unknown user 7 Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 lol, it's just that it seems people are arguing points to death... when clearly neither side is going to budge! Lol, I just had time on my hands, and was decided to toy with the idea of instigating a very serious and controversial over nothing. So I decided to zone in on ur fetus statement, cause ppl ways get touchy and crazy over abortion issues, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avenir001 Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 Fetuses are not human beings. I think even an embryo is a human being, and a super-cute one at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 I think even an embryo is a human being, and a super-cute one at that. I'll let you guys in on a little secret, lol, I intentionally said that statement to see if their would be a long 1 page post arguing it... and what do you know, there was!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heathcliff Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 This forum looks like the transcript from my last interview. NOT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 This forum looks like the transcript from my last interview. NOT! LOLLLLL . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfette Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 A fetus is most definitely a human being. That is a simple biological fact. Hey Devari. I neither agree nor disagree with your position on abortion. I have no intention of publicizing on this forum my religious beliefs. But I disagree with your sweeping, generalized statement of this being a "simple biological fact". Whether someone agrees or disagrees with you depends on their definition of "human being". The problem with the whole abortion debate is that the pro-life people considers life to begin at conception wherease pro-choice people considers life to begin at birth. Then, there's the gray area where life doesn't begin at a particular moment, but is a gradual process. This includes the many people who consider themselves "pro-choice" and are okay with early-term abortion, but are morally against late-term abortion. There's also the "pro-life" people who would be okay with abortion in instances of rape or incest. It is not a trivial thing to define where life starts. What I am saying is that the definition of what constitutes a "human being" is neither biological nor scientific, but rather social, moral, religious, and political. Science says a fetus is a fetus. It does not have the answer to moral questions - that is the field of religion and philosophy. I firmly believe that no woman whether pro-life or pro-choice would ever want to make a decision about abortion. The most pro-choice woman in the world doesn't want to have an unwanted pregnancy and a subsequent abortion. And the most pro-life woman in the world doesn't want her teenage daughter to have an unwanted pregnancy, to watch the father disappear off the face of the planet, and give up her future and her career to a life of poverty for herself and her baby. And in a world where contraception methods are safe, convenient, and easy, abortion should never have to be a problem. If the two extreme pro-life and pro-choice sides would stop pushing their ideology and work together to prevent women from ever having to make the decision in the first place, then maybe abortion would stop becoming an issue. I was reading an interesting article in Times/MacLean's (can't remember which one) about the abortion issue. They talked about how an abortionist and a Catholic priest in this one American town began working together to prevent unwanted preganancies. Obviously, the abortionist is still pro-choice and the priest is still pro-life, but they worked hard to see the other side's point of view. They were the most unlikely group to ever come together. But I bet they are extremely powerful in their ability to actually help solve the problem in their communities. Regardless of your beliefs, this is what all of us should be doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 Great post, Smurfette! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 Hey Devari. I neither agree nor disagree with your position on abortion. I have no intention of publicizing on this forum my religious beliefs. But I disagree with your sweeping, generalized statement of this being a "simple biological fact". Whether someone agrees or disagrees with you depends on their definition of "human being". The problem with the whole abortion debate is that the pro-life people considers life to begin at conception wherease pro-choice people considers life to begin at birth. Then, there's the gray area where life doesn't begin at a particular moment, but is a gradual process. This includes the many people who consider themselves "pro-choice" and are okay with early-term abortion, but are morally against late-term abortion. There's also the "pro-life" people who would be okay with abortion in instances of rape or incest. It is not a trivial thing to define where life starts. What I am saying is that the definition of what constitutes a "human being" is neither biological nor scientific, but rather social, moral, religious, and political. Science says a fetus is a fetus. It does not have the answer to moral questions - that is the field of religion and philosophy. I firmly believe that no woman whether pro-life or pro-choice would ever want to make a decision about abortion. The most pro-choice woman in the world doesn't want to have an unwanted pregnancy and a subsequent abortion. And the most pro-life woman in the world doesn't want her teenage daughter to have an unwanted pregnancy, to watch the father disappear off the face of the planet, and give up her future and her career to a life of poverty for herself and her baby. And in a world where contraception methods are safe, convenient, and easy, abortion should never have to be a problem. If the two extreme pro-life and pro-choice sides would stop pushing their ideology and work together to prevent women from ever having to make the decision in the first place, then maybe abortion would stop becoming an issue. I was reading an interesting article in Times/MacLean's (can't remember which one) about the abortion issue. They talked about how an abortionist and a Catholic priest in this one American town began working together to prevent unwanted preganancies. Obviously, the abortionist is still pro-choice and the priest is still pro-life, but they worked hard to see the other side's point of view. They were the most unlikely group to ever come together. But I bet they are extremely powerful in their ability to actually help solve the problem in their communities. Regardless of your beliefs, this is what all of us should be doing. I whole-heartedly agree with you. About everything, the sweeping generalization of "biological fact" and about your suggestions about abortion. Great post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devari Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Hey Devari. I neither agree nor disagree with your position on abortion. I have no intention of publicizing on this forum my religious beliefs. I generally try to avoid bringing religious beliefs into these discussions. The only reason I've mentioned religion at all on these forums has been in response to others who have brought the topic up in their own posts. But I disagree with your sweeping, generalized statement of this being a "simple biological fact". Whether someone agrees or disagrees with you depends on their definition of "human being". I was clearly referring to a scientific definiton when I stated that "A fetus is most definitely a human being." A simple definition of human being from http://www.dictionary.com is: human being –noun 1. any individual of the genus Homo, esp. a member of the species Homo sapiens. A fetus is very obviously human and has a distinct genetic identity from the moment of conception. If someone wants to use a subjective definition of what they consider to be a "human being" that's fine, but at that point this ceases to be a scientific discussion. The problem with the whole abortion debate is that the pro-life people considers life to begin at conception wherease pro-choice people considers life to begin at birth. Actually, there is no uncertainty about when life begins. An embryo is alive from the moment of conception. There's absolutely no way to refute this. If someone wants to argue that they don't believe that an embryo is a "person" in a subjective sense that's a completely separate argument. But trying to suggest that a human embryo isn't alive before birth is simply wrong. Then, there's the gray area where life doesn't begin at a particular moment, but is a gradual process. This includes the many people who consider themselves "pro-choice" and are okay with early-term abortion, but are morally against late-term abortion. There's also the "pro-life" people who would be okay with abortion in instances of rape or incest. It is not a trivial thing to define where life starts. Again, you're not using the correct terminology here. A distinct human life is created from the moment of conception. There is no point at all at during human development at which an embro or fetus is not alive. What I am saying is that the definition of what constitutes a "human being" is neither biological nor scientific, but rather social, moral, religious, and political. Science says a fetus is a fetus. It does not have the answer to moral questions - that is the field of religion and philosophy. Whether abortion is "right" or "wrong" isn't an issue that can be determined scientifically, but there are certain things that science can bring to the debate. For example, the fact that an embryo is alive from conception is a simple fact that is known scientifically. I firmly believe that no woman whether pro-life or pro-choice would ever want to make a decision about abortion. The most pro-choice woman in the world doesn't want to have an unwanted pregnancy and a subsequent abortion. And the most pro-life woman in the world doesn't want her teenage daughter to have an unwanted pregnancy, to watch the father disappear off the face of the planet, and give up her future and her career to a life of poverty for herself and her baby. And in a world where contraception methods are safe, convenient, and easy, abortion should never have to be a problem. If the two extreme pro-life and pro-choice sides would stop pushing their ideology and work together to prevent women from ever having to make the decision in the first place, then maybe abortion would stop becoming an issue. I was reading an interesting article in Times/MacLean's (can't remember which one) about the abortion issue. They talked about how an abortionist and a Catholic priest in this one American town began working together to prevent unwanted preganancies. Obviously, the abortionist is still pro-choice and the priest is still pro-life, but they worked hard to see the other side's point of view. They were the most unlikely group to ever come together. But I bet they are extremely powerful in their ability to actually help solve the problem in their communities. Regardless of your beliefs, this is what all of us should be doing. I agree that the social aspects that contribute to abortion are important to address. At the same time, if someone believes that abortion is wrong then they also have a responsibilty to argue against the legality of abortion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMmd Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 just because you end your sentences with " it is a simple fact that is known scientifically" doesnt make it true... dude, nothing is so black or white EVEN in science! oh devari, im curious, what is your educational background? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avenir001 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 ...and while we're at it, I'd like to know if Devari ever smiles, laughs, or tells jokes? Devari's predicted response: Sorry, but I don't see how that is relevant to the fundamental issues we are discussing here. The aspect of one's behavior about which you are inquiring is an outward manifestation of one's inner emotions whose role in reasoning and logic have not been supported by scientific research. LOL <-- note that tongue indicates avenir's chillaxed & easy-going attitude which Devari is welcome to adopt should he wish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMmd Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 hahahah ... that is awesome... im thinking he will say: of course I laugh, its a normal biological process that was proven scientifically lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JewelLeigh Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 ...and while we're at it, I'd like to know if Devari ever smiles, laughs, or tells jokes? Devari's predicted response: Sorry, but I don't see how that is relevant to the fundamental issues we are discussing here. The aspect of one's behavior about which you are inquiring is an outward manifestation of one's inner emotions whose role in reasoning and logic have not been supported by scientific research. LOL <-- note that tongue indicates avenir's chillaxed & easy-going attitude which Devari is welcome to adopt should he wish ROFL! That is potentially the most hilarious post I have read on this forum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 ...and while we're at it, I'd like to know if Devari ever smiles, laughs, or tells jokes? Devari's predicted response: Sorry, but I don't see how that is relevant to the fundamental issues we are discussing here. The aspect of one's behavior about which you are inquiring is an outward manifestation of one's inner emotions whose role in reasoning and logic have not been supported by scientific research. LOL <-- note that tongue indicates avenir's chillaxed & easy-going attitude which Devari is welcome to adopt should he wish LOL ziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devari Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 just because you end your sentences with " it is a simple fact that is known scientifically" doesnt make it true... dude, nothing is so black or white EVEN in science! An embryo is alive from the moment of conception. In this instance this is a statement that is completely irrefutable. oh devari, im curious, what is your educational background? I'm currently in the sixth year of my Ph.D. program in biochemistry. What about yourself? ...and while we're at it, I'd like to know if Devari ever smiles, laughs, or tells jokes? In person I smile, laugh and tell jokes all the time. On these forums, however, I don't do these things very often because I'm too busy trying to win the internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samsara Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Hi all, didn't realize the saga was continuing, but here's my second (tentative) foray into this argument. Devari...since you have no qualms in referring to dictionary.com...here's a taste of your own medicine . You mentioned the definition of human being as "human being –noun 1. any individual of the genus Homo, esp. a member of the species Homo sapiens." So, I decided to go a step ahead and refer to the lovely dictionary.com website to find out what being an "individual" entails. And lo and behold, definition 5 of "individual" is Biology. a. a single organism capable of independent existence Now, a fetus isn't capable of independent existence - I hope you don't have a problem with that statement - so, given the dependence on the mother and all (and just as a side, I'm not going so far as Judith Jarvis Thompson does with the dependency theories) one could argue that a fetus is not a person right? This is based entirely on "definition" - a similar mode of reasoning you employed previously. I'm not interested in any ad hominem attacks on what I think to be flaws in your character here, but I am hoping to simply point out to you that things aren't always black and white. You disagree with cosmetic surgeries based on some definition of normalcy that you've formulated in your 30 odd years on this planet - that's great, good for you. But just keep in mind what's "biologically average" is always just that - an average. Others have differing opinions because their perspective on what's normal/average might be different - which is why I mentioned preferences in my first post. Someone might have helpful doses of intelligence and wit - and this could very well compensate for a gargantuan nose in their experience. Others might not have the right neurobiochemistry to deal with these matters as well as someone else - there are several recent studies that show variations between people and the way they deal with stress. Our phenotypes are a combination of our genotypes and their respective interactions with the environment. Try to keep this in mind. You might believe that difficulties breed strength, and maybe from a Nietszchean perspective, I agree with you - but at the same time, I've seen many who have withered and crumbled under similar or lesser pressures. Judging the respective psyches of people is a bit difficult - unless that PhD in biochemistry has also conferred upon you some lordship over psychological understanding. The definition i mentioned above is meant to demonstrate what i just spent a long paragraph outlining. There are few absolutes- by the very definition of the scientific method - just theories waiting to be disproven or established as relatively real/true in the experience of budding scientists. The day an apple heads skyward instead of falling on the ground- gravity will take a bit of a hit. (I'm not suggesting this will happen in our lifetime or anyone else's - just that the scientific method necessitates that we keep our minds open to the possibility of such an event). So, if possible, try to keep an open mind to the possibility that other definitions can work too depending on how you deconstruct them. Anyhow...good luck in your endeavors to establish dominion over internet forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ève Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 samsara: that was beautiful!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown user 7 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Can't we just end this debate, by listening to me to tell everyone to, "SHUT UP." lol. Jks. Let's start a new thread or something and say that its the thread that says Cool Interviews Thread is all kaymcee and law's fault, lol. So now everybody, lets move all this posting energy to a thread that really discusses serious life issues, the What's Everybody Doing Thread. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Can't we just end this debate, by listening to me to tell everyone to, "SHUT UP." lol. Jks. Let's start a new thread or something and say that its the thread that says Cool Interviews Thread is all kaymcee and law's fault, lol. So now everybody, lets move all this posting energy to a thread that really discusses serious life issues, the What's Everybody Doing Thread. Lol. LOL unknown, the "what's everybody doing..." thread is TOO serious to bring in such a silly forum as this :p Poor kaymcee, his thread got derailed BIG time lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown user 7 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 LOL unknown, the "what's everybody doing..." thread is TOO serious to bring in such a silly forum as this :p Poor kaymcee, his thread got derailed BIG time lol. Hmmm....I guess ur right, I think it might be too much for every one on this thread to deal with. We do after all deal with very serious stuff that should really result in the closing of the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vip_138 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 LOL unknown, the "what's everybody doing..." thread is TOO serious to bring in such a silly forum as this :p Poor kaymcee, his thread got derailed BIG time lol. i fail to see how this thread got derailed. tell me, how is a massive theological, pscyholgical and biological debate concerning abortion, plastic surgery and life in general is off topic (lol, i might be confusing the genetics thread with this one too). ooo, we should debate whether or not this thread has gotten derailed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown user 7 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 i fail to see how this thread got derailed. tell me, how is a massive theological, pscyholgical and biological debate concerning abortion, plastic surgery and life in general is off topic (lol, i might be confusing the genetics thread with this one too). ooo, we should debate whether or not this thread has gotten derailed Better yet, we should really debate about which of the thread is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Better yet, we should really debate about which of the thread is better? Or we should debate the merits of debating whether or not the thread got derailed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted May 5, 2007 Report Share Posted May 5, 2007 Better yet, we should really debate about which of the thread is better? Sure, if someone can differentiate the two for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.