Abortion- "It is her body!" But is it?

It matters to plenty of people.

Only the uneducated, and murderers do not care.

- - - Updated - - -

And yet you have given no argument that wasn't promptly defeated.

 

Perhaps you should injecting what ever it is you are on, not a single piece of reason or logic from you .. only you assumption based on a biased opinion, and as I said the hollow drum sounds loudest and boy are you empty.

 

The fact you haven't provided any is a testament to your troll nature, and the fact that you have been laid bare as ignorant of any reality is something a physiatrist can certainly help you with.

 

Let me know when you actually use and understand what objective truth is, along with reason and logic .. so far all you have is BS and ignorance.

If you paid any attention you would have seen your false premise renders your opinion pointless.

- - - Updated - - -

More nonsense from the ignorant troll.

 

You literally did not such thing. I proved your entire argument illogical.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet, you lost due to lack of logic.

 

well as they say you can't argue with an idiot, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience, you fit the bill perfectly.

Obviously to anyone that your biased argument has been shot full of holes hence why you pathetically spew the same comment over and over again.

You are dismissed little boy

 

You won't find this information on the pro-life websites but here is what Scientific American published in 2009:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-does-consciousness-arise/
The brain is missing connections that would be needed to think, or feel pain, until the middle of the third trimester... and even then it is sedated by the chemicals in the blood and the low oxygen until actual birth.

A person with a severed spinal cord still has living nerve cells in the legs, and they respond, chemically, to pressure (which may be interpreted as pain) but that person does not "feel" pain in the way pro-life writers are implying. If you look at the details of the pro-life claims you will see that they base the earliest time-frame on the presence of nerve cells near the mouth. They do not actually say the signals are processed by the brain as pain, so they are not technically lying... but what they are doing is intellectually dishonest.

 

delusional as well as ignorant .. no surprises there then.

What logic, all you have is BS and hot air.

now if you will excuse me I will go back to debating with real adults who understand what logic and reason are .. you are free, of course to continue being the ignorant troll you are.

 

A life that is in development is a potential person (because its mind is not yet active). A body that is brain-dead is a former person (because its mind is no longer active). A body which has been born (assuming a normal brain) has a mind which was activated at birth and it is an actual person.

An organism cannot be a potential person and an actual person at the same thing, so you are objectively wrong.

 

You could say God is responsible for forming every human body (and responsible for destroying about 30% of them in the womb) but the key point here is that He knew Jeremiah as a person/soul before his body was created (i.e. before conception). This suggests that the soul exists before conception, and other parts of the Bible suggest the soul will continue long after the body has died, but it does not tell us when the soul inhabits that body that was formed. The soul seems a lot like the mind. We know we have a mind, but nobody has offered objective evidence that the soul is anything different from the mind. Therefore there is no reason to believe that the soul could inhabit the body any earlier than the mind is activated (which is generally at birth).

 

We were discussing rape and now you are squirming away and including consensual sex. We were discussing RAPE...



YOU want the woman to give up her body for 9 months, suffer the physical and financial damage of pregnancy, NOT TO FORGET THE TRAUMA AND PHYSICAL DAMAGE FROM THE RAPE WHICH YOU IGNORE.... be punished for being raped.....because someone else committed a crime....if that isn't illogical nothing is.....it is also blatant misogyny...


YOU want to PUNISH women for being raped.....




IF, (take note of the word IF) a fetus is ever declared a person then women would have the right to use self defense to kill the fetus.

You have the right to defend yourself from harm from another person and women do NOT lose the right to self defense because they become pregnant.

And, YES, pregnancy does harm women enough to be considered serious injury in law.

 

You have been the one using faulty logic to draw a false equivalence (i.e. it is alive so it must be the same as a person). When you claim person-hood based on life you include ALL life (even the mouse in my basement). We all know you do not mean to belittle person-hood by equating it to life in general, but it is your obligation to defend your position (if you can) by explaining what it is about persons that make us different from the mouse in my basement so we can determine if it justifies your implication that the fetus is a person.

 

You proved nothing...see, just saying,"I'm right and you're wrong" doesn't cut it...you have to present a fact....you have not done so, you only presented a silly illogical and nasty opinion.

 

There you are again, diminishing the value of a person by equating it to any and all life. False equivalency. The mouse in my basement is life too. What do you claim is the distinction? To support your claims, you need something that no other animal has... but both the fetus and the baby have.

 

"If you deliberately kill a human being, it's called murder. If you deliberately kill a chimpanzee--biologically, our closest relative, sharing 99.6 percent of our active genes--whatever else it is, it's not murder. To date, murder uniquely applies to killing human beings. Therefore, the question of when personhood (or, if we like, ensoulment) arises is key to the abortion debate. When does the fetus become human? When do distinct and characteristic human qualities emerge?
We recognize that specifying a precise moment will overlook individual differences. Therefore, if we must draw a line, it ought to be drawn conservatively--that is, on the early side. There are people who object to having to set some numerical limit, and we share their disquiet; but if there is to be a law on this matter, and it is to effect some useful compromise between the two absolutist positions, it must specify, at least roughly, a time of transition to personhood.
Every one of us began from a dot. A fertilized egg is roughly the size of the period at the end of this sentence. The momentous meeting of sperm and egg generally occurs in one of the two fallopian tubes. One cell becomes two, two become four, and so on—an exponentiation of base-2 arithmetic. By the tenth day the fertilized egg has become a kind of hollow sphere wandering off to another realm: the womb. It destroys tissue in its path. It sucks blood from capillaries. It bathes itself in maternal blood, from which it extracts oxygen and nutrients. It establishes itself as a kind of parasite on the walls of the uterus.

By the third week, around the time of the first missed menstrual period, the forming embryo is about 2 millimeters long and is developing various body parts. Only at this stage does it begin to be dependent on a rudimentary placenta. It looks a little like a segmented worm.

By the end of the fourth week, it's about 5 millimeters (about 1/5 inch) long. It's recognizable now as a vertebrate, its tube-shaped heart is beginning to beat, something like the gill arches of a fish or an amphibian become conspicuous, and there is a pronounced tail. It looks rather like a newt or a tadpole. This is the end of the first month after conception.

By the fifth week, the gross divisions of the brain can be distinguished. What will later develop into eyes are apparent, and little buds appear—on their way to becoming arms and legs.

By the sixth week, the embryo is 13 millimeteres (about ½ inch) long. The eyes are still on the side of the head, as in most animals, and the reptilian face has connected slits where the mouth and nose eventually will be.

By the end of the seventh week, the tail is almost gone, and sexual characteristics can be discerned (although both sexes look female). The face is mammalian but somewhat piglike.

By the end of the eighth week, the face resembles that of a primate but is still not quite human. Most of the human body parts are present in their essentials. Some lower brain anatomy is well-developed. The fetus shows some reflex response to delicate stimulation.

By the tenth week, the face has an unmistakably human cast. It is beginning to be possible to distinguish males from females. Nails and major bone structures are not apparent until the third month.

By the fourth month, you can tell the face of one fetus from that of another. Quickening is most commonly felt in the fifth month. The bronchioles of the lungs do not begin developing until approximately the sixth month, the alveoli still later.
So, if only a person can be murdered, when does the fetus attain personhood? When its face becomes distinctly human, near the end of the first trimester? When the fetus becomes responsive to stimuli--again, at the end of the first trimester? When it becomes active enough to be felt as quickening, typically in the middle of the second trimester? When the lungs have reached a stage of development sufficient that the fetus might, just conceivably, be able to breathe on its own in the outside air?
The trouble with these particular developmental milestones is not just that they're arbitrary. More troubling is the fact that none of them involves uniquely human characteristics--apart from the superficial matter of facial appearance. All animals respond to stimuli and move of their own volition. Large numbers are able to breathe. But that doesn't stop us from slaughtering them by the billions. Reflexes and motion are not what make us human.
Other animals have advantages over us--in speed, strength, endurance, climbing or burrowing skills, camouflage, sight or smell or hearing, mastery of the air or water. Our one great advantage, the secret of our success, is thought--characteristically human thought. We are able to think things through, imagine events yet to occur, figure things out. That's how we invented agriculture and civilization. Thought is our blessing and our curse, and it makes us who we are.
Thinking occurs, of course, in the brain--principally in the top layers of the convoluted "gray matter" called the cerebral cortex. The roughly 100 billion neurons in the brain constitute the material basis of thought. The neurons are connected to each other, and their linkups play a major role in what we experience as thinking. But large-scale linking up of neurons doesn't begin until the 24th to 27th week of pregnancy--the sixth month.
By placing harmless electrodes on a subject's head, scientists can measure the electrical activity produced by the network of neurons inside the skull. Different kinds of mental activity show different kinds of brain waves. But brain waves with regular patterns typical of adult human brains do not appear in the fetus until about the 30th week of pregnancy--near the beginning of the third trimester. Fetuses younger than this--however alive and active they may be--lack the necessary brain architecture. They cannot yet think.
Acquiescing in the killing of any living creature, especially one that might later become a baby, is troublesome and painful. But we've rejected the extremes of "always" and "never," and this puts us--like it or not--on the slippery slope. If we are forced to choose a developmental criterion, then this is where we draw the line: when the beginning of characteristically human thinking becomes barely possible. "
http://www.2think.org/science_abortion.shtml

 

.""" To date, murder uniquely applies to killing human beings. Therefore, the question of when personhood (or, if we like, ensoulment) arises is key to the abortion debate. When does the fetus become human?"""

A human fetus is always human. It becomes a person when it's born...IF it is deemed a person before birth then women, again, have every right to use their right of self defense and kill it..... so when a fetus becomes a person really doesn't have much to do with the legality of abortion.

 

I would add that the environment of the womb keeps the mind of the fetus inactive until actual birth, so the mental character (our person-hood) that is created based on perceptions, experiences, and thoughts logically begins when the mind is activated by the process of birth. That, I believe, is what distinguishes us from the mouse in my basement. Its mind cannot operate at a level we would consider person-hood, so the mouse never begins being a person. A newborn can begin the first step of person-hood when it starts perceiving and incorporating experiences. We do not consciously remember the moment we are born, but those early experiences could still influence our subconscious mental development.

 

You literally just have no logic or reason to your thinking. You just "feel" the way you do. YOu have lost.

- - - Updated - - -

That is simply and completley false.

You are objectively wrong. My point still stands strong.

- - - Updated - - -

We were discussing abortion in general, and you added in rape. I proved your logic wrong in the vast majority of cases except only rape, but still made sure to say it didnt justify murder. YOu lost.

- - - Updated - - -

My logic has been on point its just that objective truth is not the thing you wanna hear so you attempt to falsify it.

- - - Updated - - -

I have proved my point very strongly. You cant stand it can you?

- - - Updated - - -

I have done no such thing. YOu simply have not been paying attention.

 

A woman's womb is specifically function to bear babies, not as a casket,
the same reason why that woman did exist through good fate or ill fate.
We could not equate happiness against an innocent life.

 

Trolling again I see.

 

Irrelevant, plenty of things are designed for a specific usage (the womb by the way is not one one them) which are not used for that specific use.

The womb or uterus, to give it it's medical name, provides structural integrity and support to the bladder, bowel, pelvic bones and organs as well as functioning as a gestation chamber for a fetus.

 

"Everybody's wrong but me! I said I was right so I am"""


If we didn't see so many Anti-Choice/Anti-Women posters in here I'd swear you are the reincarnation of someone familiar....someone who also though saying he was right made him right without posting any facts, just his opinion based on ignorance and hate.... ...

 

You provided no logic or reason to support your claims. Perhaps you were having an off day. Care to try again?

For example, I argue that a life that is being developed is a potential person (because its mind is not yet active). A body that is brain-dead is a former person (because its mind is no longer active). A body which has been born (assuming a normal brain) has a mind which was activated at birth and it is an actual person.

When I claim that an organism cannot be a potential person and an actual person at the same time, you could present a logical argument that would help me (and other readers) see that an organism could be a potential person and an actual person at the same time. I can't think of any logical argument that would help you... but when you respond with no logic or evidence... it just looks like you have run out of argument and you hope the readers will not notice if you keep declaring victory. It might make you feel better to imagine that, but it does not advance the discussion.

 

I have provides more than anyone here.

- - - Updated - - -

You simply defy logic, so yes u r wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

Winning with logic you mean.

 

No, that is incorrect.

I see you responded while I was editing my response so I will repeat here.

For example, I argue that a life that is being developed is a potential person (because its mind is not yet active). A body that is brain-dead is a former person (because its mind is no longer active). A body which has been born (assuming a normal brain) has a mind which was activated at birth and it is an actual person.

When I claim that an organism cannot be a potential person and an actual person at the same time, you could present a logical argument that would help me (and other readers) see that an organism could be a potential person and an actual person at the same time. I cannot think of any logical argument that would help you... but when you respond with no logic or evidence... it just looks like you have run out of ideas and you hope the readers will not notice as long as you keep declaring victory. It might make you feel better to imagine that, but it does not advance the discussion.