human being at seven weeks (abortion pro-life)

priestsforlife ^ | 2001 | Professor Andrzej Skawina,Dr. Antoni Marsinek, MD Zrodlo Foundation

[Dimensio]

WHOOHH big fella, don't you come off to me like you have with the others on this thread. In your post #67 you made comment that you did not know for sure when brain activity begun. I was simply giving you information. If you meant that statement in another context then I did not see that. I am not, nor was I trying to attack you or start a debate with you.

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my statements. I am aware that the electrical patterns are detectable, but I do not know for certain that such patterns are an irrefutable sign that the forming embryo has acheived "real" brain function (as opposed to a simple stimulus-response nervous system) -- however, I believe that since there exists the possibility and no certain knowledge to the contrary that it is better to err on the side of caution.

If you are an atheist then that is your buisness. I am not one, but do not hold it against those who are. So to clarify my second question. The man I knew believed in logical ways as opposed to God's way for man's creation and all events that Christians attribute to God's work. Not as to what makes up the universe, just the way it was made. Do you believe this? Simply a question.

"Logic" is simply a formula for determining truth values. Logic could be used to derive a course of events through various methods, but there's more to the formation of the universe than pure "logic". I suppose that in the end all observations regarding the formation of the universe and theories thereof are subject to the rules of logic, because logic is a means for determining the validity of a premise or a conclusion. I don't think of natural processes as being inheritly "logical", but if that's what you mean, then I do believe that natural forces are responsible for the existence of the unverse and its contents -- mind you, I don't claim know what all of those processes were or how they worked.

[meandog]

Alright meandog, you have been getting beat up on this thread and I for one would like to hear your response before I flame away. So how about it?

All I said was it looked "liked a tadpole"...look, I'm pretty much pro-life except in the certain cases of extraordinary circumstances...I've even had a special extended family situation where the issue of pro-life was the one that was taken because abortion would not be considered. The trouble with some foaming-at-the-mouth right-of-Heinrich Himler FReepers is that there is NO circumstance where abortion could be considered.

[patriot31u]

Tell me some of your views as to what circumstances require abortion. This is a highly debated topic with lots of different views. I would like to know yours. As far as the Hitler so and so Freepers. You have to admit that your comment was ill timed and on a subject of this nature I'm not sure what you expected.

[jwalsh07]

Why yes, that's just what I'm really trying to do: find excuses to justify the first-degree slaughter of a clump of undifferentiated cells with NO BRAIN TISSUE!

This seemed a bit wordy and hyperbolic so I substituted it. Does "it" offend you?

[Dimensio]

If by "it" you mean the clump of undifferentiated cells of a blatocyst, then no it does not offend me.

If "it" means something else, then I cannot answer, as I'm not sure of what you speak.

I only used all-caps because I cannot understand the mindset of those who wish to define a mass of cells that has no potential for thought, much less evidence therein, as a "human being" -- especially when they begin that definition at the single-cell stage where most of them are discarded through natural causes anyway (thus making me wonder why they never propose a means of "protecting" minutes-old human fertilized ova).

[jwalsh07]

Your argument is without merit. Many children die of natural causes, it doesn't justify killing them. The bastocyst is human life. You can support the taking of human life but to argue that it is something different is simply dishonest.

[angelbaby1111]

I had a miscarriage at 11 weeks. It slipped right out, was perfectly formed and fit right in the palm of my hand. When you want a child and you get pregnant...you call everyone you know and tell them you are going to have a baby. One question for the pro-lifers...when you don't want the baby and you get pregnant...do you tell everyone you're going to have a "tadpole" or fetus? I don't think so. It's a baby!

[jwalsh07]

I had a tete a tete with my congressman when he voted against protections of babies in the womb from criminal acts. The discussion eneded when I asked him if he went home and asked his wife how the blatocyst was doing. For some reason he took offense at that, go figure.

[1 FELLOW FREEPER]

Now now, printing pictures like this may inhibit and/or alienate young feminists, and may even cause some young impressionable girls to NOT seek abortions........what am I saying????????

[Dimensio]

Your argument is without merit. Many children die of natural causes, it doesn't justify killing them. The bastocyst is human life. You can support the taking of human life but to argue that it is something different is simply dishonest.

I will agree that a blatocyst is human life inasmuch as my red blood cells are "human life" (they have human DNA and they are living cells). I cannot bring myself to believe that a clump of cells without any neural activity (impossible without nerual tissue) is a "human being" subject to the same rights and protections as someone with a brain (and thus the possibility of thought and sentience).

On the "natural causes" issue -- there are those who see childrens' deaths of "natural causes" as something to be prevented and they work toward such prevention. However, I've not seen any major cry -- even from the anti-abortion crowd -- demanding research to investigate the causes of fertilized ova from planting in the uterus. I would think that people who speak of the sanctity of unborn life beginning at conception would be willing to take any means necessary to insure that said life is "protected" from the moment it exists.

I maintain the 40-days stance because that's when neural development actually begins, but I did suggest two possibilities -- earlier here I posted a link to another article where I made the comment and the suggestions, go and check them out. Also keep in mind that on another discussion forum (dealing with stem cell research) a person suggested that a special division of the police be created to examine the ... er ... "release" from menstruating women to see if any fertilized eggs were present (and if so launch an investigation). He was quite serious -- and he also thought that my ideas were "intrusive" and absurd. Go figure.

[Steve0113]

I maintain the 40-days stance because that's when neural development actually begins...

Five yard penalty for false embryology. Actual brain waves have been recorded at 43 days, therefore neural development must begin well before then.

[Steve0113]

I cannot understand the mindset of those who wish to define a mass of cells that has no potential for thought, much less evidence therein, as a "human being".

So we agree that liberals aren't human?

[Loc123]

That is exactly what I believe! I contend that women may have abortions before 5 weeks because there is no brain formation and therefore no capacity for a soul.

My take on abortion is this:

1) Asolutely NO late term.

2) Anything before late term is legal, only from a pragmatist reality that we will never get what we want with a populace brainwashed by poor public schools and deceptive media.

3) Women who get an abortion must "endure" having the ultrasound screen in plain sight. They may choose not to look, but the option must be there.

4) Abortions are not anonymous; both the men and women involved must wear a sort of "scarlet letter" indicating they've recently condoned an abortion. This could be a temporary tatoo or clothing insignia.

5) Only a limited number of abortions per person. The penalty for this could possibly be sterilization.

[Loc123]

Speaking of a post that demostrates proof for God, in its case SCIENTIFIC proof for him, all should search for a post called "Imagine no religion." BTW look for my posts :)

[Loc123]

"That probably has somethign to do with the fact that these 1000's of posts don't actually provide any actual evidence, just wishful thinking, or are posts on completely separate topics."

Do a search for a thread "Imagine no religon" and look up my posts. I would be glad to continue the debate (after the other agnostics "disappeared" mysteriously).

[green team 1999]

[ClearBlueSky]

NO human female has ever been pregnant with anything other than a HUMAN baby. NO human has ever given birth to anything other than a HUMAN being. Mating between humans produces HUMANS-period. AND- if 'it' isn't really 'alive', if it isn't 'life'- why is it necessary to kill it? It's very simple. Evil people who try to justify murder for convenience complicate it.

[hope]

"You'll be even sorrier someday when powers that be decide they can't see the human in you".

That was already established when the idiot posted that remark.....He doesn't realize that his support of killing these small humans are done mainly by those of his ilk, which if continues another 100 years or so will wipe his liberal a$$ off the face of the earth through self-extinction.

[meandog]

NO human female has ever been pregnant with anything other than a HUMAN baby. NO human has ever given birth to anything other than a HUMAN being. Mating between humans produces HUMANS-period. AND- if 'it' isn't really 'alive', if it isn't 'life'- why is it necessary to kill it? It's very simple. Evil people who try to justify murder for convenience complicate it.

The spritual part of me`agrees with everything pro-life folks stand for; however, the libertarian in me still feels that abortion is strictly a matter between a pregnant woman and her doctor! Like a rose, a fetus is a fetus is a fetus; and would be the same by any other name...

[Hajman]

Like a rose, a fetus is a fetus is a fetus; and would be the same by any other name...

And it's human, though you give it the name 'fetus'.

-The Hajman-