Abortion

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Well I laugh at the idea of life beginning at conception, first of all.

You can laugh, but that IS when a new life begins. A life is created, and it grows until it is born. Whether it is unborn or not, no matter how small, it is still a life, always has been, and always will be.

Originally posted by Makedde
You can laugh, but that IS when a new life begins. A life is created, and it grows until it is born. Whether it is unborn or not, no matter how small, it is still a life, always has been, and always will be.

No it's not. What are you talking about?

Nobody here can prove life begins at conception. It's one of those altruistic pro-life beliefs.

-AC

Well, it is when the journey towards life starts properly, and the cell is alive, obviously.

To call it the beginning of life is a bit of an abuse of those words.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Well, it is when the journey towards life starts properly, and the cell is alive, obviously.

To call it the beginning of life is a bit of an abuse of those words.

So why is a baby not alive? Not a human being?

Is this being alive? Yes. He has the characteristics of life. That is, he can reproduce his own cells and develop them into a specific pattern of maturity and function. Or more simply, he is not dead.

Is this being human? Yes. This is a unique being, distinguishable totally from any other living organism, completely human in all of his or her characteristics, including the 46 human chromosomes, and can develop only into a fully mature human.

Is this being complete? Yes. Nothing new will be added from the time of union of sperm and egg until the death of the old man or woman except growth and development of what is already there at the beginning. All he needs is time to develop and mature.

Seems (to me at least), that it will be born as a full human being, then get larger..... nothing new happens, it doesn't become "more human" after birth.

FOR THE THIRD THAT IS UNHEARD!!!

Originally posted by sithsaber408

Is this being complete? Yes.

Admittedly the intellects of many of the posters on this site seem to be powered by a single cell.

So maybe you're right.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Admittedly the intellects of many of the posters on this site seem to be powered by a single cell.

So maybe you're right.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
So why is a baby not alive? Not a human being?

Is this being alive? Yes. He has the characteristics of life. That is, he can reproduce his own cells and develop them into a specific pattern of maturity and function. Or more simply, he is not dead.

Is this being human? Yes. This is a unique being, distinguishable totally from any other living organism, completely human in all of his or her characteristics, including the 46 human chromosomes, and can develop only into a fully mature human.

Is this being complete? Yes. Nothing new will be added from the time of union of sperm and egg until the death of the old man or woman except growth and development of what is already there at the beginning. All he needs is time to develop and mature.

Seems (to me at least), that it will be born as a full human being, then get [B]larger..... nothing new happens, it doesn't become "more human" after birth.
[/B]

Life is not soley dependant on cells. (As I've said before) when we die, the cells continue to grow in the nails, hair, and probably other areas of the body. Does that mean we are not really dead? No. As far as I know, clinical death is when the the brain and the heart cease to function.

So what defines "human life"? I go by the old saying "I think, therefore, I am", but obviously, you disagree.

What defines the term "human"? Would you say that one page of writing is the same as a book? From there, the writer, pouring in material, can expand it into a full-on novel, but is that page in itself a book? Obviously not. Therefore, the being is not complete.

And in terms of size=worth, you're guilty of thinking the same thing. I'm sure you've killed a fly sometime in your life, but have you killed a deer? Just because the fly is smaller and does not have cognitive abilities, does that mean its life is worth less than a deer's?

Originally posted by crazylozer
Life is not soley dependant on cells. (As I've said before) when we die, the cells continue to grow in the nails, hair, and probably other areas of the body. Does that mean we are not really dead? No. As far as I know, clinical death is when the the brain and the heart cease to function.

So what defines "human life"? I go by the old saying "I think, therefore, I am", but obviously, you disagree.

What defines the term "human"? Would you say that one page of writing is the same as a book? From there, the writer, pouring in material, can expand it into a full-on novel, but is that page in itself a book? Obviously not. Therefore, the being is not complete.

And in terms of size=worth, you're guilty of thinking the same thing. I'm sure you've killed a fly sometime in your life, but have you killed a deer? Just because the fly is smaller and does not have cognitive abilities, does that mean its life is worth less than a deer's?

Of course not, and neither is a baby worth less than a human.

A baby is a human.

A cell isn't.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
A baby [b]is a human.

A cell isn't. [/B]

Is this being human? Yes. This is a unique being, distinguishable totally from any other living organism, completely human in all of his or her characteristics, including the 46 human chromosomes, and can develop only into a fully mature human.

Is this being complete? Yes. Nothing new will be added from the time of union of sperm and egg until the death of the old man or woman except growth and development of what is already there at the beginning. All he needs is time to develop and mature.

Seems (to me at least), that it will be born as a full human being, then get larger..... nothing new happens, it doesn't become "more human" after birth.

FOR THE THIRD THAT IS UNHEARD!!!

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Is this being alive? Yes. He has the characteristics of life. That is, he can reproduce his own cells and develop them into a specific pattern of maturity and function. Or more simply, he is not dead.

Could be describing bacteria.

Originally posted by sithsaber408

Is this being human? Yes. This is a unique being, distinguishable totally from any other living organism, completely human in all of his or her characteristics, including the 46 human chromosomes, and can develop only into a fully mature human.

No it's not 'human'. It's a single cell. It will become a human.

Originally posted by sithsaber408

Is this being complete? Yes. Nothing new will be added from the time of union of sperm and egg until the death of the old man or woman except growth and development of what is already there at the beginning. All he needs is time to develop and mature.

Seems (to me at least), that it will be born as a full human being, then get larger..... nothing new happens, it doesn't become "more human" after birth.

Haha. Yes, that one cell just gets bigger, and is born as a huge ball.

By this logic, children are adults.

Gary Glitter will be pleased.

third trimester baby's fit the bill for all you look for in humans VVD where does that put the law?

Originally posted by soleran30
third trimester baby's fit the bill for all you look for in humans VVD where does that put the law?

It doesn't affect the murder law, because the murder law isn't based on when a foetus is 'human'.

The medical and scientific information informs the abortion law though, because they can judge when it really is too late to abort.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
It doesn't affect the murder law, because the murder law isn't based on when a foetus is 'human'.

The medical and scientific information informs the abortion law though, because they can judge when it really is too late to abort.

No they don't I have shown pages ago where the development of a fetus is and the definition upon development. That being the case the law doesn't match the science.

Regardless its not against the law it just doesn't match science.

my bad

Not sure what you mean with those two posts.

if we take the definition of a human and take the definition of a thrid trimester baby they coincide..............................hence the law isn't keeping up with science and thats somthing I have said a few times already.

Originally posted by soleran30
if we take the definition of a human and take the definition of a thrid trimester baby they coincide..............................hence the law isn't keeping up with science and thats somthing I have said a few times already.

Murder law isn't based on that point though, so it's neither here nor there.

As for abortion law, those abortions aren't really performed anyway.

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Murder law isn't based on that point though, so it's neither here nor there.

As for abortion law, those abortions aren't really performed anyway.

yeah I already said that................................and the fact they are performed at all is disturbing. Anyway my point is the law and science don't always match up as in this case.

Originally posted by soleran30
yeah I already said that................................and the fact they are performed at all is disturbing. Anyway my point is the law and science don't always match up as in this case.

Hmm.

I guess it depends on the reasoning behind the abortion, even so. Obviously if it's for silly reasons, then it would seem not to match.