Log In Sign Up

Adoption vs Abortion


Abortion Debate

This forum is for Abortion debate only. If you are highly sensitive about this topic, read at your own discretion.

Welcome to the JustMommies Message Boards.

We pride ourselves on having the friendliest and most welcoming forums for moms and moms to be! Please take a moment and register for free so you can be a part of our growing community of mothers. If you have any problems registering please drop an email to boards@justmommies.com.

Our community is moderated by our moderation team so you won't see spam or offensive messages posted on our forums. Each of our message boards is hosted by JustMommies hosts, whose names are listed at the top each board. We hope you find our message boards friendly, helpful, and fun to be on!

Reply Post New Topic
  Subscribe To Abortion Debate LinkBack Topic Tools Search this Topic Display Modes
  #61  
January 24th, 2011, 11:50 AM
Platinum Supermommy
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 10,538
__________________
Shelley, mom to:

Reply With Quote
  #62  
January 24th, 2011, 07:24 PM
smt smt is offline
Mega Super Daddy
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
That "most" neurologists "believe" brain synopses are complete by a certain week of gestation.
Welcome to science where we have a collective judgment, position, and opinion of the community of scientists in a particular field of study.[1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
... the ones that do believe it only "believe" it to be true.
Really? Are you going to delve into post-modernism[2] where there is no such thing as objective truth? If that is the case then everything you say is just your own opinion and no more right than anything I say, including the fact that scientists only "believe" it to be true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
It's an assumption, not something they have been able to confirm.
It's not an assumption, it is based on the facts relating to the growth of nerves into the cortex brain.[3] These can physically be measured.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
...remember when you and Sunflower Mommy got banned from the message boards hosted by American Baby magazine because of your vicious verbal attacks to anyone who planned to circumcise their sons?
I recall being banned, but not for those reasons. Feel free to post what I wrote and critique that. Otherwise it is just your opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
The Socratic Method of debate? That's the one that Aristotle said is not a suitable method of debate when debating ethics. [citation needed]
We have not even gotten to debating the ethics of abortion (what is right and wrong[4]) by the Socratic Method, we have mostly been debating the facts relating to humanness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
And ethical debates seem to be your favorite. I've only seen you active in debating circumcision, religion, and abortion. And yes, all of your debates go in circles. It's useless.
Right, I enjoy debating topics relating to morality as opposed to things everyone agrees about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
It's useless.
Then why do you do it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxfire_ga79 View Post
I was able to correct your link to Wiki, and the gestational age is 3 weeks, meaning that the age of the pregnancy is called 5 weeks.
Great. So you said "Abortions cannot be done before 7 weeks". Case closed.

[1] Scientific consensus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[2] Postmodernism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[3] Fetal Awareness - Review of Research and Recommendations for Practice | Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
[4] Ethics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote
  #63  
January 25th, 2011, 07:39 AM
Super Mommy
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by smt View Post
The cells are certainly human in origin, but a "human being" is more than a simple collection of cells. A human being is a complex collection of trillions of cells in an organization where other emergent properties come to exist, such as consciousness, feelings, etc.


I would say that without a doubt a fetus at the six month stage is a person. I would probably be willing to go lower than that, too.
[QUOTE=smt;22817098]


Are you saying "prove it's not a human being" as opposed to "prove it's not human tissue"? I could if you would dare to define a human being like I asked. If you actually believe that a conceptus is a human being then would you support charging women, who have abortions at any point in a pregnancy, with murder? How about the death penalty for multiple abortions? Of course not, because you don't actually believe that a early-stage conceptus deserves the same protections that a full-fledged human being deserves.

First and Second bolded: So your definition of "human" revolves around the ideal that "something of human nature" becomes a viable "human" when conscious thought comes into existence? So I think it would be logical to deduce from that, given that you believe a 24 week fetus or possibly younger is a viable human, that there is scientific evidence of brain functionality beginning at a certain week of gestation? Can you please show me the study where the scientific community has came up with a definitive answer? Or do you just "feel" like that is a proper point to determine that it's human? Why? Because it looks human to you at that point? It's not viable without the mother at 24 weeks and an attempt won't even be made to save a fetus at younger then 24 weeks gestation. So at 23 weeks and 6 days, a fetus is probably still not cable of conscious brain activity so we have no concern for it's well being, but when it hits your magical 24 week mark, it does? Or is this because you know that 24 weeks is when at attempt at saving a fetus will be made? So, do you base your whole perception of what defines human off of when the scientific community says that a fetus can be saved by hooking it up to machines that does everything for it? Is that even a baby? Something that just lies there not doing anything except existing with machines doing what a mother's body usually would do, that's a human? I want to understand what you define human as and why you deem something human at the point you do.

Third Bolded: Given that you would potentially call a fetus of less than 24 weeks gestation a human, then I assume you are for charging mothers who have abortions when they are 21, 22 or 23 weeks, with murder? You said previously that you think abortions at or after 24 weeks should be illegal, but then also said that you believe a fetus at less than 24 weeks is a potentially a viable human, so you are okay killing a human at that point? So if a conceptus doesn't deserve the same treatment as a full fledged human, but a fetus at 23 weeks in your opinion is full fledged human and can be aborted, then I'm confused, what treatment does or does not it deserve? You can abort either one. So you believe a human being that has not reached a certain number (24 weeks) doesn't deserve the same treatment as a human being that has? I guess I'm also still confused at what point we determine "full fledged human being" status. Please elaborate on that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #64  
January 25th, 2011, 05:11 PM
smt smt is offline
Mega Super Daddy
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love.BryceyBoo View Post
First and Second bolded: So your definition of "human" revolves around the ideal that "something of human nature" becomes a viable "human" when conscious thought comes into existence? So I think it would be logical to deduce from that, given that you believe a 24 week fetus or possibly younger is a viable human, that there is scientific evidence of brain functionality beginning at a certain week of gestation? Can you please show me the study where the scientific community has came up with a definitive answer? Or do you just "feel" like that is a proper point to determine that it's human? Why?
My only argument was that the well-being concerns related to before the 24 week stage are much less because the brain is not sufficiently developed to process basic information such as pain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love.BryceyBoo View Post
Because it looks human to you at that point? It's not viable without the mother at 24 weeks and an attempt won't even be made to save a fetus at younger then 24 weeks gestation. So at 23 weeks and 6 days, a fetus is probably still not cable of conscious brain activity so we have no concern for it's well being, but when it hits your magical 24 week mark, it does? Or is this because you know that 24 weeks is when at attempt at saving a fetus will be made?
I think a fetus should be saved at any stage of the pregnancy if the mother desires that it be brought to term. The reasoning for this varies by age, but before the 24 week stage it would primarily be for the mother's well-being related to her own desires to have a child. Later in the pregnancy (let's say the last trimester) I would say that the fetus is sufficiently "human" to have it's own well-being taken into account for its own sake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love.BryceyBoo View Post
So, do you base your whole perception of what defines human off of when the scientific community says that a fetus can be saved by hooking it up to machines that does everything for it? Is that even a baby? Something that just lies there not doing anything except existing with machines doing what a mother's body usually would do, that's a human? I want to understand what you define human as and why you deem something human at the point you do.
I would say that the point of viability is an important issue because it potentially releases the mother from the obligation to care for the child. Of course, there would be significant risk to a baby to deliver it at that stage just so the mother could avoid the inconvenience of carrying it. I think after the first couple months of pregnancy the mother needs to make a commitment to either carry the baby to term or to abort it as soon as possible. The commitment to continue the pregnancy should be as binding as if someone adopted a child.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love.BryceyBoo View Post
Third Bolded: Given that you would potentially call a fetus of less than 24 weeks gestation a human, then I assume you are for charging mothers who have abortions when they are 21, 22 or 23 weeks, with murder? You said previously that you think abortions at or after 24 weeks should be illegal, but then also said that you believe a fetus at less than 24 weeks is a potentially a viable human, so you are okay killing a human at that point?
I don't think I said that a 24 week old fetus is necessarily a child, I think a good argument can be made that before that point there is less reason for concern. This is all a gray area and I think I could be convinced fairly easily to shift a few weeks or a month either way. I am open to discussion on that. It is important to understand that there isn't a specific day where a transformation happens and we go from "non-person" to "full-fledged-person". It is a process and a transformation over time. What I think matters is to try and delineate where the safe zones are. The issue relating to 24 weeks was in response to a claim that brain activity occurs at somewhere around 4-5 weeks. I don't see that only autonomous brain functions of the brain-stem are of significant concern.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Topic Tools Search this Topic
Search this Topic:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:18 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0