The problem with the Abortion debate

[openmind77]

…
On the other hand, do we think God has reduced us to utter guesswork about the nature of how to act according to the nature we’ve been given? Are we left orphans, with no way of knowing anything about the mind of God?

Certainly we are not left to utter guess work. Jesus’s words are clear enough about helping the poor, the hungry, the sick, the stranger and those in prison. And not stealing and not killing is pretty obvious - even atheists know that. However, what do we know about what he thinks of every specific case - like one specific fertilized egg of a specific woman. Maybe he would rather that she not have ANY children or that she had this child a few years later. or someone else has the child (with this specific soul). I think it is presumptuous to assume you know God’s mind in specific cases.

 

[Bradskii]

An unborn child IS a unique life. science says so. A clump of cells isn’t and never will become so. The two should never be compared in any serious way.

A clump of cells never becomes a child.

OK…

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

An unborn child IS a unique life. science says so. A clump of cells isn’t and never will become so. The two should never be compared in any serious way.

A clump of cells never becomes a child.

OK…

Nope. The child is always a child, nothing happens to make it become a child.

 

[openmind77]

…In other words, therefore, I can say that at the moment of conception a new human person is created and neither you nor anyone else has any grounds to say I’m wrong. Thus, the flaw.

A human person can be said to be created only when a human soul enters/ensouls the fetus. You can not possibly know when that happens. Some people say it happens at 40 days, some at 90 days. Many believe that the soul does not enter until the brain is pretty much fully developed and even then does not stay there continuously and the fetus is permanently ensouled only upon birth.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

…In other words, therefore, I can say that at the moment of conception a new human person is created and neither you nor anyone else has any grounds to say I’m wrong. Thus, the flaw.

A human person can be said to be created only when a human soul enters/ensouls the fetus. You can not possibly know when that happens. Some people say it happens at 40 days, some at 90 days. Many believe that the soul does not enter until the brains is pretty much fully developed and even then does not stay there continuously and the fetus is permanently ensouled only upon birth.

Thanks for proving my point about an arbitrary standard

Personhood is not a serious argument to use in this debate.

 

[Bradskii]

Bradskii:

Sbee0:

An unborn child IS a unique life. science says so. A clump of cells isn’t and never will become so. The two should never be compared in any serious way.

A clump of cells never becomes a child.

OK…

Nope. The child is always a child, nothing happens to make it become a child.

Please give me an example from anywhere at any time where someone, outside of these type of discussions, has ever referred to a zygote as a child.

Thanks.

 

[openmind77]

openmind77:

Sbee0:

…In other words, therefore, I can say that at the moment of conception a new human person is created and neither you nor anyone else has any grounds to say I’m wrong. Thus, the flaw.

A human person can be said to be created only when a human soul enters/ensouls the fetus. You can not possibly know when that happens. Some people say it happens at 40 days, some at 90 days. Many believe that the soul does not enter until the brains is pretty much fully developed and even then does not stay there continuously and the fetus is permanently ensouled only upon birth.

Thanks for proving my point about an arbitrary standard

Personhood is not a serious argument to use in this debate.

Which means you want to set your own arbitrary standard and apply it to everyone? As I said before you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[TheLittleLady]

A zytoge is one stage of a human life. Other stages are embryo, fetus, infant, child, teen, adult, old dude.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

openmind77:

Sbee0:

…In other words, therefore, I can say that at the moment of conception a new human person is created and neither you nor anyone else has any grounds to say I’m wrong. Thus, the flaw.

A human person can be said to be created only when a human soul enters/ensouls the fetus. You can not possibly know when that happens. Some people say it happens at 40 days, some at 90 days. Many believe that the soul does not enter until the brains is pretty much fully developed and even then does not stay there continuously and the fetus is permanently ensouled only upon birth.

Thanks for proving my point about an arbitrary standard

Personhood is not a serious argument to use in this debate.

Which means you want to set your own arbitrary standard and apply it to everyone? As I said before you are entitled to your opinion.

Nope, but it proves exactly what I said about personhood - completely arbitrary, a whole bunch of different standards, people have different opinions, can easily be applied to the born as well as unborn and so on. nothing scientific in any way about it. It’s a non argument in the abortion debate. And any appeal to what is a “legal”person i.e no SSN for an unborn child is logically fallacious.

You have zero grounds to tell me I’m wrong if I say a human person is formed at conception. See the problem?

I go with the science on this one and see a human life which science says was formed at conception.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

Bradskii:

Sbee0:

An unborn child IS a unique life. science says so. A clump of cells isn’t and never will become so. The two should never be compared in any serious way.

A clump of cells never becomes a child.

OK…

Nope. The child is always a child, nothing happens to make it become a child.

Please give me an example from anywhere at any time where someone, outside of these type of discussions, has ever referred to a zygote as a child.

Thanks.

Unborn child is a child.

 

[laylow]

Black and white does not exist in a world immersed with shades of gray…

 

[goout]

It’s a deer!
No it’s an tree!
No! It’s a man!
Go ahead and shoot, I’m not sure.

 

[openmind77]

…You have zero grounds to tell me I’m wrong if I say a human person is formed at conception. See the problem?

No I don’t see the problem at all. It is not a human person because there is no soul yet in that fertilized egg - those are the no-zero grounds.

 

[goout]

Good illustration of the core problem with this issue and many others:
Loss of the ability to reason well.

 

[Sbee0]

Sbee0:

…You have zero grounds to tell me I’m wrong if I say a human person is formed at conception. See the problem?

No I don’t see the problem at all. It is not a human person because there is no soul yet in that fertilized egg - those are the no-zero grounds.

That is your opinion not fact. And therefore I say the person is formed at conception. You can’t prove me wrong. Nor prove you right.

 

[laylow]

Our species isn’t that important in the scheme of earth’s life history. Sure we are clever, but we will go extinct just like the 99% of species before us. Once habitat for a species is lost, so is the species.

 

[goout]

Our species isn’t that important in the scheme of earth’s life history. Sure we are clever, but we will go extinct just like the 99% of species before us. Once habitat for a species is lost, so is the species.

And…what point are you making?

 

[openmind77]

I already agreed that you are entitled to your opinion. You were the one who said that I had no grounds for disagreeing. A human definitely requires a soul in order to be called a human.

 

[goout]

I already agreed that you are entitled to your opinion. You were the one who said that I had no grounds for disagreeing. A human definitely requires a soul in order to be called a human.

Incorrect.
Any scientist/biologist can conclude who is human by simply looking at the scientific data available.

 

[laylow]

Hopefully we are more concerned about whether the soul exists upon fertilization (which can also take place in a petri dish).

A “soul” is a philosophical concept, not a scientific one.