A new push to define 'person,' and to outlaw abortion in the process

Originally posted by Kryties
So what happens when a mother miscarries? Should we all pick up our pitchforks and try to sue Mother Nature?

Now your just making senseless and meaningless analogies

Originally posted by Kryties
Like I said this argument is ridiculous. The egg/zygote has no idea that it is even alive, it does not even know what the concept of alive is.

There are also many adults and elderly people in hospitals that are almost vegetables and don't even know that they are alive either.

Some patients stay in comas for over 9 months as well.

btw, even a 1month of baby doesn't understand the concept of being alive either, but what does that have to do with anything?

reply to post by ModernAcademia


K.I.S.S.

Keep it simple stupid.

The pro-life group just love to overcomplicate the issue with rhetoric and philosophical mumbo jumbo about consciousness and what not.

A parasite is unable to survive without the host, therefore the host should be able to decide whether they want a parasite feeding off them. If not, they should be able to rid themselves of the parasite.

It is not the only option available, but it should always remain an option, otherwise you reduce adult women to the role of mere "breeder". Where should they become pregnant, they suddenly realize they forfeit all of their rights as an individual to the state because they became pregnant.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
It's not JUST her body though
that's the entire issue

there is a 2nd body there

you saying the govt. can say anything is the same as the govt. shouldn't tell you that you can't murder your neighbour

Right, and as a person, they both have equal rights. So, if she doesn't want the egg, take it out, put it in a petri dish, and let it grow as it may.

There's widespread hypocrisy in the anti-abortion movement. If an egg is a person, then aborting it is murder. Is it right to murder a person if its birth can damage the woman? If the woman was raped, is it right to murder a person who is a product of a violent act? What about a product of incest? For some reason, an egg is okay to murder under these circumstances, but not under other ones?

There's no legal grounds for abortion under any circumstances if the egg is defined as a person, because the law can't sanction capital punishment of an innocent person that has no motive.

Once again, more hypocrisy from people who'd rather spend their time dictating the lives of others than living their own. Must be good to have the spare time!

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Actually, even a century ago those elderly folks would have passed away years before they got that bad. It is modern medicine that keeps them alive. I actually discussed this with my grandfather a year before he died of lung cancer and he told me he had instructed grandma to pull the plug if he ever got to that point. He flatly refused to live the rest of his days not in control of his faculties.

Anyways, a year later my grandmother pulled the plug. I was there, holding her hand as he passed away. It was the last act of love we could have shown him. He did not want to be left a zombie, he was a proud man.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
It's not JUST her body though
that's the entire issue

there is a 2nd body there

you saying the govt. can say anything is the same as the govt. shouldn't tell you that you can't murder your neighbour

If your 15 year old son's liver stops working, should you be required to give part of your liver to him by law?

Is his mere existence and life, with a body that isn't functioning to maintain life, reason enough to rescind your rights to your body? He is your son. You helped make his body.

This is enough reason to make new law. I also think that the obvious choice in these cases is to make it law that the male DNA father is the first choice for these required donations. The fact that women are potential child-bearers means that such organ transplants lessens their ability to get and maintain pregnancy, meaning that it creates an environment unstable to a fetus. This is obviously contrary to the best interests of all involved.

Originally posted by quackers
A parasite is unable to survive without the host, therefore the host should be able to decide whether they want a parasite feeding off them. If not, they should be able to rid themselves of the parasite.

once again, babies are "parasites" as you call them until they move out of the house.

secondly, once a parasite always a parasite
are you a parasite right now?

thirdly, if anything a fetus can more accurately be called a symbiote than a parasite. And it's not a parasite because a woman's body prepares for the fetus.

oestrogen reduces postprandial fatty acid oxidation leading to an increase in body fat which may account for the greater fat mass observed in women compared with men and the fat gain in early pregnancy. Therefore, female puberty and early pregnancy could be seen as states of efficient fat storage of energy in preparation for fertility, foetal development and lactation providing an obvious biological advantage. Further research into this mechanism of fat storage may provide further insights into the regulation of body fat.
www3.interscience.wiley.com...

reply to post by quackers


i have to agree on the parasite thing
thats all a zygote is. i think abortion should be 100% legal. a womans body is her own biz

reply to post by ModernAcademia


You have just posted the medical and natural equivalent for keeping a tape worm alive.

A woman's body performs the incredible feats of preparing for child birth every month. Large portions of the male population make fun of women for those same processes (PMS) then they turn around and use it to justify their reason for forcing us into birthing children that WE DO NOT WANT.

I see those that rail against women for their right to choose as having no control in there own lives. Have any of you here that want to make decisions for women ever adopted, fostered or lent a hand to an unwanted child?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

once again, babies are "parasites" as you call them until they move out of the house.

Choice, choice, choice. It's that thing you want to remove. My partner and I chose to have children and all the fun times that brings, right up until l they bugger off. I fail to see how your example of choice fits your argument.

secondly, once a parasite always a parasite
are you a parasite right now?

I am a parasite on the planet (as are most of us). When and if the planet decides it's had enough of me being a parasite, POOF, no more me. Are you going to lobby the planet to extend my life?

thirdly, if anything a fetus can more accurately be called a symbiote than a parasite. And it's not a parasite because a woman's body prepares for the fetus.

Some chose the symbiotic relationship some don't. For those who do, who made that choice, tis ok, they are doing what you want, what you find acceptable. For those who do not want that symbiotic relationship, you want to remove their rights in order to force them into that symbiotic relationship. I find that odd as I highly suspect you would be in disagreement with any other sort of forced relationship.

You need to differentiate between what you find morally objectionable and what is ultimately a choice in which you have absolutely no business being involved in. Well unless you happen to be the father. Then that's a whole other kettle of fish.








[edit on 28-9-2009 by quackers]

I am not sure if babies having long or short term memories has anything to do with abortion.


What an emotive subject this is. What I find illogical is we (here in the UK) do not agree with euthenasia, despite some suffering unbearable pain in their last few days,because it is not ethical for the state to kill someone.
Yet thousands of abortions are carried out on perfectly normal fetus.

I am an advocate of abortion but things imo have got out of hand, women having three, four, five even are using it as contraception, some fetus are got rid of because they have a hare lip or club foot. And of course women carrying i.e., a Downs Syndrome fetus are routinely talked into having an abortion, all in the quest of a perfect human race.
Of course there are those who have an abortion because the baby would be the wrong sex.


Not so long ago it was thought new born babies did not feel pain when they were operated on, now they are anethasised because it is believed they do. We have no proof one way or the about fetus suffering pain when being aborted, I would think those who go through late abortions do.

There will always be cases where abortion is the only answer, such as rape, health of the women and severe disability, the condom split, or the pill didn't work, but I think women and men have to take more personal responsibility and not have an unwanted pregnacy. There are far more unwanted pregnancies now than at any other time, yet contraception has never been better or so readily available.

reply to post by dizzylizzy


You make some intereting points. If I might just pick up on one. You mention that women will abort due to abnormality ect, is this not fitting as within nature itself these abnormalities would be unlikely to survive on their own.The mother would simply abandon such offspring, or eat it. I see little difference. I'm not going to start arguing about quality of life and all that jazz, I just wanted to point that out. It is self correcting [?].

reply to post by dizzylizzy


All of the goals you stated are completely agreeable! The best way to halt using abortion as a "birth control" measure would be to thoroughly educate young people on proper birth control and safe sex procedures.

Interestingly enough, this would make some birth control illegal. Plan B (which is just a potent birth control pill) couldn't be used or regulated safely because the morning after pill would technically be murdering a person.



On another note, would declaring a zygote as a full person mean an attorney can prosecute someone who has an abortion as a murderer?

Would someone who had contriband birth control be charged with conspiracy to commit murder?

If a pro-life neighbor doesn't agree with their neighbor's life style (perhaps they liked to party or dated often), would they be able to call the police and report suspect sexual behavior?

Interesting that those that rail against a fascist police state could support a policy that would encourage the existence of said police state.

Originally posted by quackers
reply to post by dizzylizzy

 

You make some intereting points. If I might just pick up on one. You mention that women will abort due to abnormality ect, is this not fitting as within nature itself these abnormalities would be unlikely to survive on their own.The mother would simply abandon such offspring, or eat it. I see little difference. I'm not going to start arguing about quality of life and all that jazz, I just wanted to point that out. It is self correcting [?].

People with a club foot can have as normal life as anyone else. I saw a doco on tv last year about a surgeon who has spina bifida and confind to a wheel chair. Not all people with a hare lip die it is often operated on for cosmetic reasons.

We unlike the rest of the animal world do not on the whole abandon our offspring normal or not, it is the way humans have evolved. Many animals reaching old age are left to die. Many babies are born with unforeseen problems, they are operable they are not abandoned
I did say in my post that I agree with abortion for many reasons including severe disability.

Would Stephen Hawkins have been born today, whether someone agrees or not with him, he has a fantastic mind.


[edit on 28-9-2009 by dizzylizzy]

reply to post by ModernAcademia


Well good for you and what you believe in, but I will rather have you the hell away from my body and my womb

Still this nothing than another lame attempt by anti abortion to score one against pro choice that have nothing better to do than monitor women reproductive systems for their own twisted and sick personal agendas.

As usual they don't get very far with their extremist crap.


[edit on 28-9-2009 by marg6043]

"Egg as a person"? Seriously? That's a bit extreme. I have some rather unique views on abortion. I am pro-life, and I believe that life begins at conception. Once fertilization occurs and cells begin to multiply, that process should not be interrupted. Let nature run its course.

However, I also do not think that at this point abortion should be banned. It's like whaaa said, they'll be doing it in the back alleys again, and that will be a whole different set of problems.

I am dead set against partial birth abortion.

Other than that, some ground rules need to be set. While I personally don't agree with abortion in cases of rape and when the mother's life is in danger, that is a personal view. I cannot say what someone else can mentally and physically endure.

Just my thoughts.

Originally posted by dizzylizzy

People with a club foot can have as normal life as anyone else.

I'm not saying they cannot.

We unlike the rest of the animal world do not on the whole abandon our offspring normal or not, it is the way humans have evolved.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. There are plenty of examples of humans abandoning their offspring, for a multitude of reasons. Also you make the basic mistake of assuming that everyone is the same, that they see childbirth the same, feel the same, they do not. Evolution has nothing to do with it.

Would Stephen Hawkins have been born today, whether someone agrees or not with him, he has a fantastic mind.

He has a degenerative disease, he wasn't born in a wheelchair. If he had been born that way who knows, but that's only supposition. He wasn't and he is a great mind. "What if" isn't really a valid argument.


[edit on 28-9-2009 by quackers]

I believe killing a living human being is murder pure and simple. The argument is when does a woman's fertilized egg become a human organism. Many believe at the moment of conception. I tend to believe that at that moment the "mother/father's" actions have co-joined in order to initiate the formation of another human life and what follows afterward is God's will not theirs.

If you believe that abortion should be legal, I advise you to watch one. When you see the tiny hands and broken limbs of a fetus being ripped from a woman's womb via forceps and vacuum, you will quickly change your mind as your humanity overcomes whatever society has ingrained into your stated beliefs.

reply to post by mizzu


It might change your mind, but it certainly doesn't change mine. A woman has the right to her own choices, be that abortion or not. No other person (except the father of course) should have a say on this. Anyone who does is just poking their nose into other people's business. Period.

Oh and watching an abortion would be rather educational from my perspective



[edit on 28/9/2009 by Kryties]

reply to post by mizzu


"If you think it's ok go watch one". I like eating chicken, I'm not about to trot off to an abattoir to see whether "the process" changes my mind. The process is irrelevant and using it as emotional manipulation, well, transparent.

reply to post by mizzu


Well dear if you don't want to have an abortion don't have one, as a matter of fact, I careless what you do with your eggs, sperm, womb or male reproductive organs as long as you stay away from mine.

Isn't that so hard to understand? you stay away from my reproductive organs and I will more than happy stay away from yours.

Is call freedom of choice, I will never force my freedom of choice on you or anybody else.