I don't think it is anything like a holy grail, it is just one item of many that dispels the "person at conception" myth Well as you didn't specify my answer was based around when brain-death has occurred. I would for elective abortions, but not for life threatening to the woman, fetal disability incompatible with life, rape and incest. Nope no brain waves that early, electrical activity yes, the same as any cell produces (including a bowl of Jello), this factoid stems from two sources, neither of which were peer reviewed studies, in fact they were not studies at all .. the first item is a 1964 AMA convention speech transcript (not a research paper at all) published in the JAMA arguing for brain function rather than heart function to determine cessation of life, the second is a 1982 letter (not a peer-reviewed paper) published in the NEJM. No original research is being described here, which makes it dishonest and misleading to quote it as the source of a claim. http://www.svss-uspda.ch/pdf/brain_waves.pdf A common misconception quoted by pro-lifers that the electrical activity found in an 8 week fetus are brain waves, this only shows that for the majority, pro-lifers do not understand the difference between the two. That is your interpretation one I do not share, the same question could be asked by simply replacing the word person with war, religion etc etc, and my definition of person is very clear to me. There could be a number of reasons for a woman to seek an abortion, mental illness, poverty, being just two. See above per the woman, as to the doctor, is there a motive? a motive alludes to there being a hidden agenda which I don't believe a doctor would have. Answered.
Assume the baby is healthy, mentally as far as science can tell and physically. Absent mental illness of the mother, (another defense to murder), the average and most common situation, what is the motivation? Poverty can count as a main one, fair for me to Counter with adoption lines a mile Long and we import children? The doctors motivation is money, they are paid for the procedure. In the coma patient, they stop getting paid when they cut the tube. No state lets someone choose to end the. kill someone if their motive is money. The brain is a big thing then for you? Ok. is a growing and expanding brain alive or dead? 1964? 1982? Did we have MRIs way back then? Wow, your data needs Some refreshing. Your article is from a pro abortion Chinese website. University of Kentucky http://www.uky.edu/Classes/PHI/305.002/fd.htm The technology you can use today to monitor your babies brain wave sand heartbeat at home: http://www.newscientist.com/article...rs-brainwaves-and-baby-bump.html#.Udtscbd5mc0 Brain waves is a weird term anyway, but it is yours. Growing expanding and improving and Multiplying brain cells are obviously alive, the Organ is obviously alive if growing etc...That is how it works with brains.
Right so now you continue to move the goal posts in order to try and garner the answers you need to support your opinion, do you think you are first one to try this approach? your counter falls short when there are over 400,000 children in care in the US awaiting adoption and not enough people willing to take them on .. I've already done the calculations involved of how many extra children would probably go into care if abortion were made illegal .. 116,000 per year. Why do you import children, the answer is that most adoption couples want cute perfect little babies. Pretty cynical outlook on doctors, I disagree that money is the motivation, but we are entitled to our opinions .. though as far as I am aware doctors get paid regardless of the number of abortions they do or how many patients they have on life support. and where did I say the brain is a big thing for me, the ability of that brain is certainly a big factor in my position and assuming you mean a healthy brain then it is alive, though I don't see the relevance as far as sentience is concerned.
Those in foster care are usually in temporary care taken from parents. They spend little time before going into a home and it is usually court related. There are tons of people waiting to adopt here. If the motive is poverty, it is misplaced adoption is a solution. Kids in orphanages even are better off the. Dead, ask any of them. But most abortions don't take place in poor wombs, they take place in well off ones. You have to admit it is for inconvenience. That is the point of all the motive questions, and you even know you are dancing. The doctor says yes because that is how they make a living as the hatchet man. You don't become an elective abortionist other then to make money, otherwise why do we have to pay them for it? The doctor has no other reason to agree to the procedure past that. (healthy situation) The mother does it in an elective situation to escape the inconvenice and consequences of getting pregnant. Is that pretty close to accurate on motivation?
Agreed on the short term levels, though adding another 114,000 per year is only going to ensure one thing, taxes will be required to pay for them, that is not an reason to keep abortion legal by the way, but it is a fact. According to Missionaries of the Sacred Heart web site (I use this one as it is pro-life) the following concerning abortion and poverty; Source - http://misacor-usa.org/index.php/abortion-statistics-and-related-issues As far as I am aware, from numerous comments made here and other places, pro-lifers are not in favor of increasing welfare, making abortion illegal and assuming it does make a difference to the abortion rate there would be a huge rise in welfare requirements for at least 50% of the women who cite poverty as the reason for wanting the abortion. I admit to nothing of a sort and find it a bit judgmental to make the assumption that your personal opinion of what is convenience is compared to the person in the situation, is more compelling. Perhaps this will help you to narrow down your broad brush a little; http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html The data is a little out of date, but it gives a good spread of the reasons why women choose to abort, and is yet again a pro-life site, and yes the largest proportion are elective, just as the largest proportion of abortions are performed before 12 weeks - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_abortion_by_gestational_age_2004_histogram.svg That is your opinion and you are entitled to it, however I would never be so bold as to judge women with such a broad brush without knowing the individual reasons behind each abortion. For you quite probably yes.
I have to run, but will get back to this, want to give you proper time and not a one line response. However.... What happened to the brain debate on the previous page? Did you end up agreeing they are brain alive much sooner then 24 weeks? What do you think about the baby brain monitor they have now? Big upgrade in the understanding we have now then back then, don't you agree?
I thought I had responded, perhaps not ... so. Are you talking about electrical activity or brain waves, they are different. Every living thing has electrical activity whether it has a brain or not, systematic brain waves can only occur when the brain has developed. I assume you are talking about SARA (SQUID Array for Reproductive Assessment, SQUID in turn stands for Superconducting Quantum Interference Device), though the test so far have been far from conclusive considering they could only get reading from 4 of the 10 tested, it also doesn't go into any detail as to how early or late the pregnancy has to be in order for the device to work correctly .. It is something worth keeping an eye on though.
Brain waves and electrical activity are the same. We were talking about living brains vs brain death though, when peolpe could pull plugs and all that. A growing, expanding brain is obviously alive, and the electrical signals only add to that. I think that was it. THey had a different name for the product. Very interesting how far science has come.
Err no brain waves and electrical activity are not the same otherwise every single living cell could be classified as "thinking", there is a famous experiment often quoted by pro-lifers that involved a scientist claiming that he had measured intermittent brain waves in an 8 week fetus, two college students did the same experiment on a bowl of Jello and got the same readings. Even a person who is brain dead will still show some electrical activity in the brain, unless the brain has had a high level trauma or the brain stem is damaged, this is why doctors perform a range of tests before declaring a person brain dead, and in most states two doctors must agree. Those tests include. 1) The brain must be in an intractable loss of consciousness of known and irreversible cause. 2) The patient must have no brainstem reflexes. 3) The apnea test. As I said before an early term fetus just doesn't have the physical brain ability to be considered a person, alive yes but not in the same way as you, me or a late-term fetus.
So lets get down to brass tacks. Is a growing expanding brain with growing electrical activity alive or dead? One or the other, that is the point of all this. Is that brain alive? Yes or no?
I agree lets get down to brass tacks, is a under-formed brain with no ability to do pretty much anything the same as your brain. Yes or No? Of course the brain is alive in much the same way as any other organ is, or any other cell for that matter .. a heart cell is not a heart and neither is a brain cell a brain. Prior to the point where the brain becomes fully active there is no person.
Only a fully developed brain can establish personhood? What about people with strokes? Can they be offed? Probably doesnt work like mine, but mine did at that age.
Even people who have had strokes were people with a formed brain that was once capable of higher functions, does this apply to a fetus?
A fetus has a very high likelihood of 75 years of full functionality in front of it. Does this apply to a stroke victim?
I really don't see this as relevant, a fetus has the potential of 75 years of functionality in front of it and has just as much potential that it will not .. I don't attempt to predict the future, where as a stroke victim has already achieved a functional life.
