"The first thing I'd do as president is..."

Page 3 of 4 First 1234 Last
  1. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    Exactly where the problem arises...when does it qualify as being classified as a "human being"?
    Let's consider the facts in the matter that bring IT to existence in the first place.

    Two human beings with healthy function reproductive systems cause the sperm of a male human being to fertilize the egg of a female human being.

    It's would not be a leap of logic or reason to consider it a fact that if two human beings participate in the act of human reproduction that they are partaking in the process of human reprodcution. They are replicating - reproducing an other human being.

    Let's further discuss the idea of when something is classified a human being. The physiological premise that you present is - at what state of development of this replication is IT considered a human being?

    I proposed that it is qualified a human being first and foremost as it is a product of the process of human reproduction - replicating - a human being.

    When human beings replicate there are several states of development in the process. As stated there is the fertilization process. Then comes the gestation period where the human fertilized egg of the human being becomes a human embryo. The human embryo progresses along the process of development as a human fetus and so on until it is considered full term gestation human.

    Now lets consider further this process. A human fetus or human baby comes into the world through "human child birth". Yet it is only a human infant newborn. There are many phases that it will undergo in development...which I am not going to recite because I have not the medical knowledge to recite these in pediatric terminology.

    But lets further follow the process. A human child spends most years in human development - human pre-adolescence, human puberty, human adulthood and so forth.

    At what stage is the human development process complete that this IT can be considered a "human being". Is it before human puberty, when it's human reproductive organs are functional after human puberty, or does it take place later in life into it's a human teenager - early twenties when it's fully formed human body further process it's human development until it possess a fully developed human brain - integral part of the human CNS?

    Human beings reproduce human beings. The process of human reproduction begins at the fertilization of a human egg where the process of human gestation begins. The human development processes only begins at fertilization and continued development of a human being takes place many years after gestation.

    To qualify a time during the human gestation period that a fertilized human egg can be slaughtered is equal to suggesting that there is a time qualified at any other time after the human gestation period and the subsequent human development process that a human may be slaughtered.

    Fact - human beings reproduce human beings.


  2. For me as soon as there's a heart flicker, it's a living human.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by B5150 View Post
    Let's consider the facts in the matter that bring IT to existence in the first place.

    Two human beings with healthy function reproductive systems cause the sperm of a male human being to fertilize the egg of a female human being.

    It's would not be a leap of logic or reason to consider it a fact that if two human beings participate in the act of human reproduction that they are partaking in the process of human reprodcution. They are replicating - reproducing an other human being.

    Let's further discuss the idea of when something is classified a human being. The physiological premise that you present is - at what state of development of this replication is IT considered a human being?

    I proposed that it is qualified a human being first and foremost as it is a product of the process of human reproduction - replicating - a human being.

    When human beings replicate there are several states of development in the process. As stated there is the fertilization process. Then comes the gestation period where the human fertilized egg of the human being becomes a human embryo. The human embryo progresses along the process of development as a human fetus and so on until it is considered full term gestation human.

    Now lets consider further this process. A human fetus or human baby comes into the world through "human child birth". Yet it is only a human infant newborn. There are many phases that it will undergo in development...which I am not going to recite because I have not the medical knowledge to recite these in pediatric terminology.

    But lets further follow the process. A human child spends most years in human development - human pre-adolescence, human puberty, human adulthood and so forth.

    At what stage is the human development process complete that this IT can be considered a "human being". Is it before human puberty, when it's human reproductive organs are functional after human puberty, or does it take place later in life into it's a human teenager - early twenties when it's fully formed human body further process it's human development until it possess a fully developed human brain - integral part of the human CNS?

    Human beings reproduce human beings. The process of human reproduction begins at the fertilization of a human egg where the process of human gestation begins. The human development processes only begins at fertilization and continued development of a human being takes place many years after gestation.

    To qualify a time during the human gestation period that a fertilized human egg can be slaughtered is equal to suggesting that there is a time qualified at any other time after the human gestation period and the subsequent human development process that a human may be slaughtered.

    Fact - human beings reproduce human beings.
    Well said B...
    Armed to the teeth.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by whiskers View Post
    The waiting period is a good idea. Yes the three days is unfortunate, but what would be more unfortanate is a non-raped pregnant woman having a bad day and deciding to get an abortion, and regretting it the next day.
    My point is that marriage is reversible and there is a waiting period of 72 hours. Abortion is in no way reversible and there is no waiting period required.

    I'm sure the justification for the marriage waiting is that you wouldn't want to do something you'd regret. It seems that an abortion should get at least the waiting period, as the potential for regret is greater since its an action that can't be undone.
    This is really almost a non-issue. Only 2-3% of rape cases actually lead to impregnation. So the justification of abortion based on rape is like legalizing the running of red lights, because you may have to run one someday to save someone who is about to commit suicide.
    All three of you have experience as impregnated rape victims, correct? As I am quite sure none of you have, let us refrain, out of respect for those who do have experience in this particular field, from making objective statements on what is, and what is not an issue. Shall we?

    Now, the point which all three of you, and a few others in this thread are missing, is that Post-Viability Abortions are not a free-for-all kill order. They are to be used with the utmost discretion, in the most dire circumstances. I would hope those with especially stringent religious biases would provide better qualifications for justifying one life over another.

    Again, I post this video:

  5. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Now, the point which all three of you, and a few others in this thread are missing, is that Post-Viability Abortions are not a free-for-all kill order. They are to be used with the utmost discretion, in the most dire circumstances. I would hope those with especially stringent religious biases would provide better qualifications for justifying one life over another.
    I've not missed it and have emphasized that the current verbiage of "distress" is very ambiguous and as it stands is left to the discretion of whom? Abortionist medical practitioner? Anti-abortion medical practitioner? The distressed women? A board of review of abortion rights activists? A board of review of anti-abortion activists?

    One case sets president. One president sets motions. One motion can rectify or amend. One amendment...and so on.

    Edit: BTW I am not looking at this through any religious or faith glasses. I'm looking at this procedurally - what's the process and procedure?
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    All three of you have experience as impregnated rape victims, correct? As I am quite sure none of you have, let us refrain, out of respect for those who do have experience in this particular field, from making objective statements on what is, and what is not an issue. Shall we?

    Now, the point which all three of you, and a few others in this thread are missing, is that Post-Viability Abortions are not a free-for-all kill order. They are to be used with the utmost discretion, in the most dire circumstances. I would hope those with especially stringent religious biases would provide better qualifications for justifying one life over another.
    Being an Atheist I have no religious bias. All I said was that in Maryland, by law I have to wait 3 days to get married, but I can get an abortion this afternoon. I don't agree with the marriage waiting period, but I think if you can justify that, there's no reason not to justify a waiting period on abortions. Why is marriage a decision that requires time to contemplate, but not abortion?

    As far as the, "you've never been raped, so this is none of your business" argument, I think that's an attempt to circumvent a moral question that applies to society, not just the pregnant woman. Why do those who have never served care if there are gays in the military? Because it is a question of societal values and principles on both sides, its not merely a military policy.

  7. Is a rape child worth less than a child conceived intentionally?

  8. Quote Originally Posted by B5150 View Post
    I've not missed it and have emphasized that the current verbiage of "distress" is very ambiguous and as it stands is left to the discretion of whom? Abortionist medical practitioner? Anti-abortion medical practitioner? The distressed women? A board of review of abortion rights activists? A board of review of anti-abortion activists?

    One case sets president. One president sets motions. One motion can rectify or amend. One amendment...and so on.
    In this particular discussion, apparently that discretion is up to you. Is it not? I assume so, given the very binary judgment on abortion you are making herein.

    I also comically enjoy the manner in which regret is being synonymously interchanged with mistake in this instance. Is it not being considered that at times a woman regrets the situation as a whole, but undergoes the abortion as a deliberate act? Abortions are not as happy-go-lucky as they are being made to seem.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post

    As far as the, "you've never been raped, so this is none of your business" argument, I think that's an attempt to circumvent a moral question that applies to society, not just the pregnant woman. Why do those who have never served care if there are gays in the military? Because it is a question of societal values and principles on both sides, its not merely a military policy.
    Ah, Rob! What would a debate be without you deliberately misrepresenting my words, and painting me with making an argumentum ad populum (appeal to the base)?

    You were painting it as a non-issue, and I was merely circumventing your ignorance and pointing out it may (possibly, you think?) be an issue for those who are affected.

  10. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    Is a rape child worth less than a child conceived intentionally?
    Ah, yes, more fallacies! Where did I say as such? Where did I imply worth anywhere within this discussion? I would enjoy your attempts to show me where I have.

    Abortion is a reality, not a moral abstraction. I am sure women heading into an Abortion Clinic are more than interested in your philosophical permutations on the subject, Rugger. I am quite sure, just as they are contemplating the severity of their actions and the ramifications therein, their first thought is the philosophical implications of worth vs., non-worth! A pragmatist you are, sir.
  11. Unbreakable
    David Dunn's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    In this particular discussion, apparently that discretion is up to you. Is it not? I assume so, given the very binary judgment abortion you are making herein.

    I also comically enjoy the manner in which regret is being synonymously interchanged with mistake in this instance. Is it not being considered that at times a woman regrets the situation as a whole, but undergoes the abortion as a deliberate act? Abortions are not as happy-go-lucky as they are being made to seem.
    I am not sure what you mean.

    I am not passing judgment and have compassion and sympathy for cases that require such.

    In either case it is, or is not, a human life, which also solicits compassion.

    In either case it is taking a life, if it is indeed a human life, as I believe.

    But again, my question is - what are the circumstances that subject a human life to abortion (death) and who determines the prerequisite?

    You are using rape as one...what about divorce, infidelity, loss of a job (insufficient means), abuse...what is defined as distress and who decides?

  12. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Ah, Rob! What would a debate be without you deliberately misrepresenting my words, and painting me with making an argumentum ad populum (appeal to the base)?

    You were painting it as a non-issue, and I was merely circumventing your ignorance and pointing out it may (possibly, you think?) be an issue for those who are affected.
    I wouldn't consider it misrepresenting you words as much as twisting them (j/k) .

    How do you think I'm misrepresenting what you're saying? I was merely pointing out that this statement could very well apply to gays in the military as well as many other issues:

    All three of you have experience as impregnated rape victims, correct? As I am quite sure none of you have, let us refrain, out of respect for those who do have experience in this particular field, from making objective statements on what is, and what is not an issue. Shall we?
    On abortion, I see both sides of the issue and could honestly go either way, I don't care too much one way or the other. Less babies means less entitlements and therefore less of my money being taken out for taxes (in theory), so I guess abortions are good in that sense.

    However, I see how they could be viewed as morally reprehensible as murder or infanticide, especially in late term abortions.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Ah, yes, more fallacies! Where did I say as such? Where did I imply worth anywhere within this discussion? I would enjoy your attempts to show me where I have.

    Abortion is a reality, not a moral abstraction. I am sure women heading into an Abortion Clinic are more than interested in your philosophical permutations on the subject, Rugger. I am quite sure, just as they are contemplating the severity of their actions and the ramifications therein, their first thought is the philosophical implications of worth vs., non-worth! A pragmatist you are, sir.
    Were you not justifying abortion with the rape-case example? With that reasoning I do not view worth as moral abstraction but as reality, as you put it. If not, on what grounds is the rape case a reasonable argument?

    Edit: Nevermind. I'm tired of you and your intellectual prowess making me feel stupid LOL
    Last edited by Rugger; 11-11-2008 at 02:11 PM.

  14. As I am getting heated, let me apologize for any derisive sarcasm, and address the respectful comments in kind:

    But again, my question is - what are the circumstances that subject a human life to abortion (death) and who determines the prerequisite?

    You are using rape as one...what about divorce, infidelity, loss of a job (insufficient means), abuse...what is defined as distress and who decides?
    Allow me to explain my comments: I interpret you to take an absolute position on abortion - that is, it always is, and always will be, murder. Now, despite the fact you claim to have sympathy and compassion for those affected - and, being that it is you, I wholeheartedly believe you - that is a judgment: You are making a discretionary stand that it is never justified. In such an instance, what rational appeal could I make to sway you from your position? I assume none.

    In respects to prerequisite, you know as well as I do making objective qualifications will gloss over some instance or another - they always do. Such is why these decisions are discretionary; in the specific case of Post-Viability, the mother's health is the prerequisite condition, to be made by the attending physician, on whether or not the child is to be aborted. In respects to the other decisions, such opinions are necessarily formed individually, on an ad hoc basis. I cannot say I support every instance of abortion, but will say unequivocally I would refuse any measure which seeks to rebuke the woman's right to choose based on a certain percentage of uninformed decisions.

    How do you think I'm misrepresenting what you're saying? I was merely pointing out that this statement could very well apply to gays in the military as well as many other issues:
    You equated my statement to "this is none of your business", when such is not the case. I am in this case, and try to in others, merely inject some reality into abstracted situations - that is, we must always consider that real-live individuals are affected by actions made on emotional, intellectual, and moral bases (bay-SEES - I hate that spelling).

    Were you not justifying abortion with the rape-case example? With that reasoning I do not view worth as moral abstraction but as reality, as you put it. If not, on what grounds is the rape case a reasonable argument?

    Edit: Nevermind. I'm tired of you and your intellectual prowess making me feel stupid LOL
    I was stating that in certain cases reality may infringe on moral imperatives, not that either baby is worth more or worth less. And, I agree, I am too tired for this ****.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    You equated my statement to "this is none of your business", when such is not the case. I am in this case, and try to in others, merely inject some reality into abstracted situations - that is, we must always consider that real-live individuals are affected by actions made on emotional, intellectual, and moral bases (bay-SEES - I hate that spelling).
    I see. I misunderstood what you were saying. I have heard many times in the past people say basically: "abortion has nothing to do with a man, so stay out of it" and I thought that is where you were going with what you said. My bad.

    As far as what you were actually saying, I agree with you, it never hurts to hear from people directly affected by proposed legislation.

    I think what makes the abortion question so divisive is that both sides have extremely compelling arguments, both of which tug at the heartstrings of people. I wish both sides would just find a reasonable compromise (early term abortions, with a waiting period) and let it rest. This is the largest wedge issue in America, and the fact that politicians keep adding fuel to the fire by bringing it up again doesn't help anybody.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    I see. I misunderstood what you were saying. I have heard many times in the past people say basically: "abortion has nothing to do with a man, so stay out of it" and I thought that is where you were going with what you said. My bad.

    As far as what you were actually saying, I agree with you, it never hurts to hear from people directly affected by proposed legislation.

    I think what makes the abortion question so divisive is that both sides have extremely compelling arguments, both of which tug at the heartstrings of people.
    Yes, that is all I meant. One need not be directly involved in a situation to form an opinion on it - I know I am sick at times, without having an M.D. I merely think it dangerous to abstract things without considering those who are actually affected by our decisions. Somebody had made a comment that rape-births are a 'non-issue'; I merely meant to say that it is in fact an issue to those that suffer through it.

  17. I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the pro-choice side beyond aborting a child when the mother's life is in danger. That's just my opinion, though

  18. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the pro-choice side beyond aborting a child when the mother's life is in danger. That's just my opinion, though
    What are the compelling arguments for the other side? To be compelled is to be subjectively swayed, based on the persuasive prowess of the speaker - that is, how well one subjectively justifies their epistemology. If you yourself were pro-choice, your opinion would be reversed, I am sure.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    Yes, that is all I meant. One need not be directly involved in a situation to form an opinion on it - I know I am sick at times, without having an M.D. I merely think it dangerous to abstract things without considering those who are actually affected by our decisions. Somebody had made a comment that rape-births are a 'non-issue'; I merely meant to say that it is in fact an issue to those that suffer through it.
    I understand why he said that. If he sees abortion as wrong, the circumstances don't matter, but as I said in the part above that I added: the abortion question needs to be resolved on some level through compromise. Zealots on both sides would disagree, but the issue has become akin to putting a finger in a bullet wound every time its brought up by either side.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the pro-choice side beyond aborting a child when the mother's life is in danger. That's just my opinion, though
    It's called "it's none of your business" until you can prove beyond sentimentality that there is an actual thinking being (not a potential identity, etc.) that is worth the cost of forcing a woman to carry to term and birth (risking life) an unwanted pregnancy.

    Put it this way, at 2 days there is ZERO brain activity. No thought. Identity. No Dreams. nothing.

    Now, before you bring in the unproven concept of "soul", which will never be anything but subjective belief, as argument you must prove it. Until then, disregard it in the case of argument.

    Simply put, in spite of the potential of a group of cells to one day form a human being, for now (very early term) it is nothing of the sort and, as a parasite the host has a right to end the one-sided relationship for any reason she so chooses, while legisators and others do not have that right to force.

    (messiest argument ever, but I have a 10 minute break I am taking before getting back to work.)
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless

  21. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the pro-choice side beyond aborting a child when the mother's life is in danger. That's just my opinion, though
    Here's some compelling arguments:

    1. If you outlaw abortion, maybe I'll just keep doing belly flops/starving myself/taking crack/use a coat hanger until the baby dies/miscarries. Like it or not, the mother has control of their own body.

    2. Illegal abortions are implicitly more dangerous than legal ones. Prior to abortion being legalized, this was a serious problem.

    3. Do you really want one more democrat voter? (sorry, that was wrong)

    If it was up to me, it should be decided at the state level. It would be legal in some states, and illegal in others. Everybody wins and everybody loses.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    It's called "it's none of your business" until you can prove beyond sentimentality that there is an actual thinking being (not a potential identity, etc.) that is worth the cost of forcing a woman to carry to term and birth (risking life) an unwanted pregnancy.

    Put it this way, at 2 days there is ZERO brain activity. No thought. Identity. No Dreams. nothing.

    Now, before you bring in the unproven concept of "soul", which will never be anything but subjective belief, as argument you must prove it. Until then, disregard it in the case of argument.

    Simply put, in spite of the potential of a group of cells to one day form a human being, for now (very early term) it is nothing of the sort and, as a parasite the host has a right to end the one-sided relationship for any reason she so chooses, while legisators and others do not have that right to force.

    (messiest argument ever, but I have a 10 minute break I am taking before getting back to work.)
    Edit: MUST RESIST!

    In closing, I'll just say that yes, it is my business; it is the business of all of us. The ending of a human life, whenever that life may begin, is our business.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    Edit: MUST RESIST!

    In closing, I'll just say that yes, it is my business; it is the business of all of us. The ending of a human life, whenever that life may begin, is our business.
    Agreed....the problem we have is defining when that point in time is.

    Are you one of those that believe that as soon as the sperm enters the egg it is now a human life, and therefore The Pill is murder?

    If not, why not?

    I am not disagreeing with that issue, just at what point. I think you will find a large majority of the pro-choice adherents to be of similar mindset.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless

  24. Quote Originally Posted by dsade View Post
    Agreed....the problem we have is defining when that point in time is.

    Are you one of those that believe that as soon as the sperm enters the egg it is now a human life, and therefore The Pill is murder?

    If not, why not?

    I am not disagreeing with that issue, just at what point. I think you will find a large majority of the pro-choice adherents to be of similar mindset.
    No, I am not, but I certainly see where they stand. Their reasoning, and it's true, is that once the sperm enters the egg there is a specific and individual DNA identity that is unlike any other, hence making it an individual. As I said earlier though, for me, once the heart beats, it's a human.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by Rugger View Post
    No, I am not, but I certainly see where they stand. Their reasoning, and it's true, is that once the sperm enters the egg there is a specific and individual DNA identity that unlike any other, hence making it an individual. As I said earlier, for me, once the heart beats, it's a human.
    I understand your position...for ME it would be when there is distinct brainwave activity and reactions to stimulus (roughly), and I would resist (violently, if necessary) your attempts to legislate your definition (and of course, laws) into my and my wife's decisions.

    Which is where the mess and over-defensiveness comes from.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. **The first of its kind DIESEL TEST 2040 is now avail.
    By Chuck Diesel in forum Get Diesel Nutrition
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-13-2007, 05:21 PM
  2. Do these mean the same thing?
    By toastynoodles in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-14-2004, 11:03 PM
  3. Second cycle as effective as the first?
    By BigVrunga in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-18-2003, 03:33 PM
  4. Digestion first thing in the morning...
    By Jcc in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-15-2003, 11:35 AM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-28-2003, 02:46 PM
Log in
Log in