Non-Catholic religions and abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter iamrefreshed
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
c’mon show me a counter evidence that a 90 day old embryo is already capable of reason, memory and/or emotion. just do it.*You put the cart before the horse … those things are not requirements of personhood only qualaties of it. Unless you can show that a person is required to have those to have the rights of personhood then your argument has no basis. I want to see something from science that says it is not a person. You don’t find it.

The disconnect is not what science says … it is obvious that the embryo is on its way to becoming a functioning member of society and that is years away. The disconnect is what you infer from science. Science makes no such claims on whether it is a person or not … it merely makes factual statements from its observations … no one here disputes that … it makes no difference what a 1 day, 90 day, 9 year or 90 year human does … personhood begins at conception and ends at natural death. … it would be much easier for you if it did. You are taking science where science has not gone.

To go where you want takes a lot more than what you have offered here. A website that explains embryology … I have one of those tucked away in a closet. You are making a judgement on human life with pseudo philospical arguements that have no basis in any sort of reason.

Why can’t I decide personhood doesn’t exist if the embryo doesnt have hair. I should get no argument from you … right or would have I gone to far. Where is your line in the sand for if your line if it isnt’ at the beginning then it can be anywhere … can’t it.
 
Or do you mean a fully developed brain?
lets make it easier, does a fertilized egg have a single brain cell?
What if you’re wrong and someday it is proven that an embryo does have cognitive ability? Too bad for those poor dead embryos before science proved they could imagine.
then its just too bad. accidents of history. but dont feel too grouchy about it, just remember that your church did a lot worst in the past. its how humanity learns, through trial & error.
You sound young…
Young enough to still enjoy Halo 3.

Now about your article, it does not touch my contention about a person being defined by the mere presence of a mind.
 
No, I don’t agree. It has the DNA of a human. There isn’t anything about it that isn’t human. It is a very complex, living, separate individual that is functioning naturally, as it is meant to be. It is being what it is.
The presence of a DNA does not constitute a mind.
 
You put the cart before the horse … those things are not requirements of personhood only qualaties of it. Unless you can show that a person is required to have those to have the rights of personhood then your argument has no basis. I want to see something from science that says it is not a person. You don’t find it.
with your religious point of view we might never agree on what a person is. Hear my understanding of it one more tiem…this time I will base it from Webster:

PERSON: the personality of a human being : self

SELF: the union of elements (as body, emotions, thoughts, and sensations) that constitute the individuality and identity of a person

By these unbiased definitions the Zygote is not a person. Agree?

And BTW, all this talk & I dont think I heard a formal definition of ‘person’ from any of you guys. What is it? What is a ‘person’? I will appreciate it more if you can base it from an unbiased source.
it is obvious that the embryo is on its way to becoming a functioning member of society and that is years away.
And this is where we differ. For you the possible end result is no different from its beginning. For me, its a world of difference. The zygote is not a person.
 
Guys -
He’s never going to change his mind because he is what he has accused others on the this thread of being - CLOSE-MINDED. It’s like talking to a wall.
He quotes from the dictionary when it suits his argument, then he uses his own warped and convoluted logic for justifying the murder of innocent humans.
If it takes the ability to reason to qualify as a human being (as Agnos has stated), the mentally retarded, those suffering from Alzheimer’s disease and other demetias should be exterminated at will.
I have only this to say to our friend:
There is none so blind as he who REFUSES to see.
 
lets work our way up, beginning with the fertilized egg. Does it have a mind? Scientifically, NO - since it doesnt have a brain. Without a mind, its not a Human Being.

agree?
The link to the source of this information is below the description of fetal development. I posted the link previously but no one must have clicked on it because many of the questions are answered on the site. I have taken sections from the site so that no one has to bother with the link.

The second link is also very interesting and I encourage posters to read the article about baby Amelia. When exactly did Amelia stop being a lump of meat and become a baby? Was it one second after she was born?
Fetal Development
Carnegie Stage 10 First Trimester
Time Period: 20-23 days post ovulation
The two endocardial tubes formed in Stage 9 now fuse in Stage 10. Together they form one single tube generated from the cells of the “roof” of the neural tube. The heart tube takes on an S-shape establishing the asymmetry of the heart. As the S-shape forms, cardiac muscle contraction begins.
Carnegie Stage 20 First Trimester
Time Period: 51-53 days
Brain is connected to tiny muscles and nerves and enables the embryo to make spontaneous movements.
The scalp plexus is now present. Nasal openings and the tip of the nose are fully formed.
12 Weeks Post Fertilization – Second Trimester
Heartbeat can be detected with external instruments. Lungs develop further as the fetus inhales and exhales amniotic fluid, which is essential for air sacs within lungs to function properly.
18 Weeks Post Fertilization – Second Trimester
**Fetus has phases of sleep and waking and may prefer a favorite sleep position. **Temporary hair called lanugo appears on the head. Lanugo may fall out in the second week after birth, allowing fine scalp hair to grow. Eyebrows begin to form.
22 Weeks Post Fertilization – Second Trimester
Bones of the ear - hammer, anvil and stirrup - harden, making sound conduction possible. Fetus recognizes maternal sounds such as breathing, heartbeat, voice, and digestion.
Amillia Taylor is believed to be the first baby to have survived following a gestation period of less than 23 weeks. “It may be that we need to reconsider our standard for viability in light of Amillia’s case,” a neonatalist at the hospital said…
24 Weeks Post Fertilization – Third Trimester
Fetal brain waves begin to activate auditory and visual systems, both mouth and lips show more sensitivity. Eyes respond to light, while ears respond to sounds originating outside uterus. Permanent teeth buds appear high in gums. Nostrils begin to open. Reflex movements improve.
28 Weeks Post Fertilization – Third Trimester
Fetal brain’s surface appears wrinkled. These convolutions provide more surface area and maximize brain cells. Rhythmic breathing and body temperature are now controlled by the brain.
32 Weeks Post Fertilization – Third Trimester
Eyes open during alert times and close during sleep. Eye color is usually blue, regardless of the permanent color as pigmentation is not fully developed. Final formation of eye pigmentation requires exposure to light and usually happens a few after birth. The iris is colored and the pupil reflexes responding to light. Head hair grows thicker.
 
By these unbiased definitions the Zygote is not a person. Agree?
You just dont get it … I wrote this early in the discussion

A person is the object created by the union of sperm and egg. As soon as that event occurs the object receives the intrinsic and extrinsic qualites of what created it. It is not dependent on anything the object does, or doesnt do, where the object resides, thinks, eats etc. Persons beget persons while I think you suggest persons beget non-persons until such time that some quality(mind) is attained then personhood is given or earned. You suggest that is why they can be destroyed because they are non-persons otherwise it would be murder.

We use words to describe what we are … they classify us … help define us but are not us. Person, human, embryo, adult, black, white, young, old, sick, healthy.

You should get to be protected as a human just as I described …no sooner because you did not exist but at the moment of conception because you do exist … seperate and distinct from sperm and egg.
And BTW, all this talk & I dont think I heard a formal definition of ‘person’ from any of you guys. What is it? What is a ‘person’? I will appreciate it more if you can base it from an unbiased source.
Like Merriam-Webster … I am sure they would be happy to be attributed as support for abortion based on their definition. Sorry your support for your position has to go a little deeper than merriam-webster. You should have reams of scientific analysis that say when a person is meaursable and attains a suficient amount of personhood to be protected. Can someone be 50 percent a person? How about anything less than 100 percent? What if your analysis concludes anything less than 100 say 99 percent is unacceptable?

Ever see a zygote turn into a embryo … ever see (let alone measure) a fetus turn into a person … I doubt it … wait look it up on wikapedia. All this science stuff from you and you cannot give scientific support when a fetus turns into a human or person or whatever it is think it needs to be to not be murdered.

I offered no scientific support for any of my areas … I go back to my igonorance of when personhood happens or how it happens. We really don’t know and for sure you don’t so unless you can offer scientific analysis when this happens otherwise protection begins at the earliest time available (conception).
 
Hi all,

As someone said earlier in this thread, religion and abortion is always an interesting topic.

I don’t believe in abortion at all, but I did have something sad happen to me once, that has always made me question the whole “life starts at conception” argument.

11 years ago I had a blighted ovum.

This is where the egg fertilizes with the sperm, and settles into the womb, creating a placenta, but the cell never divides any further to create an embryo.

After a few weeks, a missed miscarriage occurs.

I thought I was pregnant the whole time, as I didn’t have health insurance, and consequently didn’t have a scan.

At 16 weeks I miscarried, which was only the placenta coming away.
The doctors found no foetal blood, so concluded it was a blighted ovum.

Since then I have always pondered this whole “life starts at conception” as I conceived, if you call the egg and sperm meeting and fertilising, but I never created life.

Just thought I would share this with you all to add to the discussion.

What do you all think?
 
Well, I know that I have been called close-minded here but I thought for those who don’t turn to name calling they might want to still hear my opinion.

So I thought lets go back to what we all learned science 101.

What is Life?:
Even the biologists (people who study life) have a tough time describing what life is! But after many years of studying living things, from the mold on your old tuna sandwich to monkeys in the rainforest, biologists have determined that all living things do share some things in common:
  1. Living things need to take in energy
  2. Living things get rid of waste
  3. Living things grow and develop
  4. Living things respond to their environment
  5. Living things reproduce and pass their traits onto their offspring
  6. Over time, living things evolve (change slowly) in response to their environment
Therefore, in order for something to be considered to “have life” as we know it, it must possess these characteristics.
So what does this mean? Well lets apply these traits to our unborn:

1)It does take energy to grow - in fact there is so much going on at the zygote stage that if you blink you just might miss something. WOW! that is a lot of energy. 😉

2)Well, we do know for a fact that the unborn do get rid of their waste. What thoughtful people.👍

3)Oh yeah the unborn sure do grow and develop. Three stages in just nine short months.🙂

4)Any pregnant mom will attest to how their unborn reacts to their environment. IF you don’t believe that just look at an ultra sound.

5)Well, we know if given the chance they could very well reproduce one day.

6)And yes again we know that if given the chance they well evolve and adapt to their environment. As Agnos has shown he has adapted to his environment of living in the culture of death and now has evolved into a human who cares so little for those whom he once resembled due to his own blown up ego of how much more important he is compared to those who are still very vulnerable. Very sad indeed.😦
 
the presence of a mind defines a person. does fertilized eggs have a mind? does very young embryos have a mind? I am 100% sure that the answer to those are NO & NO…
Why do you think that an embrio has no mind. Because you think the answer is NO. Why that it has to be you who decide? Both the embrio and you have mind, the difference is that yours is more developed, only and only because you were born earlier. Had an embrio given a chance to live as long as you have, there is a probability that the embrio could become a better human compared to you and me or others. Could become worse too, off course. But, still the probability of being a better human it still there. It depends on us (you, me, and the society) which able to influence the outcome.
 
lets work our way up, beginning at the moment of conception.

fertilized eggs doesnt have a single brain cell. so tell me, do fertilized eggs have a mind? are fertilized eggs a person?
Since you were also originated from a fertilized eggs, where did your brain cell come from?
 
My definition of Human Mind:

“Something(s) originated from human, and belong to human”
 
You just dont get it
You cant even answer this simple question.
… I wrote this early in the discussion

A person is the object created by the union of sperm and egg.
I agree with that. But the person is created only after several weeks of processing after the actual union.
Persons beget persons while I think you suggest persons beget non-persons until such time that some quality(mind) is attained then personhood is given or earned.

Like Merriam-Webster … I am sure they would be happy to be attributed as support for abortion based on their definition. Sorry your support for your position has to go a little deeper than merriam-webster.
The dictionary only states the most common understandings of the term. Though personhood is heavily debated, at least i go by common knowledge. You guys cant even give formal definitions of ‘person’ and ‘mind’ that would support your views. With such shortcommings, how can you hope to convince people like me? Like the Catholic Romans (*preferrable than ‘Roman Catholic’ *eh? 😃 ).
 
The dictionary only states the most common understandings of the term. Though personhood is heavily debated, at least i go by common knowledge. You guys cant even give formal definitions of ‘person’ and ‘mind’ that would support your views. With such shortcommings, how can you hope to convince people like me? Like the Catholic Romans (*preferrable than ‘Roman Catholic’ *eh? 😃 ).
Be careful about going by common knowledge.

It used to be common knowledge that…

the world was flat
the sun orbited the earth
and many many more

But we are talking about babies here. A compassionate human being would err on the side of caution.

There is no denying that abortion ends a human life. You are human, you were a embryo, if you were aborted you would be dead.

I’m glad you were not:thumbsup:
 
The presence of a DNA does not constitute a mind.
I don’t really see how that is relevant to what an embryo *is. *

Science defines the mind as a function. Science describes how things work. What it does. Doing is not Being.
 
lets make it easier, does a fertilized egg have a single brain cell?
By day 6 the embryo does. You might want to study fetal development.
then its just too bad. accidents of history. but dont feel too grouchy about it, just remember that your church did a lot worst in the past. its how humanity learns, through trial & error.
You might want to spend more time studying history too. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top