An Unborn Child is in Fact, Human

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


The mind is the spirit. The thing that allows us to think and to feel. Sentience is a work made by the mind, just like running is a work made by your body.
Sentience is a level of thought, and the thoughts comes from the mind.

Mind is the essence.

....and you're using this as a criterion as to when the state has interest in the life of the unborn sufficient as to compel it to protect that life? Talk about specious arguments!

How do you determine that someone or something has a spirit or essence? What do you define as thought? Is it possible to have a mind in the absence of the ability to think?

Clearly not all brain activity is thought. To most people thought is an internal mental activity that takes the form as complex symbolic statements. Thought to a person who has had the ability to hear and speak woukld obviously be different than that of someone who has never had hearing or speech, but the ability of the person to think can be clearly infered from that person's ability to process visual language.

[November Adam]

Akka do you think it is okay to kill organisms without a mind?

Many organisms show a pain response when damage is inflicted on them without having a nervous system. Is it then okay to inflict pain on these organisms?

[Akka]

Originally posted by November Adam
Akka do you think it is okay to kill organisms without a mind?

Many organisms show a pain response when damage is inflicted on them without having a nervous system. Is it then okay to inflict pain on these organisms?

Pain is never ok to inflict.
If the organism as a way to feel pain, then we should not inflict it, or at least try to reduce it as much as we can.
Now, researchs have to be made to see what IS pain and what is mechanical reaction to external interferences.
ie : stone break when hit. Though, I hardly think that stone feel any pain . On the other hand, I can only wonder wether the chemical reactions in that happen in some trees when they are "attacked" (read : some animals start eating them) are pain or just a reaction.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


....and you're using this as a criterion as to when the state has interest in the life of the unborn sufficient as to compel it to protect that life? Talk about specious arguments!

I don't know if it's because I don't masterize sufficiently english to understand it, or if it's because it does not make sense at all, but I couldn't get what you meant.
Please reformulate in a way easier to understand.

How do you determine that someone or something has a spirit or essence? What do you define as thought? Is it possible to have a mind in the absence of the ability to think?

I already answered it about humans in my first post : mind of a human is located in the brain. As long as the brain is not dead, the person have a mind.

Clearly not all brain activity is thought. To most people thought is an internal mental activity that takes the form as complex symbolic statements. Thought to a person who has had the ability to hear and speak woukld obviously be different than that of someone who has never had hearing or speech, but the ability of the person to think can be clearly infered from that person's ability to process visual language.

What do you want to prove ?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Originally posted by November Adam
Akka do you think it is okay to kill organisms without a mind?

Many organisms show a pain response when damage is inflicted on them without having a nervous system. Is it then okay to inflict pain on these organisms?

Mind or no mind. Pain or no pain. The organism is still human and deserves to be protected.

Case closed.

[Akka]

Originally posted by Cloud9


Mind or no mind. Pain or no pain. The organism is still human and deserves to be protected.

Case closed.

I love this guy.
"it's human and we have to protect it !"
"What's a human ?"
"Err... It's human I said !"
"Oh, I see... You know, according to a reasonning sustained by proof, it can be considered NOT human. Would you like to explain me why you consider it human ? Can you back it up ?"
"Oh, you bother me ! I put you on my ignore list ! Tssch, begone ! Now, it IS human ! I decided it !"
"..."

[CyberGnu]

Avoiding commenting on your misinterpretation of the bible again, cloud?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

There is no misinterpretation. The Bible doesn't mention specifics, so there are no specifics. It is speaking of abortion in general.

You are wasting my time! Try something else, please.

[CyberGnu]

If there are no specifics, why do you think it supports your view?

Is it not much more likely that you have decided to interpret it in a way that supports your pre-concieved notion?

You think I'm wasting your time by forcing you to consider your logical mistake? Alas, such is the nature of man...

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
If you don't have a source, you're just blindly asserting.

UR, do you honestly believe that those who know their partners well are at a higher risk of contracting an STD than those that don't? That is absurd! All couples should get tested for STD's before having sex, then that way they know for sure.

I am not blindly asserting. I am making logical reasoning. Case closed.

What's with all this red herring stuff, btw?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Originally posted by CyberGnu
If there are no specifics, why do you think it supports your view?

Is it not much more likely that you have decided to interpret it in a way that supports your pre-concieved notion?

You think I'm wasting your time by forcing you to consider your logical mistake? Alas, such is the nature of man...

You know what? You're just trying to give me a hard time, and because of that I am paying no attention to this topic if you speak of it again. It's over.

[Alexander's Horse]

An unborn child is in fact an unborn child. It has the potential to become human but until there is a live birth this is nothing more than a potential.

I used to buy all this hardline anti-abortion crap until I had children of my own and went though the whole process. Now I don't know - so many pregnancies never make it to term - its a very iffy process. In my opinion, the welfare of the mother is much more important than the welfare of the unborn child.

I'm pro-choice as a result and I don't think a bunch of celibate priests and Christian fundamentalists know the first thing about it. Having said that I think abortion is a poor choice in most cases but I respect people's right to choose.

I've been in the delivery ward when a dead baby was born. The nurses were doing the birth cerificate for my son whilst they were doing the death certificate for the other child. It could very easily have been the other way round. That's life.

We've had 4 live births and lost one, our first, so don't tell me what to think about it until you've been there yourself.

Both my sisters have had miscarriages, one of them multiple miscarriages - but she's currently pregnant again - we're not going to send any congrats till she gets to 6 months with it. My sister in law had a couple of miscarriages. Friends of ours had a downes syndrome child, which they love dearly - they also had the courage to try again and had a child with no disability against all the odds.

I'm afraid this is an area where noone has the answers.

[CyberGnu]

You know what? You're just trying to give me a hard time, and because of that I am paying no attention to this topic if you speak of it again. It's over.

I have to agree with Akka here...

Question: Do you know you are in the wrong, and therefore refuse to discuss the topic, or are you afraid to even consider it?

I understand that realizing that you have misinterpreted the source of your conviction might shake the very foundations of your faith, but that doesn't take away the reality that you have misinterpted the bible...

[CyberGnu]

*wondering whether cloud9 is re-reading his bible or sticking his head in the sand*

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Why do I have to explain my viewpoints in dummy language?