Where do you stand on abortion? Let's have a civil debate.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Seems like I have read an outdated article.

The process is called nuclear transfer. It's how we grew Dolly the sheep from a somatic cell. You can look it up.

So you believe its a person once its heart starts beating?

That's the exact opposite of what I said.

I said that a person can be dead even if their heart is still beating and all their other organs are functioning, if their brain activity has ceased. Given that a fully grown adult without a functioning brain is no longer a human life, why would a fetus which doesn't even have a brain, let alone one which can function, be a human life?

A skin cell on its own will not grow up and work.

Neither will a zygote. It needs a uterus, a placenta, an amnion, a chorion, a constant supply of blood from the mother to deliver nutrients and remove waste, a variety of hormones from the mother, warmth, physical protection, immunological protection, etc.

As I said before, it the potential to turn in to a human being at some point in the future given the right conditions is your baseline, then you can equally apply that reasoning to every single sperm or egg.

[UNOE]

The consensus is the formation of a zygote marks the beginning of a new individual human life.
So if a skin cell was human life, once it became a zygote it would be a new individual human life?
I don't think that's how it works.

Neither will a zygote. It needs a uterus, a placenta, an amnion, a chorion, a constant supply of blood from the mother to deliver nutrients and remove waste, a variety of hormones from the mother, warmth, physical protection, immunological protection, etc.

As I said before, it the potential to turn in to a human being at some point in the future given the right conditions is your baseline, then you can equally apply that reasoning to every single sperm or egg.

A born baby won't grow up and get a job without a mother, a constant supply of food&water and a warm enviroment.
So a zygote's going to do it as much as a born baby will.
In its natural condition, it will be born, if there isn't an intervention or an anomaly.

A skill cell will not be born in it's natural condition, it will just remain a skin cell.

I said that a person can be dead even if their heart is still beating and all their other organs are functioning, if their brain activity has ceased. Given that a fully grown adult without a functioning brain is no longer a human life, why would a fetus which doesn't even have a brain, let alone one which can function, be a human life?

The early signs of a brain have begun to form. Even though the fetus is now developing areas that will become specific sections of the brain, not until the end of week 5 and into week 6 (usually around forty to forty-three days) does the first electrical brain activity begin to occur

The neural tube, which becomes the brain and spinal cord, seals up completely three weeks after conception, one day after the fetal heart begins to beat. By the fourth post-conception week, the eyes and ears have started to form, including connections to the developing brain.

 

Ultrasounds may detect the first fetal movements as early as five weeks post-conception. These movements provide evidence of electrical impulses at the connection between nerves and muscles. In the sixth week, the forebrain – the brain region responsible for processing perception, thoughts, and decisions in adults – doubles in size. In fact, the brain starts growing at a rate of 250,000 neurons per minute for the next 21 weeks! In the seventh week, the fetus starts showing a preference for his right or left hand. By 11 weeks post-conception, the fetus performs complex behaviors that require working neural circuits, including hiccupping, stretching, grasping objects, and turning away from loud noises.

 

Importantly, the formation of the human brain dominates early development. In fact, at eight weeks post-conception, the fetal brain weighs 43 percent of its total body weight. By comparison, a newborn’s brain weighs 10 percent of his total body weight, and an adult’s brain weighs just 2 percent of his total body weight. Therefore, even early fetal development occurs in connection with neural activity.

Where do you draw the line?

[o_e_l_e_o]

In its natural condition, it will be born, if there isn't an intervention or an anomaly.

Not accurate. Half of all fertilized eggs never implant.

Where do you draw the line?

Unfortunately, you are now quoting things I suspect you do not understand, since they do not support your position. Electrical activity is neither a brain nor consciousness. Nor is a neural tube. Nor are connections between nerves and muscles. Nor are spinal reflexes - brain dead patients can still hiccup, stretch, and move. The cortex, which is responsible for human consciousness, does not develop until 24-26 weeks. 24-26 weeks is also the limit of viability, when a fetus being delivered has a chance of surviving (albeit a low chance, and likely with significant physical and mental disabilities). That's where I draw the line.

[KingScorpio]

i can't really decide on my own anymore, if i would be a greedy billionaire, i would preer to ban abortions so women give birth to more cheap money earning cattle, ready for exploitation,

if i would be a relative to the women, that is unvoluntarily also financially unsecure and unstable i would rather decide for the women.

etc.

regards

[franky1]

8 pages on and all i can read is where men think they have a womb and that they have power to make the decision.

the women who is pregnant should be the only one making the decision...
.. end of

[UNOE]

8 pages on and all i can read is where men think they have a womb and that they have power to make the decision.

the women who is pregnant should be the only one making the decision...
.. end of

That's shitty logic.
Should only parents decide if they're going to kill their born children?

Not accurate. Half of all fertilized eggs never implant.

We're arguing over semantics.

Unfortunately, you are now quoting things I suspect you do not understand, since they do not support your position. Electrical activity is neither a brain nor consciousness. Nor is a neural tube. Nor are connections between nerves and muscles. Nor are spinal reflexes - brain dead patients can still hiccup, stretch, and move. The cortex, which is responsible for human consciousness, does not develop until 24-26 weeks. 24-26 weeks is also the limit of viability, when a fetus being delivered has a chance of surviving (albeit a low chance, and likely with significant physical and mental disabilities). That's where I draw the line.

Nor does it have to be a brain or a consciousness. It's developing.
So you believe a the fetus becomes a person at week 24-26?
What differentiates a 23 week baby from a 24 week one?

where men think they have a womb

Don't be transphobic. Men have wombs too.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Nor does it have to be a brain or a consciousness. It's developing.

Yes, it's developing. At some point it will develop in to a human being. A collection of cells with no brain is not a human being.

What differentiates a 23 week baby from a 24 week one?

See:

The cortex, which is responsible for human consciousness, does not develop until 24-26 weeks.

[UNOE]

Nor does it have to be a brain or a consciousness. It's developing.

Yes, it's developing. At some point it will develop in to a human being. A collection of cells with no brain is not a human being.

What differentiates a 23 week baby from a 24 week one?

See:

The cortex, which is responsible for human consciousness, does not develop until 24-26 weeks.

The baby isn't a person when it's 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours and 59 seconds old but when it's 24 weeks old, in that magical second, it became a person.
You can't become a person in one day.
How would anyone legally define this?

What is a person anyways?
Merriam-Webster

Definition of person
1: HUMAN, INDIVIDUAL —sometimes used in combination especially by those who prefer to avoid man in compounds applicable to both sexes

A person is a human. Human life is - human.

[o_e_l_e_o]

How would we legally define this?
The baby isn't a person when it's 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours and 59 seconds old but when it's 24 weeks old, in that magical second, it became a person.

It's not ideal, but it's one solution that is already used the world over for anything age related - being able to drive, drink, get married, join the military, etc.

[UNOE]

How would we legally define this?
The baby isn't a person when it's 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours and 59 seconds old but when it's 24 weeks old, in that magical second, it became a person.

It's not ideal, but it's one solution that is already used the world over for anything age related - being able to drive, drink, get married, join the military, etc.

Yes. You're allowed to kill people in Afghanistan when you're 18 years old but you can buy a beer when you're 21.
As horrible as these are, they usually won't end human life (unless they die in war, which is rare for US troops).
Abortion will.

How do you deem a cortex developed?
There has to be a split second between "developed" and "undeveloped". There has to be a second between those two frames.
It's undeveloped at 24 weeks and 2 days and 50 seconds but it's developed at 24 weeks 2 days and 1 minute?
Can you not be a person at one second and magically become one the other?

[o_e_l_e_o]

Can you not be a person at one second and magically become one the other?

You've completely missed my point.

Why can you not join the military at 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, but you can at 18 years?
Why can you not buy alcohol at 20 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, but you can at 21 years?

You have to apply an arbitrary cut off to a continuous process (time), so you are always left with situations like this.

Now, if you read my previous post, cortex development necessary for consciousness takes place at 24-26 weeks. So no, a fetus obviously isn't unconscious at 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes, and conscious at 24 weeks. It is a gradual process over the space of 2 weeks. If you make the cut off 24 weeks, i.e. before that process has begun, then you can be sure the fetus is not conscious since it does not have a cortex.

[Vod]

Read the first page, but not all 8.

Just one question.   How does a life stop being a life if the mother was raped?

[UNOE]

Can you not be a person at one second and magically become one the other?

You've completely missed my point.

Why can you not join the military at 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, but you can at 18 years?
Why can you not buy alcohol at 20 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 minutes, but you can at 21 years?

You have to apply an arbitrary cut off to a continuous process (time), so you are always left with situations like this.

Now, if you read my previous post, cortex development necessary for consciousness takes place at 24-26 weeks. So no, a fetus obviously isn't unconscious at 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes, and conscious at 24 weeks. It is a gradual process over the space of 2 weeks. If you make the cut off 24 weeks, i.e. before that process has begun, then you can be sure the fetus is not conscious since it does not have a cortex.

Alcohol arbitrary cut off dates don't end lives. Abortions do.
You can't apply an arbitrary cut off date to a fetus, because nothing can not be a person at one second, and magically become one the next.

It is a gradual process over the space of 2 weeks. If you make the cut off 24 weeks, i.e. before that process has begun, then you can be sure the fetus is not conscious since it does not have a cortex.

The point is still the same, there is a second in between the fetus being a person and the fetus not being a person. There is a second where you have to draw the line whether the cortex is developed enough or whether it isn't. A literal second between hundreds of fetuses and you'd have to draw the line to which can be destroyed and which can't and thousands and thousands only differ in seconds of age.
There is a second during that week where you make the cut.

[o_e_l_e_o]

This argument is the continuum fallacy. I would suggest you read about both it and the sorites paradox.

You can't apply an arbitrary cut off date to a fetus, because nothing can not be a person at one second, and magically become one the next.

And I never said they could be. It is a continuum. Please read what I said again:

So no, a fetus obviously isn't unconscious at 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes, and conscious at 24 weeks. It is a gradual process over the space of 2 weeks. If you make the cut off 24 weeks, i.e. before that process has begun, then you can be sure the fetus is not conscious since it does not have a cortex.

[UNOE]

This argument is the continuum fallacy. I would suggest you read about both it and the sorites paradox.

You can't apply an arbitrary cut off date to a fetus, because nothing can not be a person at one second, and magically become one the next.

And I never said they could be. It is a continuum. Please read what I said again:

So no, a fetus obviously isn't unconscious at 23 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, and 59 minutes, and conscious at 24 weeks. It is a gradual process over the space of 2 weeks. If you make the cut off 24 weeks, i.e. before that process has begun, then you can be sure the fetus is not conscious since it does not have a cortex.

This is a good discussion, I like it.
I'd say the continuum fallacy goes in favor of the pro-life argument
The most common example of the continuum fallacy is Freds beard.

If a person has no beard, one more day of growth will not cause them to have a beard. Therefore, if Fred is clean-shaven now, he can never grow a beard (for it is absurd to think that he will have a beard some day when he did not have it the day before.).

The continuum fallacy proves there are things that are continually developing so we can't set a value that's true/false on them at a definite point in time. It's impossible.
It's obvious Fred has a beard 4 months in and that he doesn't have one 2 weeks in. But where do you draw the line? You don't because you can't.
At 2 months in, some people would say yeah, that's a grown beard, others would say no way that's a full grown beard. A transition happens where most people attribute different things to the same transitioning object. In this sense weeks and even days matter.

When human life is involved, we can't take the risk.

[o_e_l_e_o]

The continuum fallacy proves there are things that are continually developing so we can't set a value that's true/false on them at a definite point in time. It's impossible.
It's obvious Fred has a beard 4 months in and that he doesn't have one 2 weeks in. But where do you draw the line? You don't because you can't.
At 2 months in, some people would say yeah, that's a grown beard, others would say no way that's a full grown beard.

Sure, but that doesn't change my original point.

If we set the cut-off before the process has even begun, before we have even started working along the continuum, then there can be a clear consensus.

In your example, Fred doesn't have a beard at 2 weeks, but he does at 4 months. Anything between those values is on the continuum, and therefore up for debate. So let's set the cut-off at 2 weeks, as there is consensus that that is not a beard.

The structures which are needed to provide consciousness are not present at 24 weeks, but may be present by 26 weeks (note, still not consciousness, just the structures needed for them). Anything between those values in on the continuum, and therefore up for debate. So let's set the cut-off at 24 weeks, before the continuum has even begun.

[big_hercules]

Everything is really simple. Any person is a soul in a material shell. The soul is instilled in a person from the very beginning (after conception). It is scientifically proven. Scientists have noticed that after conception, some energy is absorbed into the embryo. Therefore, no matter how long you have an abortion, it is, in any case, a murder.

[Subbir]

I accept as true with you all because nobody will support illegal abortion It disrupts our society I feel abortion should be hated by those that don't hate it. He who has not to inherit this world has no-fault If they can't raise their children then why give birth. you're right within the clinic, no, they're more likely to kill.

[TECSHARE]

One thing I don't often see discussed in this debate, is the significant influence that profit plays in this conflict. Selling fetal tissue is EXTREMELY profitable. One thing being overlooked almost completely is the financial motivation for supporting partial birth, or post birth "abortions". This methodology allows the baby to be kept alive longer, giving the peddlers of baby parts more time to find a buyer and arrange delivery the very valuable biological material.

When examined in this context, this whole system that has been implemented has been crafted into a horrifying organ trafficking scheme literally selling dismembered babies for profit. Of course, if you just call it "abortion" and all the moral implications of such a vile scheme are washed away, and protected behind a veneer of "women's rights".

[BADecker]

Pre-birth is simply a stage in human development... just the same as aging is. This means that pre-birth killing is murder just like killing a human being at any other stage is. Murderers should be executed.