Abortion: Science or Legalisms

myp · Nov 28, 2011

David said:
Facts are facts. As I said, if you argue abortion on personhood fine but you have no standing if you argue on an unborn child's Humanity.

Clearly you have no idea what facts are. Human life is a man-made term- here there is no specification and semantics can be argued. Live in your fantasy world though. Oh and check out my edit about the societal impact since you seem to suggest an inherent positive effect upon banning abortion. Or don't. What do I care?

David · Nov 28, 2011

myp said:
Clearly you have no idea what facts are. Human life is a man-made term- here there is no specification and semantics can be argued. Live in your fantasy world though. Oh and check out my edit about the societal impact since you seem to suggest an inherent positive effect upon banning abortion. Or don't. What do I care?

You can't redefine life (or any word) to fit an agenda. Life is life. Human life is life associated with a lifeform belonging to the genus homo. That's simple, scientific fact. I'll say again you can argue on personhood but not Humanity.

As for your edit, it's irrelevant as the current argument is whether or not an unborn child is a Human and/or person, not abortion itself. The science, not the act.

myp · Nov 28, 2011

David said:
You can't redefine life (or any word) to fit an agenda. Life is life. Human life is life associated with a lifeform belonging to the genus homo. That's simple, scientific fact. I'll say again you can argue on personhood but not Humanity.

1. The definition for life is not agreed upon to this day.
2. You can argue what is considered free-living human life. Under your definition of just using the genus name (not sure why you used genus instead of species either, but that's another story) and the associated DNA, all gametes are also human life. As is hair. Being produced by human life does not mean it is human life. It is really semantics though. Chemically, it is not relevant.

David said:
As for your edit, it's irrelevant as the current argument is whether or not an unborn child is a Human and/or person, not abortion itself. The science, not the act.

You are the one that brought up society with "...will, barring complications during pregnancy, grow into a functioning member of society".

Kind of ironic that two posts ago you also said "Murder is the unlawful killing of 1 Human by another. An unborn child no making it to term isn't the same thing as purposeful abortion" in which you bring up murder being an unlawful killing. Surely you aren't arguing that the law is not subjective, are you? (because if you were, you are contradicting yourself by saying the definition of human life is a scientific definition and not subjective) (and if you weren't you just admitted the definition is arguable due to the context since it relies on the definition set by the law).

RoccoR · Dec 1, 2011

David, et al,

This is one of those emotionally charged subjects that cannot really be discussed with any certainty of right and wrong.

On the scientific side, one cannot define life (truly). For any definition that is given, one can find a paradox or exception.

On the religious side, one cannot define the source or its existence. It is merely what man thinks about creation in a spiritual sense.

David said:
You can't redefine life (or any word) to fit an agenda. Life is life. Human life is life associated with a lifeform belonging to the genus homo. That's simple, scientific fact. I'll say again you can argue on personhood but not Humanity.

As for your edit, it's irrelevant as the current argument is whether or not an unborn child is a Human and/or person, not abortion itself. The science, not the act.

(COMMENT)

Every animal has DNA. My cat (Max) has DNA. DNA is not unique to humans. It is a replication mat. So, if the death of Max is not an issue, the question becomes, what aspect of a human is so radically unique and different about humans, that we treat it so differently from every other life-form? It is this, and only this, that makes humanity special. What is that quality?

Once you define that special quality and determine the origins of this special quality --- about humans, what we sometimes refer to as sentient life or consciousness , then we can intelligently talk about when life begins. That is the key to the abortion issue. It is through understanding what is lost (or not lost) in the abortion process that we can better analyse (unemotionally) the consequences.

Most Respectfully,
R

David · Dec 1, 2011

RoccoR said:
David, et al,

This is one of those emotionally charged subjects that cannot really be discussed with any certainty of right and wrong.

On the scientific side, one cannot define life (truly). For any definition that is given, one can find a paradox or exception.

On the religious side, one cannot define the source or its existence. It is merely what man thinks about creation in a spiritual sense.

(COMMENT)

Every animal has DNA. My cat (Max) has DNA. DNA is not unique to humans. It is a replication mat. So, if the death of Max is not an issue, the question becomes, what aspect of a human is so radically unique and different about humans, that we treat it so differently from every other life-form? It is this, and only this, that makes humanity special. What is that quality?

Once you define that special quality and determine the origins of this special quality --- about humans, what we sometimes refer to as sentient life or consciousness , then we can intelligently talk about when life begins. That is the key to the abortion issue. It is through understanding what is lost (or not lost) in the abortion process that we can better analyse (unemotionally) the consequences.

Most Respectfully,
R

You're assuming I place Humans higher then other life, I don't. If it's not self-defense or for food I oppose killing anything. I let even roaches be so long there not posing a health risk.

As for biological life, it can be defined. Life is any organic material that can feed, produce wast and reproduce/replicate. Non-organic life is a bit harder to define but most would agree that it's alive if is is a person which is to say sapient (not to be confused with sentient as is too often the case).

CatholicCrusader · Dec 1, 2011

RoccoR said:
..........Every animal has DNA. My cat (Max) has DNA. DNA is not unique to humans........

But your cat does not have human DNA and a human does not have Cat DNA.

I think you missed my point in the original first post.

David · Dec 1, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
But your cat does not have human DNA and a human does not have Cat DNA.

I think you missed my point in the original first post.

No he didn't, he was trying to pain me as a hypocrite for only caring about Human life. A more intelligent version of the "pro-lifers should be anti-execution" argument. Alas my views aren't Human-centric.

myp · Dec 1, 2011

David said:
As for biological life, it can be defined. Life is any organic material that can feed, produce wast and reproduce/replicate.

Um, no. For one, the EXACT DEFINITION OF LIFE IS BIOLOGICALLY ARGUABLE. Look it up if you want to- biologists still aren't settled on one definition in academia. Or give me the benefit of the doubt (I'll have my B.S. in Bio in a few months) that I know what I am talking about. That aside, the definition of life generally revolves around an organism that shows homeostasis, metabolism, growth, adaptation, reproduction. Some might argue more or less traits, but usually (not always) these 5 are there.

David said:
Non-organic life is a bit harder to define but most would agree that it's alive if is is a person which is to say sapient (not to be confused with sentient as is too often the case).

You don't know what organic means. Organic is something that is or is derived from life. Chemically, they contain carbon (although all carbon containing compounds are not organic). Inorganic life does not exist- the term is an oxymoron. There are some scientists trying to create life from inorganic chemicals but as soon as it becomes life (if they are successful) it will be organic.

dabdab · Dec 1, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
But your cat does not have human DNA and a human does not have Cat DNA.

I think you missed my point in the original first post.

so what if the cats dna is different the fact remain that the matter is a religious belief and it has to be adhered to by the believers . the others should respect there believe as will as the believers should respect the others choice . if you subject religion belief to the science you will end up losing the religion for the wrong reasons .

David · Dec 1, 2011

myp said:
You don't know what organic means. Organic is something that is or is derived from life. Chemically, they contain carbon (although all carbon containing compounds are not organic). Inorganic life does not exist- the term is an oxymoron. There are some scientists trying to create life from inorganic chemicals but as soon as it becomes life (if they are successful) it will be organic.

It doesn't exist now, no. But try telling a sapient android 10 times as strong as you and 5 times as smart that it's not alive when the time comes. It'll ether kill you or compare you to algae.

myp · Dec 1, 2011

David said:
It doesn't exist now, no. But try telling a sapient android 10 times as strong as you and 5 times as smart that it's not alive when the time comes. It'll ether kill you or compare you to algae.

Will killing an android be considered murder or killing life? No. You are talking about animation, not the biological definition of LIFE.

David · Dec 1, 2011

myp said:
Will killing an android be considered murder or killing life? No. You are talking about animation, not the biological definition of LIFE.

I said as much.

I did say organic vs. non-organic, don't act like I didn't make a distinction or deny that non-organic life doesn't currently exist.

myp · Dec 1, 2011

David said:
I said as much. I did say organic vs. non-organic, don't act like I didn't make a distinction or deny that non-organic life doesn't currently exist.

Non-organic "life" is not life. I don't know why you are talking about robots in this thread anyway- it is about life, human life, and when it is defined, not robots.

David · Dec 2, 2011

myp said:
Non-organic "life" is not life. I don't know why you are talking about robots in this thread anyway- it is about life, human life, and when it is defined, not robots.

I was just making a side point. You derailed this thread focusing on it.

DodgeFB · Dec 2, 2011

David said:
I was just making a side point. You derailed this thread focusing on it.

Looks like this will be one of those "never ending" threads.

CatholicCrusader · Dec 2, 2011

myp said:
Will killing an android be considered murder or killing life? No. You are talking about animation, not the biological definition of LIFE.

Will that android have human DNA? Nope. Stop setting up straw men.

The babe in the womb is a human being and killing her/him is murder. Its very simple. You are complicating a very simple thing in order to justify slaughtering millions of innocents.

RoccoR · Dec 2, 2011

David, et al ,

I beg yoour pardon (no sarcasm intended). But it was nothing of the sort.

David said:
No he didn't, he was trying to pain me as a hypocrite for only caring about Human life. A more intelligent version of the "pro-lifers should be anti-execution" argument. Alas my views aren't Human-centric.

(COMMENT)

I am neither pro-Life - or non-Pro; when viewed in the entire spectrum. From viruses (Non-cellular life) on up, it is obvious that the conditions were met for these life forms to evolve. I (as a life form), in all probability, may never understand if it was by design or as a natural consequence of the processes of the universe.

I tend to look as these discussions with some objectivity. I have no intention of belittling, being disrespectful, or condescending towards anyone, party to the discussion.

(QUESTION)

My questions are simple.

What is it that makes a human special, above all other life forms on Earth? When is it that a human demonstrates something more than just another animal?
What is this quality?
What is its source or point of origin?
When did I, as a baby, exhibit something more than did Max as a kitten?

I honestly don't have the answers to these questions.

I don't expect an answer. I see by the discussion, that it has advanced beyond the basics.

Again, my apologies if I have, in some way, offended you.

Most Respectfully,
R

myp · Dec 2, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
Will that android have human DNA? Nope. Stop setting up straw men.

The babe in the womb is a human being and killing her/him is murder. Its very simple. You are complicating a very simple thing in order to justify slaughtering millions of innocents.

I am not complicating it and the android response was to David not you since he thought a side point that was irrelevant to the discussion would somehow be needed here. You just want to believe what you believe and not actually look at facts. That is fine but STOP MISREPRESENTING WHAT SCIENCE SAYS in the process. You only make yourself look foolish in doing so. Everything isn't as intuitive as you want it to be- that is the universe for you.

CatholicCrusader · Dec 5, 2011

U.S. Abortion Deaths Compared to U.S. War Deaths
Revolutionary War - 4,435 deaths.
Civil War (both sides) - 498,332 deaths.
World War I - 116,708 deaths.
World War II - 407,316 deaths.
Korea - 25,604 deaths.
Vietnam - 58,168 deaths.
Total killed due to abortion since 1973 - 35,000,000 (35 MILLION) deaths.

Horrible.

David · Dec 5, 2011

myp said:
I am not complicating it and the android response was to David not you since he thought a side point that was irrelevant to the discussion would somehow be needed here. You just want to believe what you believe and not actually look at facts. That is fine but STOP MISREPRESENTING WHAT SCIENCE SAYS in the process. You only make yourself look foolish in doing so. Everything isn't as intuitive as you want it to be- that is the universe for you.

It was relevant but I wasn't talking to you. You're arguing semantics trying to disprove an argument I didn't make.

Abortion: Science or Legalisms

Similar threads