by AFL
CATEGORIES

 Military  
 Current events  
 Religion 
 Technology 
 Countries 
 Politics 
 Society 
 Other 






There are currently no top
rated posts : don't forget you can "thumb" up or down posts.

Website intro. Please login or register (it's very fast and free).



  • Index
  • » Society - Room 1
  • » Abortion by sismetic
  •    Is abortion morally wrong, right or of no consequence?

    Is abortion morally wrong? Right? Neither?

    Please indicate your position and your argument(s).

    I know there's another debate, but I wanted to renew it, besides it's a little different. This isn't about should it be legal, but if it's moral...

    I'm pro-life and believe that it's morally wrong to abort a baby because it's a life, and furthermore it's a human life with human basic rights namely that of right to live. I will expand my view as people post....

    Edit

#41 2013-01-09 21:44:59

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

No, you provide a quote which could easily be altered by context... "It is scientifically correct to say life begins at conception" could be radically altered if the next sentence is "However it is also a fact that this life has no significant brain function for months AFTER conception". You provided a quote with no context and the burden is on you to provide that context in order to show that the quote reflects the authors full intent.

You completely misconstrued my point in regards to failed pregnancies. My point is that you are seeking a definition of life that includes babies that, if they did not miscarry, would often be born with no ability to survive outside the womb... a definition of human that includes things that are not capable of life is clearly a flawed definition. Conception is when sperm meets egg, implantation is solely the first marker of viability, yet for some reason you seemed to view it as my marker for the beginning of life.

 

 It's called death by natural causes. Besides, what if you wanted to call them suicides? If a person commits suicide, does that make them less of a person? I'm curious as to what you would it.  

 
Yes, someone who commits suicide is no longer a person, as is someone who dies of any other cause... they are corpses. My point is that you definition includes corpses as human right up to the point nature corrects its mistake and mutates... Also the idea was they lacked the cognitive function to commit suicide, the very proposition of them doing so is absurd to you... ergo you realize they are not even capable of knowing they are alive

 

 That's blatantly false. A human embryo is very distinguishable from other animals. It has ONLY HUMAN DNA, just as one example. I challenge you to show me otherwise.  

 

Are you familiar with the logical fallacy known as a straw man? In essence, you restate someones argument in a way that is easier to attack. One version of it is when someone deliberately ignores self evident intention of a point. What I was clearly saying is they are PHYSICALLY indistinguishable from each other, not that no means to tell the difference exists.

 

 So what? What's your point? Laws change in time; they can be rewritten. But facts cannot. And you can't decide who is a human and who isn't a human with law anymore than the law can decide how fast the earth orbits around the sun.
 

 

You confuse science and philosophy. Science can tell you when a life begins, but it has no position on whether that life is equal to the life of a full grown human, it only says that those microbes have the potential to become human... every sperm a man produces and every egg a woman produces share that potential... they are viable human life, requiring only fertilization, the embryos are viable, requiring a full 9 months to incubate. There is no significant difference between a woman removing an embryo at 4 weeks and a man destroying millions of potential people by wearing a condom. It is simply a matter of degrees and the decision societies have made is that prior to the 2nd 3rd trimester, when the baby has all the markers of humanity, the woman's right takes precedence.

Offline

#42 2013-01-09 17:29:57

          Russia    NikoLStak
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@irishgenius 

''It does not matter how old the fetus is. It cancel the (potential) human growing in it whenever you stop pregnancy. What matter is; When the baby can feel pain and feel that we're killing it.''
Before this it is not more immoral to abort than to crush a flower.

Offline

#43 2013-01-09 07:35:43

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




Agreed

Offline

#44 2013-01-09 07:32:12

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 
                       
What makes us so sure we know when human life begins? Despite our best efforts, we do not even really know when human life ends, as the Terry Schiavo case reminded us. If it is so achingly difficult to know whether someone is dead or alive when she is in front of people who love her, how much harder it is to be certain when life begins, especially when we cannot see it with our own eyes.

Biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate.

The genetic view (the position held by the Roman Catholic Church and many religious conservatives) holds that life begins with the acquisition of a novel genome; it is a kind of genetic determinism.

Those who hold the embryologic view think life begins when the embryo undergoes gastrulation, and twinning is no longer possible; this occurs about 14 days into development. (Some mainline Protestant religions espouse a similar view.)

Proponents of the neurological view adhere to brainwave criteria; life begins when a distinct EEG pattern can be detected, about 24 to 27 weeks. (Some Protestant churches affirm this.) Interestingly, life is also thought to end when the EEG pattern is no longer present.

Finally, one can say that life begins at or near birth, measured by fetal viability outside the mother's body. (Judaism affirms something close to this position.) After all, somewhere between 50 and 60 percent of all embryos conceived miscarry.

So, when does life begin? I do not think we can know this with any more certainty than we know when life ends. People of faith, and people of good conscience, are going to have to agree to disagree—with a good dose of humility—on matters of life and death. omg

Offline

#45 2013-01-09 07:20:02

          United States    SlimNm
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SgtPeppers 
                       
If it is scientifically correct to say that the moon orbits the earth, then the moon orbits the earth.  My quote leaves no room for debate, and I challenge you to demonstrate that the author of it provides exceptions to it.  It's clear that the author is stating what he believes to be a scientific fact.

 

 Of those conceptions, 50% create a failed embryo, these abort long before they even have time to implant, Are those babies? 

 

Yes, because according to science, whether you implanted or not does not determine your status as a person.  I already made clear that "individual human life begins at conception."

will miscarry before the second trimester, often without the woman knowing she was even pregnant, were those baby suicides?

It's called death by natural causes.  Besides, what if you wanted to call them suicides?  If a person commits suicide, does that make them less of a person?  I'm curious as to what you would it.

The fact is that until well into the second trimester, it is impossible to tell the difference between a human embryo and that of any other animal,

That's blatantly false.  A human embryo is very distinguishable from other animals.  It has ONLY HUMAN DNA, just as one example.  I challenge you to show me otherwise.

They are potential people, but are not human under the law

So what?  What's your point?  Laws change in time; they can be rewritten.  But facts cannot.  And you can't decide who is a human and who isn't a human with law anymore than the law can decide how fast the earth orbits around the sun.

Last edited by SlimNm (2013-01-09 07:21:39)

Offline

#46 2013-01-08 18:28:56

          Canada    SgtPeppers
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

Honestly, I'm offline for a week and a silent debate suddenly explodes.

I'm with Irish on this one (which for me, is odd) and I'll address some problems with your point

First, the quote you posted earlier

"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception."

Interestingly, if you look at the grammar here, it implies a continuation or a larger point... the way it is phrased, I suspect the sentence that followed started with "However". Even if it didn't, it is intellectually dishonest to post a single sentence with no context and assume that it expresses the entire argument. Life may well begin at conception, but there are a few relevant numbers. Of those conceptions, 50% create a failed embryo, these abort long before they even have time to implant, Are those babies? another 30% will miscarry before the second trimester, often without the woman knowing she was even pregnant, were those baby suicides? The fact is that until well into the second trimester, it is impossible to tell the difference between a human embryo and that of any other animal, they are not functioning cognitively and are not human in any way other than genetics. They are potential people, but are not human under the law and the rights of the mother take precedent until at least the second trimester.

Offline

#47 2013-01-07 03:16:52

          United States    SlimNm
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@irishgenius 


Why should I waste my time reading some random link?  Present an argument, or I have nothing to respond to.  You can support your argument with a source, but without an argument, a source is useless.

Offline



   

#48 2013-01-06 23:35:21

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 
http://familydoctormag.com/sexual-health/251-when-does-life-begin-medical-experts-debate-abortion-issue.html

tired

Offline

#49 2013-01-06 08:10:57

          Russia    NikoLStak
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




It does not matter how old the fetus is... It cancel the human growing in it whenever you stop pregnancy. What matter is; When the baby can feel pain and feel that we're killing it? Find this and you'll get at which age it is immoral to kill it.

Last edited by NikoLStak (2013-01-06 08:16:44)

Offline

#50 2013-01-06 07:35:08

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

You call that evidence? One million face palms to you. Had you provided or even stated some fact you remember about the study or whatever that statement was based upon, that would be considered evidence ( stating from memory because you can't expect everybody to remember every source). I don't doubt what you posted is true, but it is not proper evidence. I could probably find some Yale or Oxford medical professor saying the opposite, does that immediately make it true?

Offline

#51 2013-01-06 06:35:55

          United States    SlimNm
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@irishgenius 
                       
You're incorrect.  My quote states directly that human life begins at conception.

If your view will remain the same, regardless of what evidence I give you, there is no purpose for this conversation.  If you cannot be swayed, or seriously consider evidence, then I don't know what you are doing on this site.

Offline

#52 2013-01-06 02:12:46

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   1    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

I've heard professors say that life begins at 6 months.Whats the difference.And also if you look at the wording its very carefully laid out.She didn't say "The human life begins at at conception".It also doesn't bother me that it was in the senate.She could have been trying to get her views across to sway the politicians.

But I don't dismiss her comments.She is the expert not me.My view remains the same,the child is only alive when the heart and brain develop. hand

Offline

#53 2013-01-05 23:17:30

          United States    SlimNm
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@irishgenius 
                       
1. In 1981, a United States Senate judiciary subcommittee received the following testimony from a collection of medical experts (Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Congress, 1st Session, 1981)--

"It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception."
-- Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth
Harvard University Medical School

2.  Yes it is.  Point 1 proves this.

Offline

#54 2013-01-05 19:13:42

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@NikoLStak 

Agreed.It shouldn't be used as contraceptive

Offline

#55 2013-01-05 19:12:18

          Ireland    irishgenius
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

1.Show me your scientific proof.2.The embryo is not even alive.Abortion is the same as taking a seed from the ground.It is not Unborn.It is not alive left.If its gone past 10 weeks,then it is alive and murder.

Offline

#56 2013-01-05 02:48:53

          United States    calibur
               Reply
   1    

Re: Abortion




@SlimNm 

Based upon what?

Offline

#57 2013-01-05 00:14:07

          United States    SlimNm
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




Abortion is morally wrong because it is the deliberate killing of an innocent person.  It is morally wrong to kill a baby, so it is morally wrong to kill an unborn one, regardless of it's age.  The majority of modern scientific literature supports my stance that an embryo is a human baby.

Offline

#58 2012-12-21 19:13:53

          United States    modrnscout
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




you do have a point.

Offline

#59 2012-12-21 04:58:30

          Russia    NikoLStak
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




@modrnscout 

These are special case(for which I accept abortion). But when it's the third time she get aborted, I say she have to assume it's negligence and take care of it. A accident it happen, but ruining multiple potential lifes because a woman can't keep her legs together is not tolerable.

Last edited by NikoLStak (2012-12-21 05:00:24)

Offline

#60 2012-12-21 01:59:07

          United States    modrnscout
               Reply
   0    

Re: Abortion




What about this? If a woman wants to get an abortion then wouldn't it be for the better? If she didn't want the baby then why would she treat the baby with the love and care that it should get? I'm saying it could be argued that, although it should not be taken lightly, abortion could be a viable option for those who simply aren't fit to be a parent.

Offline

Board footer

Created by AFL, powered by FluxBB
© 2011 theworlddebating.com