KennyJC: See my argument from science and law. c7ityi_: Subjective or not, what it is, as defined by science and the definition of murder in most societies, is just that: Murder. Hapsburg: Morals? No. It is not a moral issue. It is a matter of law basically down through in every civilization ever, as well as what science says even a zygote is. To speak of abortion not being murder, is to speak an absurdity as erroneous as "a square is a circle". Whether or not murder is right or wrong, however, I cannot tell you.
I was talking about moral. I think moral is a part of the universe, even though it is "just" a human definition of a thing. But if we talk about definitions, at what point does the sperm cell become a "human", so that it can be defined as "murder" if you make an abortion?
There are dozens of examples and scenarios where it is necessary to abort a fetus, either for the sake of the parent(s) or the unborn child itself. ie. rape victims, down syndrome, poverty, etc. One can't simply paint a broad brush of murder. Is every sperm sacred? There are Jews in the world, there are Buddists, There are Hindus and Mormons and then There are those that follow Mohammad, but I've never been one of them. I'm a Roman Catholic, And have been since before I was born, And the one thing they say about Catholics is They'll take you as soon as you're warm. You don't have to be a six footer, You don't have to have a great brain, You don't have to have any clothes on, You're a Catholic the moment Dad came, because Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. Let the heathen spill theirs, On the dusty ground, God shall make them pay for Each sperm that can't be found. Every sperm is wanted, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood. Hindu, Taoist, Morman, Spill theirs just anywhere, But God loves those who treat their Semen with more care. Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood. Every sperm is useful, Every sperm is fine, God needs everybody's, Mine, and mine, and mine. Let the pagans spill theirs, O'er mountain, hill and plain. God shall strike them down for Each sperm that's spilt in vain. Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is good, Every sperm is needed, In your neighborhood. Every sperm is sacred, Every sperm is great, If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. ~Michael Palin and Terry Jones.
c7ityi_: How is moral part of the universe? A sperm cell never becomes a human. A sperm cell is always simply a sperm cell. It is only when conception occurs, that is, when the zygote forms, when there is a genetically distinct entity, that a new human life exists. Hapsburg: I assume you live in a country that disagrees with you. (Q): One of the foundations of Western Law (specifically American) is that "the sins of the father are not for the child to endure". To murder a child because his father was a rapist is irrational. Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great. You cannot murder something and have it benefit unless informed consent is given, something which no child in the womb is capable of giving. Furthermore, one cannot murder someone else for another's benefit legally, so the "parent's sake" is an irrational argument. Down-syndrome is not a death-sentence crime, nor is poverty, nor anything else.
One of the foundations of Western Law (specifically American) is that "the sins of the father are not for the child to endure". To murder a child because his father was a rapist is irrational. Are we talking about a child or an unborn fetus? When does the concept of murder take place, the moment the father ejaculates or sometime later? Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great. You'd have to walk a mile in her shoes before passing judgment - sympathy means squat. You cannot murder something and have it benefit unless informed consent is given, something which no child in the womb is capable of giving. That is the decision of the parent(s). It's the same as if someone required life-saving surgery that had a very good chance of failing, but was unable to consent. Furthermore, one cannot murder someone else for another's benefit legally, so the "parent's sake" is an irrational argument. Down-syndrome is not a death-sentence crime, nor is poverty, nor anything else. So, in the case of poverty, should we allow the child to be born only to die a few years later of starvation, would that be better? Or, should we allow a down's child to be born only to have that child require substantial care and attention from parents who are now forced to do so, for the rest of their lives? Where is the rationality in that?
Strange that a man would want to pick a topic so sensitve to women. This issue has already been settled. If you are a Christian, then the act is wrong. If you are not a Christian - well you have your own rules. But speaking as a Christian - all sins can be forgiven except for sinning against The Holy Spirit - so in cases of rape especially, the pregnant mothers need to find an alone time and ask The Creator for HIS LOVE AND FORGIVENESS - remember The Creator is JUST and whatever sin you commit is between you and HIM alone. I have to attend a class - i will be back in about an hour. Thank you.
"Although one can sympathize with her position, her suffering does not give her a right to violate the law no matter how great." But she is not violating the law because abortion is legal, and it always will be as I doubt that even in America, religious extremism can't get any worse than it is now. The only way it will become illegal is if extremism becomes even more obscene, in which case the country will be fucked anyway. Tell me... When is abortion murder? Is it anytime after the sperm enters the egg? Is it when or if the fetus feels pain? It is totally cruel of you to tell a women that is pregnant out of rape that she can't 'murder' her unborn fetus. I would not want to be the son of a rapist or the product of rape. Nor would I wan't to be born with a debilitating illness. But yada yada... you think life is sacred, therefor your opinions on this have no credence with me.
Everything is a part of the universe. Moral is a sense of good and evil. It is a thought, a feeling... they are parts of the universe. Humans are part of the universe.
Hapsburg: Yes. To hold an a foolish subjective notion. (Q): If you had bothered to read my post, I point towards life starting at conception, when a genetically unique entity has formed as the zygote. Scientifically, there is no difference betwixt you and I and our zygote forms aside from our level of development. I can pass judgement just fine, thank you. It's irrational to blame the child for the father doing a thing wrong. There is no right to murder given to parents or to anyone. Yes. We are not presciently aware and able to determine what shall occur in that child's life. Under your notion of poverty being an excuse for abortion, Abraham Lincoln would probably never have been born. Angelic Being: This is not so. I'm making a wholely non-religious argument for this. KennyJC: Hopefully you'll be proven wrong with the supreme court nominees of president Bush. But as abortion's legality is nonsensical, being non-scientific and abhorrent in all manners, I would still claim she is breaking the law of murder. As I have -said- several times: Conception. Cruel? What is murder but the ultimate cruelty? c7ityi_: Understood.
You people are asking the wrong question. Is a zygote a human being? Yes. It has a complete set of human genes, and it is alive, so it is human. Next question: Does a zygote deserve to have all the rights of an adult human being, including the right not to be killed deliberately? Some people argue "yes"; others "no". Let's hear some arguments on this question, and quit quibbling about whether a zygote or foetus is human. That's a silly argument which has an obvious answer.
okinrus No, I don't think so. If mankind has to kill each other for population control, then mankind should die off. If hospitals are overcrowded then we might do to build more. And if society hasn't enough doctors, then perhaps we oought to train those whom would otherwise be aborted to become doctors. But merely killing people to preserve some vague notion of quality of life is quite, well obsurd. And furthermore, who knows. Maybe some of those who were aborted would have otherwise found some medical cure or invention. what youre basically doing here is speculating that the unborn have unlimited potential. well, so does every person who dies as a child of famine in ethiopia, so does every child in liberia who dies in a civil war, so does every child who died in the south pacific tsunami and the hurricane in new orleans. the fact of the matter is, that sometimes due to circumstances beyond our control, and sometimes due to circumstances that we can control but choose not to, people die. its a fact of life that not every single human can acheive their full possible potential. i guarantee you there is a child who could be the doctor that finds the cure for AIDS sitting in a ghetto in New York City that will become a drug dealer or a gas station attendant instead, the potential of the unborn is not the issue, the issue is what constitutes life and not at what point life becomes viable, but at what point it is valuable. and you or i may not live to see it, but how do you think the scenario will play out for mankind when there is no more space left on earth to build hospitals, or when people cant breathe anymore because the air has become poisonous because overpopulation has polluted it to the point of toxicity, or how about the even more real possibility of whole populations in 3rd world countries simply running out of water to drink? we here in the western world will just turn away and continue to pump our offspring into the world that has resources instead of controlling ourselves and giving resources to those who have none? your argument is foolish, im not talking about the short term here, im not talking about building more hospitals to take care of the sick, im talking about the point where we overwhelm the earth with our numbers, and if populations grow unchecked and we proceed to advance our technologies, it will happen. we will need to learn to control our populations and abortion will be a key aspect of managing it, unless you would prefer infanticide, the other part of it will be people in developed countries choosing to die instead of surviving indefinitely by artificial means. religious objections to these things will be nullified in the face of global destruction. either that or they will lead to global destruction. Humanity has survived despite having little or no hospital care. right, but i dont necessarily prefer to go back to 8th century medical standards do you? An unborn fetus is alive and is a human being. These are all documented medical facts. For at birth we didn't suddenly become alive or into being. That, I think, would be quite a supernatural feat. an unborn fetus has the potential to become a fully functional, independently viable human being. it cannot survive unaided, cannot emerge from the womb of its own volition, cannot even hold its own head up at birth. a person who needs to be kept alive using a feeding tube and a respirator is similarily "alive and a human being" but has no consciousness, quality of life, or independent survivability. might as well be dead. potential is the argument, not your so called "documented medical facts" which i disagree heartily with in premise anyway.
Your probably younger than him. Besisdes, age matters not. Only maturity. No matter how old you are, you have the mentality and maturity of a three-year-old.
Quote Lori: "I have such a hard time with politics...it's all such a fucking game." * That seems about right, but I think organised religion falls into that category too.
Quote water: “So many people basically believe that we are ENTITLED to consequence-free sex; that is, that we are entitled to having sex and not conceiving.” * Ho hum. Quote w: “In this universe, particular actions have particular consequences. “ * Now you’re getting there. Quote w: “We cannot 100% prevent conception.” * Then remain celibate. Quote w: “Why do people have sex when they don't want to have children” * Because there is nothing like a good orgasm after Sunday lunch. Quote w: “Is such sex justified?” * Choices eh? Quote w: “Is sex for the sake of sex justified?” * Course not, our sex organs are just for show. Quote w: “Is abortion an acceptable price to pay for the sexual pleasure?” * No. But then, not everyone who has sex, falls pregnant, OR has an abortion.
