Largest US abortion provider caught on tape selling body parts

But in the same vane you are coming from a point of view where you are saying killing a human is an absolute wrong.

Well I've killed lots of humans, by act and omission of act, and everyone was a conscious decision made with full thought.

Both sides are making the argument unnessarily, but understandably, emotive.
 
Mr Jack said:
You're equivocating again. What you're doing is attempting to elide the difference between the biological notion of a life cycle and the moral and ethical notion of human life and personhood. Finding support that the first of these concepts is widely accepted to begin around conception does absolutely nothing to demonstrate the latter does, yet that this is point that you actually need to prove in order to support your argument.

You accuse us of "dehumanising" yet your argument requires us to accept that a single cell is the moral equivalent of everyone around you with their life, loves, feelings, memories, families, failings and thoughts. That, to me, is far more dehumanising than anything pro-choicers suggest.
Click to expand...

You are talking nonsense, again.
 
spudbynight said:
On what basis are you opposed?
Click to expand...

The loss of so many potentials, everything that could have been part of the life had it been allowed to develop, also the loss of a unique life that had been created against so many odds.


spudbynight said:
In what way does this invalidate your opposition?
Click to expand...

There is a distinct difference between personally held views and what could be considered reasonably justified and right in the correct context when taking an objective standpoint.
 
Xordium said:
But in the same vane you are coming from a point of view where you are saying killing a human is an absolute wrong.

Well I've killed lots of humans, by act and omission of act, and everyone was a conscious decision made with full thought.

Both sides are making the argument unnecessarily, but understandably, emotive.
Click to expand...

I think it is vital for any discussion on abortion to acknowledge that it it the killing of a human life.

I know people who will make the argument that sometimes it is the right thing to do.
 
spudbynight said:
I think it is vital for any discussion on abortion to acknowledge that it it the killing of a human life.

I know people who will make the argument that sometimes it is the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

What exactly is so special about human life? Do you have a similar stance in the context of the different animal fetuses? What about generally killing/eating animals?
 
spudbynight said:
I think it is vital for any discussion on abortion to acknowledge that it it the killing of a human life.

I know people who will make the argument that sometimes it is the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

But then you have to also accept that whilst you are killing a human life that human life when examined from a biological and philosophical point of view may not be sufficiently developed to contribute to some parts of the ethical debate of pros and cons.

For example, actual physical pain.

It is a muddy argument all around and highly subjective.

I just object to the misrepresentation, that is scientifically unsound and plain wrong, that an embryo is not a live human.

But correspondingly I also object to the notion that killing a human is an absolute wrong. I don't think it is from a philosophical and ethical point of view.

But hell what do I know I just use flowery language I don't understand and will learn as I get older being a sprightly early 40 something ....
 
Zethor said:
What exactly is so special about human life? Do you have a similar stance in the context of the different animal fetuses? What about generally killing/eating animals?
Click to expand...

I think this thread now rapidly become a free-for-all for some of the most feeble baiting tactics I have seen in some time, this quoted post being a prime example.

If you fail to understand why sentient and self-aware human beings that have created miracles of technology can perceive themselves as superior to other life forms then you really must be struggling to comprehend the basics.

It is the very fact that we are many orders of magnitude intellectually and technologically superior to every animal on earth that charges us with a responsibility to care for and preserve them... however that does not for one second mean we are realistically not the most advanced and important species on this Earth, and that the life of a human will always be held in higher regard in the vast majority of regular circumstances.
 
spudbynight said:
I completely disagree with you, however the great thing is people can watch the videos and make up their own minds. Over 2.5 million people have now watched the first video.






I've already quoted numerous medical textbooks that disagree with you. However I am sure you wiki is a much better source.
Click to expand...

Even then, a medical textbook isn't going to go through the philosophical arguments as to when life starts. As I've already pointed out there are already several defined points of life depending on whether where you work.

Conception is a nice convenient one for some jobs, birth is convenient for others, and I'm are there are many others for other jobs as well. I bet a microbiologist will have a very different opinion to a doctor for example.

Either way you can argue until you are blue in the face, the ability to do what you want with your body (within reason) is enshrined in law in most western countries, with the limit for abortion being the point between 20 and 50% of foetuses surviving if they were birthed.
 
koolpc said:
You are just one of the 'normal' gang of people who try to make up any excuse to make the killing of a human 'life' justifiable.
Click to expand...

I assume you'll have a coherent argument why I should accept a foetus as having equal moral value to a child or an adult then?
 
spudbynight said:
Human life begins at conception. What you are confusing with this is a concept of personhood.

I have not stated anything other than that human life begins at conception. From that moment a human life begins.
Click to expand...

So billions of humans have died before they are even born?
 
Amp34 said:
So billions of humans have died before they are even born?
Click to expand...

Correct.

Or are you seriously suggesting something mystical occurs at birth other than a movement from one environment to another, a change in the blood flow and expansion of lungs etc?

spudbynight said:
The fact that so man have done so by conscious act is especially horrific.
Click to expand...

Well unless you know each individual situation then you can't say that. It may have been more horrific for the abortion not to occur.
 
Richdog said:
I think this thread now rapidly become a free-for-all for some of the most feeble baiting tactics I have seen in some time, this quoted post being a prime example.

If you fail to understand why sentient and self-aware human beings that have created miracles of technology can perceive themselves as superior to other life forms then you really must be struggling to comprehend the basics.

It is the very fact that we are many orders of magnitude intellectually and technologically superior to every animal on earth that charges us with a responsibility to care for and preserve them... however that does not for one second mean we are realistically not the most advanced and important species on this Earth, and that the life of a human will always be held in higher regard in the vast majority of regular circumstances.
Click to expand...
It's not baiting in the slightest. It all depends on your perception and opinion.

Personally the idea that a bunch of cells is somehow more important than a living animal (say a cow) just makes no sense. Yes, the embryo/foetus could become a sentient human if left to grow and be born, but it's not at that point, it cannot even survive disattached from its host (mother). I'd suggest a realist knows there is a difference between an unborn foetus and a living human and realises that, in the same way an animal lover can eat meat, abortion of an entity that that could at some point become a human is entirely reasonable.

Using an argument that others opinions are just ******** because you don't agree is cheap at best.

Edit: I've just read the last paragraph fully. Wow that is some egotistical big headed nonsense there! Most intelligent, advanced and important? For the self absorbed maybe. That there is why we are ******* up this planet so badly, for ourselves and for other living things. Perhaps infact we are just another transient species on this planet that come and go like millions before us, and undoubtedly millions after us (If we don't destroy the planet completely). We will probably be long gone in a million years, in which case I wonder if there will be another species digging us up wondering what a primitive species we were.
 
Last edited:
Xordium said:
Correct.

Or are you seriously suggesting something mystical occurs at birth other than a movement from one environment to another, a change in the blood flow and expansion of lungs etc?



Well unless you know each individual situation then you can't say that. It may have been more horrific for the abortion not to occur.
Click to expand...

So the "average" state of a human being is actually a few cells?

Not in the slightest, I'm just suggesting birth is another stage of the life cycle of a human. I'm still waiting on your explanation of how the splitting of a cell into another, and then another is this mystical occurrence. Before the split the cell was alive, after the split the cell is alive.
 
Abortions are typically carried out between about 3 and 10 weeks. By that point a foetus is not really a "few cells". Many of these would be recognisably human and have recognisable organs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom