The Abortion Debate. Again.

[huskyfan]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Don't think that's much of an argument either way.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

I guess the question with the AI is when does life end? No brain function? body function without Artificial lifesupport? which goes back to what is life and does it start at inception or when fetus has a brain function or body function.

currently we can do heart/liver/kidney transplants... but lets say in the not too distant future we can transplant our brain or create a machine that can keep our brain alive. So where does soul reside? if you transplant a brain into a body who remains or do you get 2 souls.

They made this glowing fish in 2004... since we don't have glowing cats and dogs maybe it's harder to manipulate genes or not viable financially.

 

[Sloe Gin]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others! Vote Quimby!

that was Bob Dole, you retard.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

personally I do believe life starts at conception. otherwise the embryo would not grow. brain waves at 8 weeks. heartbeat at 18 days. but it still begs the question of who "controls" that life. in the case of removing life support it is usually the family. and, for me, it also asks the question, while I find it morally repugnant, do I have the right to stop someone else? anecdotally, it seems those who are pro abortion don't believe in god. or a soul.

 

[sweet canadian mullet]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Ok sure. so adding a dna sequence to make us glow in the dark would still make us human, but lets say we mix human/chimpanzee DNA and create a viable life. "I'm not an animal" ... would that be a person or animal?

people are animals.

I guess the question with the AI is when does life end? No brain function? body function without Artificial lifesupport? which goes back to what is life and does it start at inception or when fetus has a brain function or body function.

currently we can do heart/liver/kidney transplants... but lets say in the not too distant future we can transplant our brain or create a machine that can keep our brain alive. So where does soul reside? if you transplant a brain into a body who remains or do you get 2 souls.

They made this glowing fish in 2004... since we don't have glowing cats and dogs maybe it's harder to manipulate genes or not viable financially.

we have glowing cats

 

[Boosh]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

we have glowing cats

Wait, so since we can make a cat reflect ultraviolet light, that's gonna help us cure genetic disease?

personally I do believe life starts at conception. otherwise the embryo would not grow. brain waves at 8 weeks. heartbeat at 18 days. but it still begs the question of who "controls" that life. in the case of removing life support it is usually the family. and, for me, it also asks the question, while I find it morally repugnant, do I have the right to stop someone else? anecdotally, it seems those who are pro abortion don't believe in god. or a soul.

If abortion becomes a matter of belief such as in god or a soul, then abortion should stay acceptable for each person to choose, until the government gets to dictate what I believe in.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Which begs the argument, when is it human?

If you pick time X, I'll pick X - 1 second. And I'll keep backing up until sperm -> egg. The point being is that we don't know for certain. I believe that life begins at conception. I believe will all certainty that when my wife and I lost a baby @ 8 weeks gestation, that that child is in heaven with his grandfather and all prior generations. To deny the personhood of that little embryo denies a part of my wife and me. If that little guy was nothing, than what am I? Her?

I respect why people hold this belief and why they would work tirelessly to convince others not to have abortions even to the point of requiring women to look at sonograms of their child as a condition of the procedure.

My main problem is with the attempt to enforce a position that is usually grounded or connected with a religious belief in a soul and making it a public policy. There just isn't enough evidence outside of religion or some philosophies to convince me that the fetus at an early stage of it's development should be accorded to full person hood and should take priority over a woman's right to control her own body and the enormous costs a pregnancy imposes on it.

As a Catholic, the fact that the Church has seemingly flipped it tune from quickening to conception comparatively recently doesn't help. I'm currently fine with the Supreme Court's current standard: The State can impose restrictions that don't pose an "undue burden" on the mother before viability and can ban the practice after that point.

Ultimately I hope improvements in contraceptive technology and education will make abortion a fairly minor issue in the future.

 

[Sloe Gin]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Ultimately I hope improvements in contraceptive technology and education will make abortion a fairly minor issue in the future.

I think a good contraceptive would be to have any girl under 18 who gets pregnant on her own terms have to carry the baby and birth it. It's a great way to teach women the consequences of having sex and getting pregnant.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

I think a good contraceptive would be to have any girl under 18 who gets pregnant on her own terms have to carry the baby and birth it. It's a great way to teach women the consequences of having sex and getting pregnant.

Sure, as long as the pinhead who got her pregnant has to live up to his responsibilities as well.

 

[mookie1995]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Becoming is not "being"?

If your mom decided to abort you while you were "becoming", .

if life begins when i be cumming..... well call me God, cause i give a lotta life.

 

[ScottM]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Sure, as long as the pinhead who got her pregnant has to live up to his responsibilities as well.

Oh come on, what's wrong with being an irresponsible Baby Daddy?

 

[Handyman]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

I think a good contraceptive would be to have any girl under 18 who gets pregnant on her own terms have to carry the baby and birth it. It's a great way to teach women the consequences of having sex and getting pregnant.

Right, and let me guess when they have to drop out of school and cant find work you dont think they should be allowed on welfare or to get assistance right? That seems fair to the kid...

Opinions like that are fun to say but arent practical and are actually downright stupid.

 

[leswp1]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

personally I do believe life starts at conception. otherwise the embryo would not grow. brain waves at 8 weeks. heartbeat at 18 days. but it still begs the question of who "controls" that life. in the case of removing life support it is usually the family. and, for me, it also asks the question, while I find it morally repugnant, do I have the right to stop someone else? anecdotally, it seems those who are pro abortion don't believe in god. or a soul.

This is interesting. I know many folks who deeply believe in God and believe in choice, not anti-choice. I have no idea how to reconcile my beliefs on abortion. Ancephalic babies can have heart beat and not survive outside the womb. There are many conditions in babies that make it impossible for them to survive outside the womb. If they were in the womb they could survive longer but is that true life? I also find it repugnant that I see patients that consider an abortion just a neat way to gt rid of something they didn't prevent cos' who cares.

I have come to the conclusion that God must help each person decide what is right for them because as a human there are too many variables for me to sort them. How do I know if God give us the ability to have abortion or condemns it? I don't and I don't see how I can figure that out. Abortion as we know it wasnt' really addressed (a lot of what we do medically isn't)in scripture was it?

I have a problem with the government getting involved with the banning abortion/ birth control without figuring out how to handle the consequences. If we are pragmatic- who is to take care of these babies that should be born? To say they should all be born means we should also be willing to take care of the unwanted ones and presently our system sux at that. There is a 2 month old baby in our local hospital right now that has yet to have a foster home.

 

[unh_hockey]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

I know about that theory, I think everyone who takes crim law has that mentioned to them.

I'm not sure if it's necessarily true though.

I doubt everyone on this message board has taken criminal law, or is a law student.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

personally I do believe life starts at conception. otherwise the embryo would not grow. brain waves at 8 weeks. heartbeat at 18 days. but it still begs the question of who "controls" that life. in the case of removing life support it is usually the family. and, for me, it also asks the question, while I find it morally repugnant, do I have the right to stop someone else? anecdotally, it seems those who are pro abortion don't believe in god. or a soul.

I don't have a problem with life starting at conception (cell level) and life ending at cellular level. You have frogs and birds when frozen have no heart/brain activity, technically dead but no cell damage (anti-freeze) when thawed will come back to life. And that kinda raises other questions if we can ever freeze someone for extended period then bring them back from technical death.

I guess the "control" question is the reason I'm pro "choice" more then anything else. rights over ones body vs life of a cell. Till the cell/fetus have a brain/body function. (this is the question about the brain transplant... what is a person which is more then the idea of just life)

Could very well be, more religious people might lean toward pro-life and more or all atheist pro-choice... although I remember some polling suggesting 80%+ belived in god and the abortion issue was split 50/50 or 55/45. It would be interesting to break it down by religion/race/sex/age.

 

[huskyfan]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

I probably didn't make myself very clear. I didn't mean to say if you are pro choice you are probably an atheist. I was just thinking of some people I know who are vehemently atheist and also vehemently pro choice - like right up until the very very very birth. Guess I was thinking of the extreme in both positions.

 

[ScottM]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

One theory suggests that legalized abortions results in higher crime rates. Some look at hungry when abortion was made illegal, and the crime rate one generation later increased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalized_abortion_and_crime_effect

Actually, the Wiki article is a bit weak in that regard, and doesn't suggest abortion increases the crime rate.

As a practical matter, Levitt's work in Freakonomics, and elsewhere, suggests that the availability of abortion to women who may not be capable of raising a child in a decent environment may have the effect of lowering the crime rate in next generations. He looked at a variety of factors that may have skewed the crime rates, such as the Brady Bill, tougher law enforcement in cities, tougher sentencing, etc., and his conclusion was still that future criminality was reduced when future criminals are not born.

Regardless of your political or religious views, from a pure statistical standpoint Levitt makes a number of interesting, and unsettling, arguments.

One interesting sidenote, is that when the first edition of his book was published Levitt was a guest of Pat Robertson on the 700 Club who was interested in his theses that school teachers have perverse incentives to encourage kids to cheat on standardized testing. I don't believe they discussed the abortion issue.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Actually, the Wiki article is a bit weak in that regard, and doesn't suggest abortion increases the crime rate.

As a practical matter, Levitt's work in Freakonomics, and elsewhere, suggests that the availability of abortion to women who may not be capable of raising a child in a decent environment may have the effect of lowering the crime rate in next generations. He looked at a variety of factors that may have skewed the crime rates, such as the Brady Bill, tougher law enforcement in cities, tougher sentencing, etc., and his conclusion was still that future criminality was reduced when future criminals are not born.

Regardless of your political or religious views, from a pure statistical standpoint Levitt makes a number of interesting, and unsettling, arguments.

One interesting sidenote, is that when the first edition of his book was published Levitt was a guest of Pat Robertson on the 700 Club who was interested in his theses that school teachers have perverse incentives to encourage kids to cheat on standardized testing. I don't believe they discussed the abortion issue.

Freakanomics is a fantastic book, I had to read it for microecon and loved every page. The teachers section made a lot of sense as did the "Why Do All Drug Dealers Live With Their Mother" where Levitt compares gangs to McDonald's...BRILLIANT!

 

[dropthatpuck]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

You're assuming unwanted children will grow up to become geniuses and we shouldn't deny them because they might becoming Einstein?

But can't the other side just as facetiously say we're possibly preventing the next Hitler?

See, if you open the door to the wondrous possibilities you also have to open the door to the terrible ones.

Weakest argument yet.

an infant can't survive on its own either.

Great point.

People, Scooby's point was not that he, or anyone else, can survive with no help. His point was that a fetus in the early stages of pregnancy is actually a parasite. An infant can absolutely survive without it's mother, otherwise children given up for adoption would die. A fetus is a parasite on it's mother, until fairly late in the pregnancy.

What planet are you from? They're blood-sucking parasites for most of their lives. This is common knowledge and not even up for discussion.

Those are the guys who go to law school ...

Heh, heh, heh.

My main problem is with the attempt to enforce a position that is usually grounded or connected with a religious belief in a soul and making it a public policy.

IMO, religion has nothing to do with it.

 

[joecct]

Re: The Abortion Debate. Again.

Sure, as long as the pinhead who got her pregnant has to live up to his responsibilities as well.

See NBA, MLB, NFL, NHL......

Is there unsettling social argument here that women are becoming semen receptacles and not objects of love and affection? Are we "rediscovering" our primitive roots?