Abortion

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
A fetus has the potential to become a human being. A zygote has the potential to become a human being. An oocyte has the potential to become a human being. So? It isn't currently a human being, ergo it isn't afforded the rights of a human being.

50% of fertilized oocytes are lost to spontaneous abortion, prior to the women even knowing she's pregnant.

Wha...huh?

I'm weaseling out by providing you with every conceivable reason, as are others, as to why it's not a future anything, as to why it shouldn't be treated like something it isn't. YOU then deny fact, "Lalala"-ing, and I'm somehow the weasel? You can't admit when you're being proven bang wrong, RJ. You hate it. You hate the fact that I just civilly, and without insult, proved your silly little debate wrong.

Yes, I can definitely see how that would work...

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I just think that since it has the "potential" to be a human being, that's all that matters. just because it isn't a human being at that exact moment, that doesn't change anything, not in my opinion.

It isn't one, so it doesn't deserve the rights of one, does it?

You dare pop at me for acting like my word is "law", then you constantly take a stance of "This is how I see it, so nothing, even fact, can convince me otherwise.".

It's ludicrous. You have zero debating ability in you.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Wha...huh?

I'm weaseling out by providing you with every conceivable reason, as are others, as to why it's not a future anything, as to why it shouldn't be treated like something it isn't. YOU then deny fact, "Lalala"-ing, and I'm somehow the weasel? You can't admit when you're being proven bang wrong, RJ. You hate it. You hate the fact that I just civilly, and without insult, proved your silly little debate wrong.

Yes, I can definitely see how that would work...

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I just think that since it has the "potential" to be a human being, that's all that matters. just because it isn't a human being at that exact moment, that doesn't change anything, not in my opinion.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
then why couldn't you just answer the question I posted? being very civil here, in case you haven't noticed.

"this fetus is a potential human being, if allowed to develop properly. are we agreed on this part?".

Me; "No, that's not how it is, so we're not agreed.".

It's ALREADY a potential human being. Fact is; you are not focusing on what it IS.

What it IS NOT, is a human being, so it does not deserve rights of one. Being a "potential" something doesn't count in this debate. An egg is a potential omelette, I've gave you a billion examples as to why your "It's a future human being." is irrelevant, you chose to ignore them because they are devestating to your case.

I answered your question, just not the way you want.

-AC

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
An oocyte has the potential to become a human being. A spermatocyte has the potential to become a human being. "Potential" counts for naught, the future is not predestined nor immutable. Actuality is all that matters, legally, scientifically, medically.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I get what you are saying, I really do, we just see it differently. I disagree with potential meaning nothing.

Actually unbelievable.

It's come to the point where science, medicine and law are all wrong, despite having facts, because you "See it differently.".

Almost as credible as someone saying; "The Sun isn't hot. I feel it differently.".

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

It's ALREADY a potential human being. Fact is; you are not focusing on what it IS.

What it IS is NOT a human being, so it does not deserve rights of one.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I get what you are saying, I really do, we just see it differently. I disagree with potential meaning nothing.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Actually unbelievable.

It's come to the point where science, medicine and law are all wrong, despite having facts, because you "See it differently.".

Almost as credible as someone saying; "The Sun isn't hot. I feel it differently.".

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
See, "it is a potential human being already." At the moment of conception, it is a potential human being. By being a potential human being, it has a future. there are many possible futures for it. abortion. adoption. death at age 5. death by old age. It deserves the chance to live it's life, whether it is a wasted life or a great life.

It hasn't got a future, it has a POTENTIAL life, a POTENTIAL human being.

Potential, as proven by fact, does not account for anything. It IS NOT a human being, therefore it does not deserve the rights of one.

You wish to desperately cling onto this thread so you are ignoring fact, and then expect us to treat you with respect. It's the most outlandish claim.

You do not have the right to see things differently if the situation is objective, which it is. Both of us are laying out facts and you are ignoring them.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
science and medicine are disproved all the time. law? man's law? as in traffic laws, or are we talking laws of physics?

But in this case they have not been, and won't be, because it is a FACT; legally, medically and scientifically, that a cell and a foetus are not human beings, are they? No. They are not.

Therefore, provide us with accurate reasoning as to why they should attain the rights of something they are not.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It hasn't got a future, it has a POTENTIAL life, a POTENTIAL human being.

Potential, as proven by fact, does not account for anything. It IS NOT a human being, therefore it does not deserve the rights of one.

You wish to desperately cling onto this thread so you are ignoring fact, and then expect us to treat you with respect. It's the most outlandish claim.

You do not have the right to see things differently if the situation is objective, which it is. Both of us are laying out facts and you are ignoring them.

But in this case they have not been, and won't be, because it is a FACT; legally, medically and scientifically, that a cell and a foetus are not human beings, are they? No. They are not.

Therefore, provide us with accurate reasoning as to why they should attain the rights of something they are not.

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
See, "it is a potential human being already." At the moment of conception, it is a potential human being.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
By being a potential human being, it has a future. there are many possible futures for it. abortion. adoption. death at age 5. death by old age. It deserves the chance to live it's life, whether it is a wasted life or a great life.

Prior to conception both spermatocytes and oocyte have the potential to become a human being. But they aren't at that present. They have no predestined immutable future.

Assuming they do meet, at the moment of conception its present actuality involves being a single cell with two pronuclei. They may or may not fuse. It travels towards the uterus, dividing where it may or may not properly implant itself to the fundus of the uterus, where it may or may not properly undergo gastrulation. There are a multitude of "may or may nots," the only thing that matters along the process is the present actuality.

One of those may or may nots is whether the potential mother may or may not decide to have an abortion, the only thing that matters at that point is the current actuality that it is not a human being, and if she does decide to have an abortion that is the extent of its "future."

Originally posted by xmarksthespot

One of those is whether the potential mother may or may not decide to have an abortion, and if she does that is the extent of its future.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I have laid out why I think this. Either you missed it, or you are ignoring it. We see differently on what a "potential human being" is.

Why do you think you possess the ability to deny fact? The fact is, on many levels (Scientifically, legally, medically...) that you have yet to refute, it being a "potential" human being (As in possessing the ability to become something else.) does not mean anything.

We both know that foetuses and cells are not human beings, right? Why then do they deserve the rights of something they FACTUALLY are not? The answer is; they do not.

They ARE potential human beings, POTENTIAL. Capable of BECOMING, possessing the ability to develop INTO. Not ARE, not EXISTING.

If your only desperation lifeline is "I see it differently!", when you have no right to in the face of fact, then you're more or less out of the game.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
this is what I am saying. should the mother opt for abortion, this is the fetus's future. a short future, but still a future.

There was more to that post.

I'd understand if you're afraid to reply though. He asked you a question:

Is it a potential human being "Before or after the pronuclei fuse?".

It'd be respectful to answer.

-AC

There can be more questions, before or after implantation to the uterus, before or after proper gastrulation, and so on. As already stated 50% of fertilized oocytes are lost before the woman even knows she's pregnant... what of those potential human beings lost usually during menstruation?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
this is what I am saying. should the mother opt for abortion, this is the fetus's future. a short future, but still a future.

Predicted reply, despite proof; "I see it differently.".

-AC

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
There can be more questions, before or after implantation to the uterus, before or after proper gastrulation, and so on. As already stated 50% of fertilized oocytes are lost before the woman even knows she's pregnant... what of those potential human beings lost usually during menstruation?
No you've been referring to a "future life" as an actual human being that it "deserves" to live and "future" rights it "deserves" to have. These do not exist in the present actuality.

RJ, what do you actually know of science?

-AC

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
at what point does it obtain these rights? after the sperm enters the ovum? after the embryo implants in the uterus? when?

Medically, pregnancy does not even occur until after implantation to the uterus.

Legally, the fetus in utero does not attain the rights attributed to the mother iirc for the duration of gestation. Post-viability abortions are still legal for preservation of the life of the pregnant woman.

I would wager that the basis of your definition of potential human being entails that upon conception the zygote obtains a "soul" based upon your previous religious inclinations.