
b. A person who has not attained maturity or the age of legal majority.

a. An unborn infant; a fetus.
b. An infant; a baby.

The score is two to one.

only in your mind.

You will find you are flat out wrong when you stop using a laymans dictionary and use a medical dictionary to look up the medical terms.

 

[McBell]

I don't know, you tell me, did you not believe that a foetus isn't human? I believe that the fetus is human.

and here you are playing semantics games right after whining about semantics games.

Now the question is are you even aware you are playing the games you whine so much about?

 

[Revoltingest]

Look up "Life cycle of a placental mammal". It's very basic life science.
After that, the question is "Which human beings are persons?" History is littered with tragedies resulting from some human beings deciding that other human beings are not persons, and therefore expendable.
Tom

Still, we will wrestle with defining when life as a separate person begins.
No matter how much scientific progress we see, the definition will be arbitrary.
Some will say at conception. Others will say at birth. Many will be in between.
The beginning will be a definition based upon compromise. It won't be true,
just a convenient & uneasy consensus.

I like a perspective which was presented by an anti-abortion friend.
(It troubled him, & made it difficult to be anti-abortion. An interesting guy.)
Premise: One should not be forced to enable life for another person.
No one shouldn't have to give up an organ (eg, kidney) or otherwise
have one's body appropriated.

From the above premise, the right to have an abortion would be deduced.
The fetus, whether a person or mere precursor, would have rights
subservient to the mother, who has the right to end support for the fetus.

There are still vexing complexities to address....

1) Will society make this right a "window", eg, limiting abortion to the 1st 2/3 of gestation?
This would give ample opportunity for exercising the right to abortion, while avoiding
the possibly general objection to late term abortion of what many would consider a
"baby", ie, a person. This seems a reasonable compromise.

2) The mother would have right to terminate the pregnancy, but would have limitations
upon what she can do to her own body when it affects another person. Looking at a
longer time frame, if the mother did something which imposes damage upon the future
person (a fetus which is carried to term, born, & matures), this might be regulated.

Caution:
Before anyone fulminates at my bigoted, sexist, anti-feminist intersectional privileged ravings,
remember that this is only a perspective. I don't say that it's "true". Tis only to be considered.

 

[BilliardsBall]

As a professor, I have and in any debate I have assigned to my students, emotions had no part. One can be passionate about the topic but the minute that emotions become the catalyst for their arguments they have failed.

This isn't a formal debate. This is thread people flock to because they are motivated by emotion, including past hurts and life experience. I respectfully disagree in part, because I agree that emotions should be the catalyst for arguments, however, the facts can lead mature people to become quite emotional.

 

[BilliardsBall]

What makes you think that a certain set of duplicating cells, for instance one day after fertilization, is a human being?

Let's have a look at how young embryos look like in their 4-cell form:

Would you call that a human being?

Ciao

- viole

Faith sees things as they will be. So does hope. The question is, can a soul fit into a blastocyst? Once we tell each other the size of the human soul, we can know for sure.

I would also say that the mother experiences what can be sizable changes and experiences, even when the baby is as small as your photo. We see beautiful examples of symbiosis in the animal and plant kingdoms, and of course, among mammals in the gestation and birth processes.

 

[Mister Emu]

I hate being called an abomination, a whore, and an evil woman because I'm a bisexual poly feminist.

It isn't right that you have to deal with that.

That's fair. I shall in debates with you continue to refer to your position as pro-life. I request that in spite of the position that you take in that abortion is equated to murder, that I am not seen as somebody who wants to murder anyone or supports mass scale murder.

Thank you, and I don't see you as someone who wants to murder or supports mass scale murder.

I think that my defense against what I sincerely see as sexism in the pro-life platform isn't so much as an either/or dichotomy, but unintended consequences from the desire to protect what you see as life. It is unfortunate, IMO.

I think this is a bit tangential and if you'd rather have a separate discussion about it that is cool. This is a situation where I believe we may be talking past each other. When I think of sexism, or any other bigotry, I see it as an active intent or philosophy. I don't there can be unintended sexism. If I want something that negatively affects whites, blacks, men, women, etc. that doesn't make it racist or sexist; if I want something because it negatively affects whites, blacks, men, women, etc. that is when it becomes bigotry. In other words, just because Mussolini made the trains run on time* doesn't mean making trains run on time is fascist, as it were.

*I know that is propaganda.

Call it a meta-analysis of how abortion rights fit under the umbrella of women's rights and talking points overall.

I think there is another interesting discussion in here about whether we should view issues holistically/in situ, or absolutely outside of context, or both. I do tend to look at things absolutely, I have a somewhat Kantian/categorical imperative ethical outlook as well.

I do not see it as special autonomy. Pregnancy isn't special. It's a biological process. Calling it unique or special creates a separate sphere of meaning attributed to it that I don't believe fairly offers a woman much beyond being a walking incubator or a sacred cow (for lack of a better descriptor).

I don't mean special or unique in, as you put it, magical or mystical. You were attaching meaning and connotation that I didn't intend. I meant unique in that, as I said, it is unique to women. I meant special in the way the dictionary puts it as, "designed for a particular purpose". There is no general right to end pregnancies and you want(and are considered in the U.S. to have) a special right because women are situated through biology to carry the pregnancy.

That's great thanks. We appear to agree on legal abortion within very strict guidelines. Cheers.

Bunyip, what guidelines do you believe should exist upon abortion?

What makes you think that a certain set of duplicating cells, for instance one day after fertilization, is a human being?

What makes you think I was mucking about with unfounded ever-shifting metaphysical terms like "being"?

Would you call that a human being?

I'd call it a human life. Which is what matters, not whether it meets some magical threshold for "person" or "being".

 

[JoStories]

This isn't a formal debate. This is thread people flock to because they are motivated by emotion, including past hurts and life experience. I respectfully disagree in part, because I agree that emotions should be the catalyst for arguments, however, the facts can lead mature people to become quite emotional.

Good for you. I would fail you. Emotions have no part in a rational two sided debate.

 

[Sundance]

only in your mind.

You will find you are flat out wrong when you stop using a laymans dictionary and use a medical dictionary to look up the medical terms.

Mestemia, would you please care to enlighten me with the medical definitions of a "child" and "fetus" and to explain the difference?

 

[Sundance]

and here you are playing semantics games right after whining about semantics games.

Now the question is are you even aware you are playing the games you whine so much about?

This issue is no game, and my question for you is: would you care to explain the difference between a foetus and a child, then, dear sir?

 

[Sundance]

Now try looking up the medical definition...

Since I'm in a generally benevolent mood, Mestemia, I shall, indeed, humour you.

fetus
(foetus)
n.
a mammalian embryo during the later stages of development within the uterus. In human reproduction it refers to an unborn child from its eighth week of development.

and child

child
Etymology: AS, cild
1 a person of either sex between the time of birth and adolescence.
2 an unborn or recently born human being; fetus; neonate; infant.
3 an offspring or descendant; a son or daughter or a member of a particular tribe or clan.
4 one who is like a child or immature.

There you have it. Under medical definition number 2 of "child", a fetus falls. This second definition isn't at all different from what I've been saying, is it? Now that that is settled, I have another question for you. What is the difference between a foetus and a child, again? Developmental stage, if that. Y'know, I guess it's another instance of "all x's fall under the category of y, but not all y's fall under the category of x", wouldn't you agree?

 

[Sundance]

The fetus does not breath. The fetus doesn't even have well differentiated lungs until the last trimester. This is particularly true of the 6th and 7'th months, The mother 'breaths' for the fetus. I'm not fond of childish 'riddle me this' remarks sir. And no matter how you term the fetus, it's still the woman's choice of whether to abort or not.

To begin, I must sincerely apologise to you and thank you for your politeness. Additionally, I will admit that you, Jo, are indeed correct in saying that the choice of whether or not to abort is the woman's to make, and I recognise the inherent difficulties in making a decision like that. I do accept that as a believer in the freedom of individual will. However, any choice any person makes in itself has no influence whatsoever upon my (or really, anyone's) particular view of the choice being made. In any case, you have your opinion on the matter, I have mine, and both of us are strongly opinionated on this issue, so let us just remain calm, cease this pointless arguing, and at least try to work out our differences in belief. Can you dig it?

 

[Mister Emu]

Good for you. I would fail you. Emotions have no part in a rational two sided debate.

That is a very narrow view, even though I don't prefer emotional appeal we don't all subscribe to a Lockesian philosophy of discourse.

 

[McBell]

Since I'm in a generally benevolent mood, Mestemia, I shall, indeed, humour you.

fetus
(foetus)
n.
a mammalian embryo during the later stages of development within the uterus. In human reproduction it refers to an unborn child from its eighth week of development.

and child

child
Etymology: AS, cild
1 a person of either sex between the time of birth and adolescence.
2 an unborn or recently born human being; fetus; neonate; infant.
3 an offspring or descendant; a son or daughter or a member of a particular tribe or clan.
4 one who is like a child or immature.

There you have it. Under medical definition number 2 of "child", a fetus falls. This second definition isn't at all different from what I've been saying, is it? Now that that is settled, I have another question for you. What is the difference between a foetus and a child, again? Developmental stage, if that. Y'know, I guess it's another instance of "all x's fall under the category of y, but not all y's fall under the category of x", wouldn't you agree?

Try using a medical dictionary and not the "medical" section of the laymans dictionary...

From Stedman's Medical Dictionary 28th Edition:

Fetus​

1. 1. The unborn young of a viviparous animal following the embryonic period.
   2. In humans, the product of conception from the end of the eighth week of gestation to the moment of birth.

Baby

An infant; a newborn child​

Infant

A child younger than one year​

 

[Sundance]

Try using a medical dictionary and not the "medical" section of the laymans dictionary...

From Stedman's Medical Dictionary 28th Edition:

Fetus​

1. 1. The unborn young of a viviparous animal following the embryonic period.
   2. In humans, the product of conception from the end of the eighth week of gestation to the moment of birth.

Baby

An infant; a newborn child​

Infant

A child younger than one year​

Interesting definition of "fetus". Though, what does it prove, except that you merely posted a similarly worded definition to the one I had? In addition, did you ever differentiate a fetus and a child in your response? No, you did not. And FYI, the offspring of a human parent is called a child, so, as I had aforementioned, a fetus technically counts as a "child". Fetus, infant, baby.....these are all children in one definition or another. So, what exactly is your point?

 

[McBell]

Interesting definition of "fetus". Though, what does it prove, except that you merely posted a similarly worded definition to the one I had? And FYI, the offspring of a human parent is called a child, so, as I had aforementioned, a fetus technically counts as a "child". So, what is your point?

It proves that there is a difference between a fetus and a baby and to use the two terms interchangeably is dishonest.

now that it has been pointed out to you there is a difference, every time you say that abortion is murdering a baby, you are flat out lying.

 

[Sundance]

It proves that there is a difference between a fetus and a baby and to use the two terms interchangeably is dishonest.

now that it has been pointed out to you there is a difference, every time you say that abortion is murdering a baby, you are flat out lying.

When did I say a fetus and a baby were the same? I said a fetus had technically counted as a child. (Which it does, and ironically, you STILL have YET to refute.) Second, I did not in any of my posts call abortion "murder". A difficult issue? Yes. Murder? No. Don't ever again put deceitful words in my mouth. You got it all twisted, Mestemia.