I've hesitated to post this thread, but someone has to speak out.

#451
#451
EasternVol said:
Calling a fetus a child is like calling a child an adult. Or an acorn an oak tree. They are related but aren't the same.
Click to expand...

Those poor, ignorant people in the past who, upon first learning that they were pregnant, said that they were "with child."

If only they believed in magic like we moderns.
 
#453
#453
Vol8188 said:
The issue with claiming he doesn’t consider it alive until birth is that prior to birth the child could survive outside the host.
Click to expand...
A fertilized egg? It can't survive outside the host. I think it's 7 months until the lungs can breathe air.
 
#456
#456
creekdipper said:
Those poor, ignorant people in the past who, upon first learning that they were pregnant, said that they were "with child."

If only they believed in magic like we moderns.
Click to expand...
Or Elizabeth, six months pregnant with John the Baptist, who lept for joy in the womb upon Hering the voice of the Virgin Mary
 
  • Like
Reactions: creekdipper
#457
#457
Vol8188 said:
Having to rationalize your own position has value. OHvol has hopefully improved on that some. These discussion 100% help me better understand my own position. I imagine that's true for most of us.
Click to expand...

We're also not accounting for those reading who don't weigh in. I changed my uninformed, apathetic position after being confronted with scientific evidence and reason. And I have encountered dozens of people who merely repeated bumper sticker slogans and common talking points who admitted that they really hadn't given a lot if thought to the issue. Some changed their stances to various degrees. Even some who adamantly clung to their positions admitted that arguments they previously accepted as ironclad were actually very weak and fell apart upon serious scrutiny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#458
#458
EasternVol said:
A fertilized egg? It can't survive outside the host. I think it's 7 months until the lungs can breathe air.
Click to expand...

The same person I was having the original fertilized egg conversation with, he was claiming his standard for when life begins is birth.

That’s what I was referring to in terms of survival outside
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#459
#459
It's fascinating to still encounter people who don't consider "fetuses" to be human life...as though fetuses aren't alive and could belong to other species (in defiance of the scientific method of prediction and observation that even "primitive" people without the benefit of our technology knew thousands of years ago).

Even the pro-abortion lobby has pretty much abandoned those debunked arguments and shifted almost solely to a "woman's rights" argument. I have found people who readily agreed that a fetus is "obviously" human life but argued that "personhood" is a separate issue. In other words, the fetus doesn't become a "person" with accompanying rights until brain activity can be detected.
 
Last edited:
#460
#460
creekdipper said:
It's fascinating to still encounter people who don't consider "fetuses" to be human life...as though fetuses aren't alive and could belong to other species (in defiance of the scientific method of prediction and observation that even "primitive" people without the benefit of ultrasound knew thousands of years ago).

Even the pro-abortion lobby has pretty much abandoned those debunked arguments and shifted almost solely to a "woman's rights" argument. I have found people who readily agreed that a fetus is "obviously" human life but argued that "personhood" is a separate issue. In other words, the fetus doesn't become a "person" with accompanying rights until brain activity can be detected.
Click to expand...

To be fair, neither of us know what liberal women are reproducing with. And unless they’re a biologist, they probably don’t know either
 
#463
#463
Vol8188 said:
The issue with claiming he doesn’t consider it alive until birth is that prior to birth the child could survive outside the host.
Click to expand...
I HAVE NEVER once said I do not consider it alive until after birth.
What an absurd accusation.
 
#465
#465
Vol8188 said:
The same person I was having the original fertilized egg conversation with, he was claiming his standard for when life begins is birth.

That’s what I was referring to in terms of survival outside
Click to expand...
Who is that person?
If it's me, I find it ironic, but not surprising, that you're claiming it's me who is the liar.
 
#467
#467
luthervol said:
It could be cloned into a living human.
A zygote doesn't have a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought we were talking about natural development. What you're talking about is like looking at a slab of marble and saying that it can be turned into a sculpture. You're conveniently leaving out the key element in the narrative.

When earlobes clone themselves, get back to me. I've already seen both the originals and the remakes of both Invasion of the Body Snatchers and The Island of Dr. Moreau.
 
#469
#469
luthervol said:
No more so than my fingernails or my earlobes.
Click to expand...

So you believe bacteria in your gut is not a separate life form?

That’s amazing. I don’t believe you, but it’s amazing to take such a crazy stance.

Can you elaborate? Why is the bacteria in your gut not a separate life form?
 
#470
#470
creekdipper said:
It's fascinating to still encounter people who don't consider "fetuses" to be human life...as though fetuses aren't alive and could belong to other species (in defiance of the scientific method of prediction and observation that even "primitive" people without the benefit of our technology knew thousands of years ago).

Even the pro-abortion lobby has pretty much abandoned those debunked arguments and shifted almost solely to a "woman's rights" argument. I have found people who readily agreed that a fetus is "obviously" human life but argued that "personhood" is a separate issue. In other words, the fetus doesn't become a "person" with accompanying rights until brain activity can be detected.
Click to expand...

Personhood is crux of the abortion debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RikidyBones
#471
#471
PKT_VOL said:
Personhood is crux of the abortion debate.
Click to expand...

I believe his point was more so related to how the other side of the debate is not debating "personhood" as in the legal term. But rather they will directly state that it is not alive or that it is not human life. It seems that overtime they have moved into more and more insane grounds to justify their own insanity.

As witnessed by one poster, Luther, who openly claims he does not consider the bacteria in his stomach to be a separate life form.
 
#472
#472
There have certainly been occasions duri g which I considered my gut to be a hostile life form.

And there have been periods during which my gut seemed to need its own separate wardrobe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77
#473
#473
creekdipper said:
Sorry, I thought we were talking about natural development. What you're talking about is like looking at a slab of marble and saying that it can be turned into a sculpture. You're conveniently leaving out the key element in the narrative.

When earlobes clone themselves, get back to me. I've already seen both the originals and the remakes of both Invasion of the Body Snatchers and The Island of Dr. Moreau.
Click to expand...
Just pointing out the flaws in your logic.
A zygote does not have a heartbeat.
A zygote will not develop into a human without outside supports.
 
#475
#475
Vol8188 said:
So you believe bacteria in your gut is not a separate life form?

That’s amazing. I don’t believe you, but it’s amazing to take such a crazy stance.

Can you elaborate? Why is the bacteria in your gut not a separate life form?
Click to expand...
It's part of my natural body system.
Now if a spider crawled in my ear, I would consider it a separate life form.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top