An Unborn Child is in Fact, Human

[Mr. Nice Guy]

BTW, I'm going to see a movie ya'll: The Sum of All Fears. . .

So C-Ya!

[Jon Miller]

the person I am now talking to seem reasonable

I might hold his position myself (not certain)

Jon Miller

[Ramo]

I was trying to develope the zygote as human

since you are not being open minded, instead taking it on faith that the zygote is not human

I already said that the zygote is human.

so you are taking your desired result as given

Not at all. I was pointing out the distinction between human and person, because you keep getting them mixed up.

and you say that does not matter, the zygote is not human

See the first page. I said that the zygote is human since it has the DNA of a human person.

I keep starting to build up a logical basis

It seems to me that all you've been doing is throwing around ad hominens.

I have the zygote status as undefined and am trying to show how it developes

You're not doing it very effectively.

you are being illogical and close minded

you are not worthwhile talking to in this matter
goodbye

Ditto.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
the person I am now talking to seem reasonable

I might hold his position myself (not certain)

Jon Miller

Oh come on, Jon. Don't back down now. In doing so, you will have allowed Satan to decieve you.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Cloud9
Since the pro-choicers around here are simply not gonna listen to us and keep repeating things over and over and over again when we've already proved that an embryo is human,

1) You never proved that embryo is a human.
2) You never disproven any of my arguments.

Akka le Vil

aren't you disturbed by all the murder that is being done?

What do you mean ?
Are you asking me if I'm not disturbed by the murders that happen in the world ?
By the abortions that happen after the fetus got a functionnal brain ?
Something else ?

I'd like to be sure to fully understand the question to be able to adequately answer it.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Cloud9


Oh come on, Jon. Don't back down now. In doing so, you will have allowed Satan to decieve you.

It's perhaps an attempt to be humorous. But if it's not, it clearly shows that you're much more interested sticking blindly to your beliefs rather than evaluating if they're true or false.

[Stefu]

Yes, everyone knows that a good debate on Nazi Germany is always spiced up with some nice Holocaust pictures. Bring out the body piles! It won't achieve anything, but it -will- shock hapless surfers!

I mean, there obviously exists a comparison for Holocaust pictures in Holocaust museums, websites about Holocaust or TV programs about Holocaust, and abortion pictures paraded on streets or suddenly and without much warning thrust upon us on threads like this.

Do you think PETA's similar antics, except with gruesome pictures of slaughtered animals instead of aborted fetuses, are OK?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


1) You never proved that embryo is a human.
2) You never disproven any of my arguments.





What do you mean ?
Are you asking me if I'm not disturbed by the murders that happen in the world ?
By the abortions that happen after the fetus got a functionnal brain ?
Something else ?

I'd like to be sure to fully understand the question to be able to adequately answer it.

to be fair, he was probably refering to Ramo and the others who were in the argument

and I was refering to murders done after the fetus has a brain

Jon Miller

[Akka]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
and I was refering to murders done after the fetus has a brain

Well, I admit that I'm slighty less disturbed with late abortions than with "classical" murders. Probably because I know it will never touch me (I'm somehow past the fetus stage ^^).
Still, well, I'm against abortion after the fetus has got a sense of feeling (unless of course their is health reasons about the mother, but in these cases there is anyway possibilties to remove the fetus from the womb without killing him).

All in all, I'm disturbed with this like you probably are disturbed when you hear about murders in a distant country. After all it's nearly the same case

But I wonder what this question has to do with the rest of the debate

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Stefu
Yes, everyone knows that a good debate on Nazi Germany is always spiced up with some nice Holocaust pictures. Bring out the body piles! It won't achieve anything, but it -will- shock hapless surfers!

I mean, there obviously exists a comparison for Holocaust pictures in Holocaust museums, websites about Holocaust or TV programs about Holocaust, and abortion pictures paraded on streets or suddenly and without much warning thrust upon us on threads like this.

Do you think PETA's similar antics, except with gruesome pictures of slaughtered animals instead of aborted fetuses, are OK?

I am not really shocked by the sight of blood and guts, or pictures of slaughtered animals etc. but I am rightfully disturbed when I see a picture of an innocent human being that was killed. Some people can easily ignore an issue if they are not confronted with the reality that may be presented with pictures.

PETA's antics may be effective but I don't think we are talking about the advertising effectiveness of a cause are we? The fact is that at least one of those pictures was a full term baby. Should we pretend that the sight is not shocking? Why should debates like this be limited to ridiculous arguments about the words "human", "person" and "viability"? I think that the pictures that he posted are entirely appropriate here.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Lincoln
The fact is that at least one of those pictures was a full term baby. Should we pretend that the sight is not shocking? Why should debates like this be limited to ridiculous arguments about the words "human", "person" and "viability"? I think that the pictures that he posted are entirely appropriate here.

The fact that one of these abortion was excessive and should not have been made does not make adequately timed (before the brain develops) abortions wrong.

[Lincoln]

That is like saying that of the 6 million Jews killed there were several thousand that were convicted killers. Why would you want to minimize the deaths of the innocent by pointing out that some of them may or may not have a developed brain? Is splitting hairs somehow supposed to produce a legitimate diversion from the fact that real babies with real brains are being killed even as we argue about brain development?

[Akka]

Originally posted by Lincoln
That is like saying that of the 6 million Jews killed there were several thousand that were convicted killers. Why would you want to minimize the deaths of the innocent by pointing out that some of them may or may not have a developed brain? Is splitting hairs somehow supposed to produce a legitimate diversion from the fact that real babies with real brains are being killed even as we argue about brain development?

Completely stupid.
I won't be part of such an absurd amalgam.
The fact is : it seems that USA are allowing abortion much too late. This particular case does not mean that well-done abortion is bad, just that some are. You just become hysterical on the issue and try to associate good use and bad use of something with emotionnal outburst, as you probably have nothing else to back up your beliefs.

[Lincoln]

What is "good" about killing babies? I guess I don't follow you. And how is killing a baby "well done" -- when there are no pictures?

[Akka]

Originally posted by Lincoln
What is "good" about killing babies? I guess I don't follow you. And how is killing a baby "well done" -- when there are no pictures?

If you want be part of the discussion and be ready to BACK UP your position, then come back to the second previous page and read my big post. THEN, try to disprove my reasonning.

If you just want to wave your arms in the air and shout "baby-killer baby-killer !" and only argue on the emotionnal side, then do it elsewhere, where you won't prevent others to have a serious discussion.