Abortion: Pro-Choice or Pro-Life? (v3)

They don't use scissors to do D&Cs, Jediflyer.

My uterus--my right to have a D&C.

 

But it is not your uterus getting sliced and diced anikan_girl.

 

No, but it's my uterus, in fact my entire body, that could be damaged if I were to carry the pregnancy to term.

 

I go away for a few hours, and look what happens.

a_g

"A better argument than what? A bulimic cow?"

What the hell do you call this if not an insult?

Yeah, but with interesting imagery

Master_Fwiffo

Annnnd the abortion argument reaches a new low as pro-abortion suporters compare fetus's to plants.

Bah. That hurts to read.

Bah. You have a poor memory. That is merely an observation because given that not even 10 hours before we had the same debate, although we didn't get anywhere.

Although different in many ways, an early fetus probably, and a fertilized egg definitely are not sentient or aware. A plant also is not aware or sentient, so that is where the question comes from. You need to explain why you are defining something by what it will be instead of what it is, or something to that effect before you have any chance of convincing anyone (and yes, I know I would change my mind if someone could prove it).

Fetus becomes sentient. Plant does not.

Fetus is human. Plant is not.

Although you are right (aside from IMO Fetus is Human), what you said I feel is irrelevant. Using your food analogy, the ingredients of the dish you are making will be dish, but they currently are not the dish. Likewise, a fertilized egg does not meet the criteria for human life, therefore it is not. That it will be I feel is not enough.

An early fetus is not sentient, therefore it is not a human life. It will be, but you are saying that they are, and I do not understand how you can say that.

Darth Mischievous

I replied to you too basically I am asking you why I am wrong. I want to know why you feel that the defining component of human life is full human genetic material, how you avoid some arguments like every cell in my body is then a human life among other arguments, and why is human life nothing more than just a physical body?

Jediflyer

I think the difference between human and human life is this. Each cell in my body is human, but the overall me is a human life. That is sort of how I see it.

 

fetus
Please note where the word Fetus comes from: ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, from Latin ftus, offspring. See dh(i)- in Appendix I.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/44/F0094400.html

Fetus this the Latin word for Ftus meaning OFFSPRING. In other words stop calling any unborn child a FETUS. Because a FETUS = BABY.

 

Each cell in my body is human, but the overall me is a human life.

But there is a difference between any one of your cells and an embryo. All your cells, taken as a whole, make up you. Now group all those cells in your mind and trace them back. You end up with an embryo. YOU were an embryo.

 

In other words stop calling any unborn child a FETUS. Because a FETUS = BABY.

If this is the case (foetus = baby), why do you care which term anybody uses? If they are indeed one and the same, what does a name matter?

 

In other words stop calling any unborn child a FETUS. Because a FETUS = BABY.

No, an unborn child is a fetus. Actually in the first trimester, an unborn child is an embryo. It doesn't even become a fetus until the second trimester.

A baby has already been born.

 

No, an unborn child is a fetus.

No Fetus = Baby. Fetus is Latin for Feto meaing baby. or offsrping meaning it is a baby.

The US jsut took the word and used it so that they did not have to call it a baby when they give any abortion.

 

Arguing semantics isn't going to help your case, anidan.

A fetus is not the same as a baby, as much as you would like to make it so. A fetus before the third trimester cannot survive outside the womb, not even on life support. It is still a parasite feeding off a woman.

From dictionary.com

fe·tus ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fts)
n. pl. fe·tus·es

1. The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.

2. In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo

Throw all the Latin roots out that you want, but you will not convince me that I am required to enslave my body and my life, even put it in danger, if by chance my birth control doesn't work.

 

Throw all the Latin roots out that you want, but you will not convince me that I am required to enslave my body and my life, even put it in danger, if by chance my birth control doesn't work.

Did you even go to the site:

Here's the link: Bartleby

It's coming right from: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language.

All we the english specking people did was take a word from another language and twisted it around to mean something else. Just so that English speacking Doctors would not have to use the word baby when telling a woman about the Abortion.

Those are facts. The english language does that all the time. That's why it is so hard to use for many people because the words always mean something else.

It is still a parasite feeding off a woman.

Know we are going to call it a parasite.

 

Just so that English speacking Doctors would not have to use the word baby when telling a woman about the Abortion.

That's pretty insulting to assume that these women don't know what they're doing.

A pregnant woman knows what's going to happen in nine months if all goes well--she knows exactly what is going to come out of her body. If she didn't, she probably wouldn't be terrified enough to feel she needed to consider abortion in some cases.

 

That's pretty insulting to assume that these women don't know what they're doing.[/i]

Yes it's a baby that is growing inside of her. Not a Fetus, not a parasite, but a BABY.

A pregnant woman knows what's going to happen in nine months if all goes well--she knows exactly what is going to come out of her body.

She should but when the English Language like to use a word that means offspring in another language well...

If she didn't, she probably wouldn't be terrified enough to feel she needed to consider abortion in some cases.

What else is a human going to give brith to? Humans give brith to humans. Dog's give brith to other dogs. Tigers give brith to Tigers. What is a human woman going to give birth to other then a human baby? What is gorwing inside of her if not a baby? What is growing inside of a Tiger if not another Tiger?

 

That this is even an issue is rediculous. Funny how all you pro-abortion folks have already been born and are thus not in danger of someone else taking control of the situation and terminating your life.

Unborn, or born, sentient or not, when the sperm cell and egg cell unite, that's that, human life has begun. Jediflyer's statement is very relevant. Calling an unborn child an embryo to make things easier on your conscience is really only a way of deceiving yourselves, as each one of YOU were embryos. That is the way human life begins, simple fact.

 

That this is even an issue is rediculous. Funny how all you pro-abortion folks have already been born and are thus not in danger of someone else taking control of the situation and terminating your life.

And funny how a majority of those against abortion are men who don't have to get pregnant.

Unborn, or born, sentient or not, when the sperm cell and egg cell unite, that's that, human life has begun. Jediflyer's statement is very relevant. Calling an unborn child an embryo to make things easier on your conscience is really only a way of deceiving yourselves, as each one of YOU were embryos. That is the way human life begins, simple fact.

1) We don't judge things by what they will become, but what they are.

2) Are the uses of fetus and embryo used falsely? No, so it's valid.

3) Human life might begin at conception, but the mother is the one who has final decisions on what happens to and in her body. Period. Anything short of that is making slaves out of women.


Hey, has anyone else noticed that the more conservative people on this board seem to always be hung up over words? I mean, first it's "You can't call it marriage," then it's "You can't call it a fetus."

WT[First letter of a word that is banned from this site]?




Don't leave me.
Don't ignore me.
Don't kill me!

 

Human life might begin at conception, but the mother is the one who has final decisions on what happens to and in her body. Period. Anything short of that is making slaves out of women.

Jifty, you said it better than I could.

Hey, has anyone else noticed that the more conservative people on this board seem to always be hung up over words? I mean, first it's "You can't call it marriage," then it's "You can't call it a fetus."

It's called trying to win an argument using a semantics.

I personally don't care what you call it--a fetus, a clump of cells, a baby, a monster that goes "bump" in the night--if it is growing inside my body, I have the right to say it can no longer do so.

 

Are the uses of fetus and embryo used falsely? No, so it's valid.

Then what is growing inside the woman? Is it a Fetus? Is it any embryo? Or is it a human baby? Human only give brith to other humans? So really it's baby that is growing inside of here and a baby that she give brith to.

Anything short of that is making slaves out of women.

No one is making them a slave. The blacks were slaves.

if it is growing inside my body, I have the right to say it can no longer do so.

Then you are killing a human baby. Human women can only give brith to human babys. If it is not a human growing inside of a woman then what is it?

 

Yes, anidan, as soon as the sperm and egg unite, a seven-pound human infant with a heartbeat and brain activity is growing inside a woman.

There are stages of development. After the viability stage, it is wrong to terminate a pregnancy. Before then, it is my body and if I want a D&C, I will have one.

 

"And funny how a majority of those against abortion are men who don't have to get pregnant."

So? That somehow proves abortion is ok? Look, men have to deal with the consequences of their actions, same as women in most situations. Some, such as in the case of pregnancy, they don't have the same problem. Just the same, women don't have some of the same problems as men. Just because a lot of people against this are men doesn't mean a thing.

And in case people have forgotten, it takes a man and a woman to make a baby. Thus, if the woman gets pregnant, the man should be held responsible as well. There are consequences both sides must deal with, but in any event, the baby should certainly not have to pay for something it didn't cause.

"1) We don't judge things by what they will become, but what they are."

That's a foolish way to look at things. Most things in this world start out insignificant and quite different from what there will become. The only thing we look at with the viewpoint you propose is human life, and that is most unfortunate.

"2) Are the uses of fetus and embryo used falsely? No, so it's valid."

I didn't say it was invalid, I simply said the use of these words was simply to put your minds at ease, to deceive yourselves into believing fetuses and embryos aren't human, when in fact they are very much human, because every single human walking this earth was once both a fetus as well as an embryo. That is human life. I can't believe people use the argument that human life doesn't start until at some magical point the "parasites" become sentient.

"3) Human life might begin at conception, but the mother is the one who has final decisions on what happens to and in her body. Period."

Yes, currently the mother is the one who has the final say on what happens to a child inside of her, but that is an unfortunate and sick thing. The child didn't ask to be created, and it has the right to life as much as any human that breathes air.

"Anything short of that is making slaves out of women."

No, it's allowing the natural processes of nature to occur. It's allowing the consequence to come about of said woman having sex. (And before anyone says I'm condemning women for having sex, I'm also "condemning" men for it because if a woman abstains for the right reasons, then the man will be left without sex as well. Note that I don't condemn sex, just sex outside of marriage.) It's allowing a human life to be born into the world, same as all other human life.

"Yes,anidan, as soon as the sperm and egg unite, a seven-pound human infant with a heartbeat and brain activity is growing inside a woman. "

Uh, yeah? ? That's generally how it happens.

 

Forgive me. I just got a bad cold so I hope that this all makes sense. It makes sense in my head

Jediflyer

But there is a difference between any one of your cells and an embryo. All your cells, taken as a whole, make up you. Now group all those cells in your mind and trace them back. You end up with an embryo. YOU were an embryo.

I could get all philosophical and the me now is not the same me as was a few minutes ago, but that would be a waste of time in this thread.

More to the point, to me, human means the literal genetic and biological entity that makes us up, but the human life is the person and the mind and stuff like that.

I say that we are more than just a bad of bones and other bio mass. That bag of bones and biomass I feel is human, but the stuff that is more than that, or maybe when that bio mass is being utilized in a certain way that there is a person and intelligence, is what makes a human life.

Yes, from the moment I was a fertilized egg I was human (the way I am using the word), but I do not consider myself a human life until, well I don't remember exactly when , but certainly not with a fertilized egg.

To the pro-life crowd, answer this clearly. Is human life nothing more than the bio mass that makes up our body or why does it not matter? Please do not just say 'life begins at conception' or some version thereof. Actually explain why I am wrong.

anidanami124

(I looked online for an English to Latin translator, no luck )

We are not speaking Latin, we are speaking English. There are hundreds of words, if not many many more from other languages that no longer mean the same thing, or mean something similar but no longer the same thing.

And so what? Even if fetus is the wrong word used, after a bit of confusion of trying to understand what the other person is saying, we will eventually figure out when we mean the same thing and when we don't. What you are arguing is I feel a purely a semantic argument. Although it may be possible to win this argument with semantics (or at least get people to think about their arguments and refine them to the point where they make sense) I feel this argument won't do it.

Then what is growing inside the woman? Is it a Fetus? Is it any embryo? Or is it a human baby? Human only give brith to other humans? So really it's baby that is growing inside of here and a baby that she give brith to.

Yeah, but women don't give birth until (usually) 9 months after conception. Since women don't give birth before then, and humans only give birth to other humans, it may be something else before birth.


And I asked this a while ago, if fertilized eggs are human lives that must be protected, why have none of the pro life groups demanded some drug or development in something that would save all the fertilized eggs that just don't make it? Make something that would force fertilized eggs to implant into the uterus. Think of the uncounted billions of 'babies' who have died just because of a poorly designed reproductive system!

 

And before anyone says I'm condemning women for having sex, I'm also "condemning" men for it because if a woman abstains for the right reasons, then the man will be left without sex as well. Note that I don't condemn sex, just sex outside of marriage.

What about a situation like mine, Fireman? I am married, and I use birth control; it would be dangerous for me to become pregnant because of various health problems. Dangerous for both me and the fetus. Are my husband and I supposed to abstain? (If you say yes, I'll let you talk to him. )

 

Then what is growing inside the woman? Is it a Fetus? Is it any embryo? Or is it a human baby? Human only give brith to other humans? So really it's baby that is growing inside of here and a baby that she give brith to.

It starts out as a fertilized egg. Then, it becomes a zygote. Then it becomes an embryo. Then it becomes a fetus. And then, when it reaches viability/birth, it is a baby.

Simple, no?

No one is making them a slave. The blacks were slaves.

So, telling someone that they're ****-out-of-luck and then forcing them to have a baby isn't slavery?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Then you are killing a human baby.

Wrong, it is killing an embryo or fetus, BECAUSE IT ISN'T A BABY YET!

Human women can only give brith to human babys.

Yes, they GIVE BIRTH to human babies. Up until then (or viability), IT IS NOT A BABY.

If it is not a human growing inside of a woman then what is it?

An embryo or a fetus, depending on how long since conception.




Don't leave me.
Don't ignore me.
Don't kill me!

 

as soon as the sperm and egg unite, a seven-pound human infant with a heartbeat and brain activity is growing inside a woman.

?

Where did I say that? Just answer what I asked. What is growing inside of a woman? What is she giving brith to? If it is not a human growing inside of her then what is it?

What else do human women give brith to? Is a tiger growing inside of a woman? Is that it?

I don't get this whole well it's a fetus or it a parasite

Since women don't give birth before then, and humans only give birth to other humans, it may be something else before birth.

What like a dog? So again I will ask what is growing inside of her? And don't say something that may become a human.

It's ether a human or it's not a human. If it's not a human then what is?

So, telling someone that they're ****-out-of-luck and then forcing them to have a baby isn't slavery?

Your going to compere real slavery to a woman caring a baby?

An embryo or a fetus, depending on how long since conception.

Ok then what does the fet...I mean baby becoming? It's in a human woman. What else can it become? A dog I have never heard of a woman giving brith to a dog. Unless I was out sick the day that happened?

 

"What about a situation like mine, Fireman? I am married, and I use birth control; it would be dangerous for me to become pregnant because of various health problems. Dangerous for both me and the fetus. Are my husband and I supposed to abstain? (If you say yes, I'll let you talk to him. )"

You've caught me in somewhat of a trap. Depending upon how I answer, I either have to go back on my beliefs or say something that will make you believe I think you deserve to die more than an infant.

If you really want my opinion, I'll give it, though I doubt you'll like it.

I'll just say this: my view has always been that sex should be inside marriage only. Furthermore, contraception used in such context is alright, and if you don't want children or have certain risks, it's obviously preferable that you do use it. Otherwise, abstinence, in my opinion. (At least in terms of actual sexual intercourse. There are other ways a husband and wife can be intimate.) I just don't think it's right to deny life to one person when it wasn't denied to any of us.

That was my view before I knew of you, so it's not meant as an attack against you.

 

Sperm and eggs are potential humans, anidan. It's not a black and white issue where "either it's a human or it's not a human".

We were all once sperm and eggs too.

A guy can release a million sperm per tablespoon of semen. All those babies!

Your going to compere real slavery to a woman caring a baby?

Yes, because in some cases, when a woman can't handle a pregnancy, when her life would be in danger (as it would be in my case), or she is in no position to raise a child, you are enslaving her to her uterus. And don't say "She shouldn't have had sex." Like I said--tell that to my husband. I don't want to deal with the consequences.