• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Texas bans abortion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
smartcooky said:
Jesus Ass-riding Christ:rolleyes: Do you really need this to be spelled out for you in crayon!!

This is a question, followed by its answer
Fast Eddie B: Is a fertilized egg, a blastosphere, an embryo or a fetus a fully actualized, complete “human being”? Of course not. But it’s hard to deny that at any of those stages it’s human life.

This is agreement with the answer
Reformed Offlian: So are gametes (unfertilized eggs and sperm).

Please point out the claim being made by Reformed Offlian!?
Click to expand...
Do you really not see it?

Fast Eddie B did NOT say that gametes are human life. That was a separate claim made by Offlian.
 
No, no, no.

Not the semantics. That is not the argument. Start a thread about whether or not you have five fingers or four fingers and a thumb.

A clump of cells THAT YOU CAN'T TELL IS A HUMAN OR AN ELEPHANT does not have the same rights as a human operating in society. I don't care if you've named it and decided which college you want it to go to. You can't define your way out of that.
 
Last edited:
The viability argument is a red herring.

If some mad scientist kidnapped you and sewed another human being onto you, mixing your organs up Siamese Twin Style so the other person was depending on your body to live, you still wouldn't be obligated to let them keep living on your body.
 
Warp12 said:
The Doctor should be pleased. He wanted this, by his own account.
Click to expand...

Really – He wanted a bunch of corrupt politicians to pass a blatantly dishonest and unconstitutional law that would put him and his patients in a that position? Yeh, right, what a load of crap. Just like if someone points a gun at you and threatens to shoot you if you don’t give them all your money - you have nothing to complain about if you give them the money – after all it was your choice to give them the money.
 
JoeMorgue said:
No, no, no.

Not the semantics. That is not the argument. Start a thread about whether or not you have five fingers or four fingers and a thumb.

A clump of cells THAT YOU CAN'T TELL IS A HUMAN OR AN ELEPHANT does not have the same rights as a human operating in society. I don't care if you've named it and decided which college you want it to go to. You can't define your way out of that.
Click to expand...
The ridiculousness of your highlighted statement shows how desperate you are to deny the humanity of a foetus so YOU are playing the semantics.

It doesn't matter whether it is some sort of human or not since it has nothing to do with whether a woman is obliged to carry a pregnancy to completion.
 
psionl0 said:
The ridiculousness of your highlighted statement shows how desperate you are to deny the humanity of a foetus so YOU are playing the semantics.
Click to expand...

I deny "Humanity" (like this is Dark Souls and it's a tangible thing) to ejaculations or menstruations either.

Those are both "pOTentiAl humAn bEIngs!" Both you can't control women are call them sluts with those so...
 
A woman in the 17th week of pregnancy suffers complications the mean the fetus will die.
The medical choices are...

A. Do nothing and let both mother and fetus die.
B. Abort the fetus and save the mother.

Clearly, B is preferable.

The legal choices are...
A. Do nothing and let both mother and fetus both die.

and NOTHING ELSE.
 
We shouldn't let the life of an woman take precedent over that of a 'PoTENtial PHiSOPHICAL DEFinITIOn of A huMAN beiNG!"
 
Look at it this way.

You're in a lab the does In Vitro Fertilization. A fire breaks out. In the lab is a full grown adult female lab worker passed out from the fumes and a nitrogen canister containing one frozen embryo. You only have time to save one.

See? Obvious answer. The answer is not save the frozen embryo and sue the lab worker.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Look at it this way.

You're in a lab the does In Vitro Fertilization. A fire breaks out. In the lab is a full grown adult female lab worker passed out from the fumes and a nitrogen canister containing one frozen embryo. You only have time to save one.

See? Obvious answer. The answer is not save the frozen embryo and sue the lab worker.
Click to expand...

If they're grad students, save the cannister. OSHA doesn't cover students, killing them is free ;)
 
An amicus brief from the architect of this Texas abortion end-around makes clear they intend to undo Lawrence V Texas (overturning anti-gay sex laws) and Obergefell v. Hodges (allowing gay marriage) using the same attacks as they are using for Roe.
 
tyr_13 said:
An amicus brief from the architect of this Texas abortion end-around makes clear they intend to undo Lawrence V Texas (overturning anti-gay sex laws) and Obergefell v. Hodges (allowing gay marriage) using the same attacks as they are using for Roe.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's not too late to wonder if Mexico might want Texas back.
 
eerok said:
Perhaps it's not too late to wonder if Mexico might want Texas back.
Click to expand...

The guy who came up with these arguments is from PA, so he would probably argue that giving Texas back invalidates Lawrence V Texas anyway.
 
Psion's insistence that we label a fetus, zygote, embryo etc a "human being." Is a deliberate attempt to sneak language into the discussion that is inherently problematic to the pro-choice position. I'm confident that he knows this.

Human beings have rights. Embryos, zygotes and fetuses etc up until the third trimester don't. And their rights are limited even then.

This is an attempt to win an argument based on semantics.

Sorry, Psion it's not that simple.
 
"I demand we agree on language that forces you to already agree with me before discussion starts" is a time honored tactic from people who don't have facts on their side.
 
acbytesla said:
Psion's insistence that we label a fetus, zygote, embryo etc a "human being." Is a deliberate attempt to sneak language into the discussion that is inherently problematic to the pro-choice position. I'm confident that he knows this.
Click to expand...

It's also scientifically false. A being has consciousness, feelings and thoughts.
 
smartcooky said:
I deny that a cluster of cells that is not viable (cannot survive outside of its mother) is a human.

A fertlized egg is not a human
A blastosphere is not a human
An embryo is not a human
A foetus before 20 weeks is not human and will not survive if born premature

The earliest a baby has ever been born and survived is 21 weeks 4 days. She weighed 410 grams, her whole hand was the size of her mother's index fingertip, and she spent the first 6 months of her life in intensive care.

Survival rates for premature births declines sharply the closer you get to 20 weeks. A baby born between 20 and 26 weeks is a considered to be periviable, or born during the window when a fetus has at least some chance of surviving outside the womb.

Before 24 weeks 50%
Before 23 weeks 10-35%
Before 22 weeks 0-10%
Before 21 weeks 0%
Click to expand...
Interestingly the USA was very late to the whole idea of treating premature births at all. The first US university to open a training and research centre for premature babies was Cornell in 1939 and incubators only became common in the mid-50s.

Couney (as an example) attempted to popularise the techniques and ideas of European neo-natal specialists like Budin and Tarnier as early as 1901 (at
the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo) but the medical establishment, and populace, were uninterested. The general perception was that premature babies were inferior "weaklings", treatment for which was a waste of resources. Hence the survival rate well into the '20s for premature births was less than ten percent.

Of course Couney had his own solution, and saved over six thousand....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom