|
|
Post by creature386 on Jun 20, 2014 16:27:48 GMT 5
I am not theropod, but I can also reply: An undeveloped life, that has the potential to become human. Just my sperm has the potential to create a person, but that doesn't compel me to stop beating off. Since there is no unequivocal definition of life, I would just go by the common definition of life starting in the pregnancy. Sperm cells can be considered as part of the body. But when they fuse with ova, the child already gets its complete genetic code and can be considered life. Sure, consciousness is debatable, but there are also some animals that are not normally considered as very intelligent or advanced with probably low consciousness and they are still considered as life that shouldn't be simply killed. Foster homes typically are where children are adopted. So, even when saying that the woman needs foster homes, it still doesn't change that the only real argument against it is "no fun place to be", but I believe the unpleasantness of it should be taken to safe a life. Maybe not the proffesional athlete scenario, but the case where a woman has to choose between aborting or losing a job she sorely needs is still there. If that's the case, I actually can agree with you because I said that a financially difficult situation is a case I can understand. However, if that woman doesn't live in the USA, such situations should not be that common:  OK, theropod, you can reply to the rest, I am not so good at replying to long comments with many quotes and points, sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 20, 2014 21:05:03 GMT 5
A life, a multicellular organism with its own distinct DNA to be exact. Sperm is technically nothing but a part of your own body, and a male amniote can produce almost an infinite amount of identical sperm in his life. The same can not be said for female egg cells, and it can certainly not be said for unborn children.
Afaik foster homes are not where babys given up for adoption get adopted, since they get adopted at a very young age. Usually mothers search for suitable parents before even delivering their child.
Well, I have no idea where you live, but in most modern countries there are laws that prevent such things from happening. There are such things as maternity leave, and it is illegal to fire someone because of a pregnancy. So if the baby is given up for adoption, it really doesn’t have to ruin anything for the mother.
That’s not the baby’s fault, its the fault of the mother’s surroundings. Again, there are better alternatives than aborting a considerable percentage of unwanted pregnancies, and if those are still not enough than something about society has to change.
That’s the reason why abortions are even legal, or at least not criminal in many countries.
Of course a fetus has, do you think it suddenly evolves cognitive functions the second the umbilical cord is cut? That’s a gradual process, fetuses start showing signs of cognitive functions fairly early, it is very difficult to know how much exactly they are capable of, and who are you to judge how much its life is worth at any given time in its development?
But as a matter of facts a considerable number of abortions occurs because the child is likely to be disabled, or because the mother (or, even worse, here relatives) finds a pregnancy too inconvenient.
I wasn’t claiming that wasn’t the case, just that you are not the only abortion-supporter here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vodmeister on Jun 21, 2014 1:05:49 GMT 5
This woman needs to be killed, slowly and painfully. "newborns aren't infants" - disgusting swine  www.youtube.com/watch?v=deFJcKrkZ40Can someone "post-birth abort" her, please?  |
|
|
|
Post by malikc6 on Jun 21, 2014 2:41:55 GMT 5
I have mixed feelings about this, but I'm pro choice. I understand the pro lifers arguments though, but part of the reason why I'm pro choice is because I support stem cell research.
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 21, 2014 4:44:41 GMT 5
A lot of things fit in the category of life, like insects, rodents, and even cancer, therefore just because a fetus is alive doesn't instantly make it precious or anything like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 21, 2014 5:04:38 GMT 5
Creature386 my reply to you was accidently deleted and I am too aggravated to repeat what I wrote at the moment so I'll get to you tommorow.
Yeah if we get really scientific about it, an unborn baby is more human than a sperm cell, but like a sperm cell its lacks any awareness of the world and is thus far less precious than later stages of human life in my opinion.
Okay, either way oprhanages and foster homes are flawed and generally terrible places to live in.
Yeah on paper that sounds fine. But maternity pay only last several months, does not provide a free babysitter, and certainly isn't enough to provide for a child on its own. For a single mother/couple on minimum wage, its not the greatest of situations to be in.
Disownment can still occur. Inability to attend classes can still occur.
And who are YOU to judge how valuable an unborn person is? Only the mother(and usually the father) should be the ones to decide in my opinion.
So? A considerable number of people purchase weapons for the sake of hurting others, am I then given the right to chastise all gun owners?
One, leopjag is actually mostly prolife if I remember correctly. And two I stated I was the only pro choice supporter who had EXPRESSED their opinion here, which was true at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Jun 21, 2014 13:10:53 GMT 5
Well, your reply to theropod already can be applied to several of my points.
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 21, 2014 15:00:42 GMT 5
But unlike sperm it is not expendable. It has everything ot takes to develop. How aware it is depends on the stage of the pregnancy. There are a few sick idiots who advocate abortion even in the late stages, so that’s relevant. That’s certainly true in many places, but we are not talking about putting it in a foster home or orphanage. And either way, the child should be given a choice. Where I live parents can choose anything between 6 months and almost two years, but the monthly pay is adjusted depending on how long a leave is taken. There’s also an obligate leave a few months around the birth date I think, which gets paid fully.Well, a babysitter isn’t exactly economical, but there are definitely countries that provide (and even guarantee, even though in practice this hasn’t been fully implemented yet) free places in day nurseries. I can only speak for where I live. But that’s fairly irrelevant if they do not want to keep the child anyway. I’m not saying every teenage mother has to care for her child the next 18 years, I’m saying they should be able to make it through a 9 month pregnancy to ensure the child’s survival. From that point on there are enough other people who could also care for the child, and so do well. Nobody was talking about the greatest of situations. You mean from really fundamentalist parents that will cast their child out if she is pregnant? Well, it’s very sad that in modern times such people still exist. I can understand that abortion may seem like the only solution, but I still don’t think it actually is a solution. Where would we come if we just killed everything that can give us trouble?At best for a few months, that can be made up for. I don’t think something like a decision should be made at all. No, I think countries where this is so common should implement stricter regulations on weapons trade, but I don”t really see the connection. theworldofanimals.proboards.com/post/16180/thread |
|
Fragillimus335
Member
Sauropod fanatic, and dinosaur specialist
Posts: 573
|
Post by Fragillimus335 on Jun 21, 2014 20:13:44 GMT 5
Regardless of any inconvenience a child causes. The mother and father went into the "contract" willingly, and must deal with the results. Murder is not a viable option.
|
|
|
|
Post by coherentsheaf on Jun 22, 2014 0:46:55 GMT 5
Regardless of any inconvenience a child causes. The mother and father went into the "contract" willingly, and must deal with the results. In case of breakage of contraception they did not go into it "willingly" Murder? I do not understand. Murder is the killing of a person under specific legally defined circumstances. This does not qualify as murder at all. |
|
|
|
Post by ultimatedinoking95 on Jun 22, 2014 4:52:46 GMT 5
A lot of things fit in the category of life, like insects, rodents, and even cancer, therefore just because a fetus is alive doesn't instantly make it precious or anything like that. but I didn't say it was, but you see a kid step on an insect and nobody gives it a second thought (accept me, when I see that I tell the kid that the insect had just as much right to live as his dog did.) but talk about killing a fetus and you get a war. genetically, the blastula (isn't that the stage when they kill it?) is biologically a human, sure its not the wrinkly pink thing that makes the parents go "awwww" but it is just as much a human as the caterpillar is a butterfly. why does leaving the mom change it from abortion to murder?
|
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Jun 22, 2014 4:59:22 GMT 5
That depends.
In some cases women may be allowed to abort as late as the 6th month for so called "medical indication" (which is often something like "80% chance of trisomy 21"), the child is surely much more than a blastula at that stage…
|
|
|
|
Post by ultimatedinoking95 on Jun 22, 2014 5:22:58 GMT 5
That depends. In some cases women may be allowed to abort as late as the 6th month for so called "medical indication" (which is often something like "80% chance of trisomy 21"), the child is surely much more than a blastula at that stage… so, a mom can kill her baby because it has an extra chromosome? that's just sad. |
|
Fragillimus335
Member
Sauropod fanatic, and dinosaur specialist
Posts: 573
|
Post by Fragillimus335 on Jun 22, 2014 5:26:47 GMT 5
Regardless of any inconvenience a child causes. The mother and father went into the "contract" willingly, and must deal with the results. In case of breakage of contraception they did not go into it "willingly" Murder? I do not understand. Murder is the killing of a person under specific legally defined circumstances. This does not qualify as murder at all. Yes, failure of contraception is a risk understood and taken by both parties before having sex. Yes, knowingly ending the life of a human against their will is generally known as murder. |
|
|
|
Post by Supercommunist on Jun 22, 2014 8:24:44 GMT 5
Okay. So you basically insinuated that I and several others are advocates of murder. No point in debating with you.
Yes, a fetus is gentically human, however it's lack of awareness makes it fundamentally from a full developed human. For example what do you think is worse, a robber killing a man during a bank heist, or a doctor pulling the plug on a patient who is in a vegetated state? Neither act is in the least bit pleasant but they are leagues apart from one another.
Anyway I am pretty much done with this thread. Politics is a tiresome topic and unless someone blatantly misinterprets the other position I'm butting out.
|
|
An undeveloped life, that has the potential to become human. Just my sperm has the potential to create a person, but that doesn't compel me to stop beating off.Since there is no unequivocal definition of life, I would just go by the common definition of life starting in the pregnancy. Sperm cells can be considered as part of the body. But when they fuse with ova, the child already gets its complete genetic code and can be considered life. Sure, consciousness is debatable, but there are also some animals that are not normally considered as very intelligent or advanced with probably low consciousness and they are still considered as life that shouldn't be simply killed.
