[BeaverFever]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

raydan raydan:

Something I don't understand... some people are against abortion because they consider it to be murder but are OK with the exception for rape or incest.

Why are the exceptions not murder?

Me neither but then again, alot of the pro abortionist I've talked to don't seem to have any issue with the Gov't interfering in a parents right to dictate how a sick child is treated or not treated?

This whole argument would appear to boil down to "when does a life become a life" and we have two different opinions on that subject it. So until they define it unequivocally it still remains the woman's choice because she'll be the one who has to live with that choice just like the parents of sick children will who chose prayer over medical procedures.

It's a pretty fucked up world when you think about it.

These anti-choicers are also not consistent with the arguments many would use when it comes animal cruelly. Many on the right argue that animal abuses in the farms and slaughterhouses and laboratories are ok because animals don’t have the same complex thoughts, emotions and senses that people do and may not even be self-aware much less aware of the harm being inflicted on them . Well a fetus for most of its existence is even less developed than that

[N_Fiddledog]

Strutz Strutz:

Where in my post did I say anything about abortions at 25 weeks?

Nowhere and it's OK. I wasn't judging you. Just offering up what I thought was an interesting thought exercise.

And not that Ray asked but I'm going to reply to his musing over is someone who's opposed to abortion OK with it in cases of rape, incest, or if the baby doesn't die the mother does.

Me personally, I've only reached the point where I can stand firm on opposition to late term abortions. They're murder.

For me though, if the problem was rape or incest the mother should have done something before it became unequivocal that the mass of cells had become a baby. Too late now Mama. Kill the baby and get charged for murder in my world.

Apparently others are willing to deal though. That's the case with this fetal heartbeat law in Georgia anyway .

As far as the choice of saving the mother or the baby I'd say save the mother. But it would get tricky if the mother wanted to sacrifice herself. At that point I just don't know...

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

This whole argument would appear to boil down to "when does a life become a life" and we have two different opinions on that subject it. So until they define it unequivocally it still remains the woman's choice because she'll be the one who has to live with that choice just like the parents of sick children will who chose prayer over medical procedures.

You'll never define when life begins because it's a philosophical question.

The difference between sick children and a fetus is that there is zero debate that life has begun at that point. So not really a valid comparison.

[Freakinoldguy]

Tricks Tricks:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

This whole argument would appear to boil down to "when does a life become a life" and we have two different opinions on that subject it. So until they define it unequivocally it still remains the woman's choice because she'll be the one who has to live with that choice just like the parents of sick children will who chose prayer over medical procedures.

You'll never define when life begins because it's a philosophical question.

The difference between sick children and a fetus is that there is zero debate that life has begun at that point. So not really a valid comparison.

And here I thought it should be a scientific one especially since science can now tell us all about consciousnesses and oddly enough what happens when we die with no one except the organized religions claiming their findings are philosophical?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/ ... -afterlife

Apparently the only reason we don't have a scientific consencus on this subject is because of agenda's and sciences decision not to get overly involved. So, to one side a fetus is just as much of a child as any infant but to the other life doesn't start till you take the first breath. And, just because you're on the life starts at birth side doesn't mean comparing older children to unborn children isn't a valid argument because, a large number of people would disagree with your position.

But here's an interesting read about the topic and if true, the last line might be the most important one to consider.

$1:

Human embryos and fetuses are human beings. That's what science tells us. Is human equality true? That's what the abortion debate is really about.

https://www.mccl.org/post/2017/12/20/th ... n-children

[BeaverFever]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Me personally, I've only reached the point where I can stand firm on opposition to late term abortions. They're murder.

For me though, if the problem was rape or incest the mother should have done something before it became unequivocal that the mass of cells had become a baby. Too late now Mama. Kill the baby and get charged for murder in my world....

As far as the choice of saving the mother or the baby I'd say save the mother. But it would get tricky if the mother wanted to sacrifice herself. At that point I just don't know...

Pretty much all “late term abortions” are done to save the mother.

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

And here I thought it should be a scientific one especially since science can now tell us all about consciousnesses and oddly enough what happens when we die with no one except the organized religions claiming their findings are philosophical?

Is consciousness where life begins? That's what is philosophical. Science can't tell us what life is. It can only tell us how life starts, and ends.

$1:

Apparently the only reason we don't have a scientific consencus on this subject is because of agenda's and sciences decision not to get overly involved.

Science doesn't tend to get involved in something that has no basis in measurement. You can't measure when life begins. Some say it happens at conception, which can be measured. Some says it happens at birth, which can be measured. Some say it happens somewhere in between. It's something based on belief. But you can't measure the life of any given thing, other than after it has died I suppose.

$1:

So, to one side a fetus is just as much of a child as any infant but to the other life doesn't start till you take the first breath. And, just because you're on the life starts at birth side doesn't mean comparing older children to unborn children isn't a valid argument because, a large number of people would disagree with your position.

You've misunderstood the point. The beginning of life is in dispute. A child being alive isn't in dispute. That's the difference. So the comparison is foolish, and a bad way at trying to keep kids from receiving medical attention because their parents are too stupid to believe in medicine.

$1:

But here's an interesting read about the topic and if true, the last line might be the most important one to consider.

$1:

Human embryos and fetuses are human beings. That's what science tells us. Is human equality true? That's what the abortion debate is really about.

So if Human embryos are considered alive, should child support start at conception? You can't deport the mother because she's carrying a citizen? How about life insurance in case of miscarriage? Should the mother be jailed if there is a miscarriage?

At 6 weeks a fetus is not a human being. Any animal at that point is closer to being a human than a fetus is. It has the potential to be a human being. A seed, or a bud, is not a flower. An acorn is not a tree.

[Tricks]

Additionally, 6 weeks is fucking nonsense. A woman may not even know she is pregnant at 6 weeks. They're effectively outlawing abortion, a direct contravention of Roe v. Wade, which is why this will likely be over turned.

[Freakinoldguy]

If nothing else the anti abortionists are creative. But I do agree that children shouldn't be denied medical care just because their parents are ignorant assholes who are so vain that they think God actually listens to them and is willing to step in even after he's given us, through science and the scientists all these marvels of modern medicine.

Seems to me that praying for God to intervene and save your child while ignoring modern medicine is pretty much akin to buying a Ferrari and then hooking up a draft horse to drive it around town.

But as for the philosophical aspect. Science may not be able to define what life is but if they can tell us what happens when it ends they can sure as hell find out when it begins.

[Tricks]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

But as for the philosophical aspect. Science may not be able to define what life is but if they can tell us what happens when it ends they can sure as hell find out when it begins.

When it begins is the philosophical aspect. Science is derived from something that can be measured and tested and falsified. How do you test when life, as a metaphysical concept, begins?

Even when it ends can be called into question. Is it on brain death? When the heart stops beating? What if people are kept alive on life support? Are they dead or alive? If it's consciousness, is a coma patient dead?

And of course they can tell what happens what happens when we die, it's a physical reaction. Heart stops, blood flow stops, and various systems within the body start shutting down because of lack of blood flow to the brain to control them. That's not the same as the concept of life, and you're conflating them for some reason.

I feel like you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is. And what the concept of life is.

[PluggyRug]

Tricks Tricks:

And what the concept of life is.

That's it, a concept. Everyone has a different one.

[raydan]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

If nothing else the anti abortionists are creative. But I do agree that children shouldn't be denied medical care just because their parents are ignorant assholes who are so vain that they think God actually listens to them and is willing to step in even after he's given us, through science and the scientists all these marvels of modern medicine.

Seems to me that praying for God to intervene and save your child while ignoring modern medicine is pretty much akin to buying a Ferrari and then hooking up a draft horse to drive it around town.

But as for the philosophical aspect. Science may not be able to define what life is but if they can tell us what happens when it ends they can sure as hell find out when it begins.

Why can't we just say that God gave us science?

He also gave us a round earth.

[herbie]

Tricks Tricks:

Additionally, 6 weeks is fucking nonsense. A woman may not even know she is pregnant at 6 weeks. They're effectively outlawing abortion, a direct contravention of Roe v. Wade, which is why this will likely be over turned.

Exactly the point I make. It's an outright attack, the 6 week bullshit the thinnest excuse possible to fool people into thinking it isn't.
It will get overturned, along with the states with 'heartbeat' laws.

[xerxes]

herbie herbie:

Tricks Tricks:

Additionally, 6 weeks is fucking nonsense. A woman may not even know she is pregnant at 6 weeks. They're effectively outlawing abortion, a direct contravention of Roe v. Wade, which is why this will likely be over turned.

Exactly the point I make. It's an outright attack, the 6 week bullshit the thinnest excuse possible to fool people into thinking it isn't.
It will get overturned, along with the states with 'heartbeat' laws.

Or will it? This law and all the other "heartbeat" and TRAP laws are all meant to get to the Supreme Court and get Roe overturned. And with the stolen court seats, it's probably their best chance to get it done.

[Tricks]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Tricks Tricks:

And what the concept of life is.

That's it, a concept. Everyone has a different one.

Which is exactly what I've been saying.

[Tricks]

xerxes xerxes:

herbie herbie:

Tricks Tricks:

Additionally, 6 weeks is fucking nonsense. A woman may not even know she is pregnant at 6 weeks. They're effectively outlawing abortion, a direct contravention of Roe v. Wade, which is why this will likely be over turned.

Exactly the point I make. It's an outright attack, the 6 week bullshit the thinnest excuse possible to fool people into thinking it isn't.
It will get overturned, along with the states with 'heartbeat' laws.

Or will it? This law and all the other "heartbeat" and TRAP laws are all meant to get to the Supreme Court and get Roe overturned. And with the stolen court seats, it's probably their best chance to get it done.

Then the u.s. can further cement itself as a shithole.