An Intellectual Discussion About Killing Babies

[monolith94]

"Abortion is not a necessary part of civilised society, but will rather allow the society to consume itself. "

Abortion is a manifestation or cause of society consuming itself? Please - this is alarmist claptrap.

"So people who are currently unconscious are no longer persons?"

I deserve this - for I wasn't being specific. I believe that the creation of a consciousness, the point where the brain comes together and makes the connections that create the first thought of the fetus is around the point where a fetus ceases to be considered just a mass of flesh.

"If you believe that a right can be lost due to extenuating circumstances, what would that say for a population that does not vote? Do they lose their right to liberty because they are lazy?"

A completely irrelevant and silly point. A population that does not vote does not vote for any number of reasons. You're inferring that they do not vote because they do not desire liberty. You have no evidence to make that inference.

[Ben Kenobi]

Victor Galis:

Something that is human and can survive on its own

I meant the child, not human life.

What is the unborn child if it is not human life?

However, you bring up an interesting point in your post.

someone who once could survive on his own.)

Why make the distinction. Clearly, they are not currently independent. Why don't they lose their right to life, since they are not using it properly?

I think it's better to discard the standard of independence, since we are all interdependent on one another for survival.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Many of the environmentalists here are starting to side with hunters as a more environmentally sound form way of obtaining meat.

I don't think so. More ethical (although being more ethical than a factory farm is not something you can brag about) perhaps, but not environmentally sound. If every american went out and hunted for their food they'd probably kill everything in a matter of days.

The most enviornmentaly sound diet is one that has no meat.

[Ben Kenobi]

Abortion is a manifestation or cause of society consuming itself? Please - this is alarmist claptrap.

Abortion is neither the cause, nor a manifestation, but rather is society consuming itself.

Look at the demographics, mono. Europeans fear the Muslims because the Muslim women in Europe have more children. Children are essential for any society to survive.

One of the causes of the decline of the Roman empire was due to the fact that they relied too much on mercenaries for defense. Why did they do that? Because there were not enough young Romans to serve.

You're inferring that they do not vote because they do not desire liberty. You have no evidence to make that inference.

And you are inferring that just because one restricts abortion means that one also is not interested in reproductive freedom.

People can believe in the right for people to have children, with whom they want, but that right need not include abortion.

[Kuciwalker]

btw, I feel sorry for you bipolarbear. I escaped Catholic school after fourth grade.

[Ben Kenobi]

I believe that the creation of a consciousness, the point where the brain comes together and makes the connections that create the first thought of the fetus is around the point where a fetus ceases to be considered just a mass of flesh.

That begs the question.

Is the fetus a mass of flesh before this point? No.

Secondly, when does this magical flash occur? Can you pinpoint it with any regularity? Can you observe it in a lab? Is the hypothesis testable?

Conception meets all of these standards.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Kucinich
...Catholic school...

This explains much

[Kuciwalker]

Like the fact that I'm a pro-gay marriage, pro-choice atheist? (As opposed to a mormon like you.)

[monolith94]

Abortion is not statistically significant enough for me to consider it society consuming itself.

Also I think the reasons why intolerance towards Muslims exists in Europe is a LITTLE more complex than a simple fear that they'll be overwhelmed in a vast swarthy tide of righteousness. At least, I hope that the reason is complex.

You talk of Empire as if you fear that this United States will fall, or at least that seems to be the subtext of your post. The idea that this society we live in will consume itself.

Besides, there are too many people anyways. This world would probably be healthier ecologically at around 5 billion or so. There's no reason why our population needs to keep expanding at the rate that it does.

[Ben Kenobi]

Ah, you are fortunate enough not to know the megalomania of Ceausescu. He wanted to rule over more people so he banned abortion and contraception. Needless to say, some still tried to get abortions.

Did he force them to have kids, or did they do that on their own?

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Kucinich
(As opposed to a mormon like you.)

The Lenin will make you pay for those words

[monolith94]

"Is the fetus a mass of flesh before this point? No."

Yes. Without thought a human being is nothing but a mass of flesh. The only difference is our own human sentiment, that causes us to do such ridiculous things as, say, fancy funeral rights for example.

"Secondly, when does this magical flash occur? Can you pinpoint it with any regularity? Can you observe it in a lab? Is the hypothesis testable?"

The fact that we cannot monitor with accurate precision at this point in science is exactly why I'm so torn up about abortion.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
The Lenin will make you pay for those words

The Reagan shall bury The Lenin!

[Ben Kenobi]

mono:

Abortion is not statistically significant enough for me to consider it society consuming itself.

"The ratio of the number of induced abortions per 100 live births increased from 31.3 in 1999 to 32.2 in 2000."

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/030328/d030328e.htm

"3.96 million live births, 1.31 million induced abortions, and 1 million fetal losses (miscarriages and stillbirths)."

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/03facts/pregbirths.htm

What this means is that 1/4 of all who would have been born have died here in Canada, and about 1/5 in the US.

We have lost 25% of our generation.

Statistically insignificant? I don't think so.

Besides, there are too many people anyways.

So why don't we kill born people to redress the ecological balance?

[Ben Kenobi]

Without thought a human being is nothing but a mass of flesh. The only difference is our own human sentiment, that causes us to do such ridiculous things as, say, fancy funeral rights for example.

They have funeral rites for unborn children in Japan. We would have them here, except the clinics have opposed them for quite some time.

The fact that we cannot monitor with accurate precision at this point in science is exactly why I'm so torn up about abortion.

So why not come to the same conclusion as Barnard Nathanson?

Why not go with the point where you can be confident, rather than insecure?