Emergency contraceptives and/or the pill DO NOT terminate a pregnancy

[morpheus02g]

Some would argue that emergency contraceptives and/or the pill DO NOT terminate a pregnancy. The argument goes as follows:

I. One way an emergency contraceptive works is by irritating the lining of the uterus so that if the woman does become pregnant, the baby will die before he or she can actually attach to the lining of the uterus.

II. A baby necessarily has a heartbeat. That which does not have a heartbeat is not a baby. Therefore the fertilized egg, before its 22nd day, is just that, a fertilized egg. On the 22nd day the heart starts beating. Then it is a baby. (In a similar way, we do not call a seed a tree. A seed is just that, a seed. It is potentially a tree, but not actually a tree. When it has had water and sunlight and time, then it becomes a tree.)

III. So, if the egg, that does not yet have a heartbeat as it has not yet reached its 22nd day, never attaches to the lining of the uterus, then no abortion would have taken place and no baby would have been terminated.

There are so many decent people using birth control and are ignorant of the gravity of their actions. If you have any common sense, helpful counter arguments I would appreciate your response.

God Bless.

 

[tjm190]

“II. A baby necessarily has a heartbeat.”

Says who?

 

[bingbang]

“II. A baby necessarily has a heartbeat.”

Says who?

Yes. The Catholic church states that it’s soul is created right at the moment of conception, right when the egg is fertilized. To be honest I don’t see what a heartbeat has anything to do with it. That fertilized egg will, under the right circumstances, become a full grown human adult. So why does there need to be a heart beat?

 

[morpheus02g]

The train of thought is as follows: to be alive, one has to have a heartbeat. When someone dies their heart stops beating; that is how one distinguishes between a person that is alive and one that is dead.

 

[curlycool89]

The train of thought is as follows: to be alive, one has to have a heartbeat. When someone dies their heart stops beating; that is how one distinguishes between a person that is alive and one that is dead.

You’ll never find a reputable biologist that agrees with that definition. One of the biological traits of being alive is growth, which obviously happens at all times after conception.

Someone could also not have a heart beat but could be kept alive by an outside medical help. Therefore, the heartbeat alone is not enough to split life from death. Also, someone does not die exactly when their heart stops beating (that’s why we have CPR).

 

[morpheus02g]

unfortunately, I am not trying to convince a biologist, just a friend.

And I would argue that when someone’s heart stops beating, they are dead. CPR is used to bring them back to life. It does not make sense to say if someone’s heart stopped beating they are sitll alive. If they are alive, then what is the need for CPR?

 

[Will_B]

The train of thought is as follows: to be alive, one has to have a heartbeat. When someone dies their heart stops beating; that is how one distinguishes between a person that is alive and one that is dead.

So… Since from the point of conception to the 22nd day, there is no heartbeat therefore the baby is dead… It becomes alive on the 22nd day? >>> Yet there is live from conception because there is growth… Cells are dividing and human parts are being formed. >> Remember: Dead plants and dead animals don’t grow, they decay. >>

 

[jafthompson]

I agree with bingbang at conception God gives the new life a soul and as a soul cannot be measured by science you either accept this fact or you better have a better understanding of what you consider to be a person.

 

[JohnDamian]

unfortunately, I am not trying to convince a biologist, just a friend.

And I would argue that when someone’s heart stops beating, they are dead. CPR is used to bring them back to life. It does not make sense to say if someone’s heart stopped beating they are sitll alive. If they are alive, then what is the need for CPR?

CPR does not bring them back to life. They are not dead. CPR merely restores the function of the heart; like using smelling salts on someone who has feinted.

If someone who’s heart has stopped is “dead” does that mean I could bury them straight away instead of trying CPR or calling an Ambulance?

 

[bingbang]

The train of thought is as follows: to be alive, one has to have a heartbeat. When someone dies their heart stops beating; that is how one distinguishes between a person that is alive and one that is dead.

geekosystem.com/dick-cheney-no-pulse-ventricular-assist-device/

Apparently you don’t need a heart beat to be alive anymore

 

[morpheus02g]

CPR does not bring them back to life. They are not dead. CPR merely restores the function of the heart; like using smelling salts on someone who has feinted.

If someone who’s heart has stopped is “dead” does that mean I could bury them straight away instead of trying CPR or calling an Ambulance?

If CPR was not administered, at what point after the heart stops beating then would you say that that person died?

Before CPR and other such resuscitation methods came into practice, people would be buried after their heart stopped beating. Would you say these bodies were buried alive?

 

[bingbang]

If CPR was not administered, at what point after the heart stops beating then would you say that that person died?

Before CPR and other such resuscitation methods came into practice, people would be buried after their heart stopped beating. Would you say these bodies were buried alive?

Look it up, Dick Cheney’s heart does not beat anymore. Anyway, it doesn’t matter. There are millions of living organisms that don’t have a heart. A heart beat is not necessary for life. Your argument is flawed in the eyes of the Catholic church as well as the eyes of biology.

 

[JohnDamian]

If CPR was not administered, at what point after the heart stops beating then would you say that that person died?

For one; activity in the brain; and an onset of permenance with regards to their inability to biologically function.

As bingbang has clearly pointed out heatbeat is irrelevant.

Before CPR and other such resuscitation methods came into practice, people would be buried after their heart stopped beating. Would you say these bodies were buried alive?

Incidentally I would; and ironically my confirmation patron(Bl Duns Scotus) was buried alive after such a mistake.

 

[choose_to_love]

morph, google Maureen condic and you should come up with some good counterarguments. I posted some links of hers a few weeks ago, so you can check my posting history to find those - - I’m short on time right now. Basically, there is no such thing as a fertilized egg; once its fertilized, it is a new, distinct, self-organized individual

westchesterinstitute.net/images/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf Actually there it is.

 

[JAGCath28]

morpheus,

I think curlycool makes a good point. Maybe try to take the approach of cells and growth. Your friend may not be a biologist, but he/she could probably understand the analogy of plants growing. Once a seed is germinated, it begins to grow and is considered alive, right? So in the same way, once an egg is fertilized, it begins to grow and is therefore alive. The seed germination could be considered that plants conception, just like the egg fertilization is conception for mammals (humans).

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

I. One way an emergency contraceptive works is by irritating the lining of the uterus so that if the woman does become pregnant,** the baby will die** before he or she can actually attach to the lining of the uterus.

.

This one answers itself, really. What they do is to prevent implantation. The egg is now a human, who has the door to the nourishment it needs in the ovary to survive slammed shut in its face.

 

[Stylites]

“II. A baby necessarily has a heartbeat.”

Says who?

Only the superstitious.

 

[Stylites]

Some would argue that emergency contraceptives and/or the pill DO NOT terminate a pregnancy. The argument goes as follows: . . .

Your religion incorrectly states 'Roman Catholic". A Roman Catholic adheres to all the faith and morals of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[vera_dicere]

The train of thought is as follows: to be alive, one has to have a heartbeat. When someone dies their heart stops beating; that is how one distinguishes between a person that is alive and one that is dead.

So trees are dead then?

An entitity can only be dead or alive, there is no middle ground. Something that is dead cannot grow. The zygote [NOT fertilised egg, because once the ovum is fertilised it is no longer an egg, it is a zygote], is growing as it moves down the fallopian tube to the uterus.

Anyone who thinks the zygote isn’t alive is in dire need of an education.

My science professor used the acornymn “MRS GREN” to determine if somethign is biologically alive.

Movement, respiration, (cellular), sense, growth, reproduction (cellular), excretion, nutrition. The zygote does all these things. Therefore the zygote is alive. Its heart beat or lack of it is moot.

The pill/MAP does not cause an abortion in the semantical technical sense as an abortion is the ending of a pregnancy and pregnancy doesn’t start until implanation. However, the pill.MAP can KILL that human being in her earliest stages.

The other thing, the human being is not a “baby” or neonate until AFTER its born, before its either a foetus, embryo or zygote et cetera. There is nothing dehumanising about using the correct terms.

But honestly, whatever happened to good old fashioned education and common sense? This is why I hate the pro-abortion argument, its just assinine.

 

[bingbang]

This is why I hate the pro-abortion argument, its just assinine.

I think the pro abortion argument has more to do with a woman’s right than it not technically being a baby. I think they say that it isn’t technically a baby to just make themselves feel better.