Obama to Lift Ban on Overseas Abortion Funding

[Bronco Bob]

Conciousness begins at conception.


How is that even possible? Are you saying a protozoa is conscious?
Because biologically they are the same, a single cell. Unless you
have stumbled on to some extremely new research, I was under
the impression that an organism required a highly developed
functioning brain structure to be conscious. Or are you using
the term conscious in a way no other human on the planet
uses that term.




Viability begins at 12 weeks.

How many 12 week old premies survive? Again is this some sort
of new information, because in the medical literature the age
of viability for a fetus is 22 weeks, not twelve weeks, and
even 26 to 28 week old premies have a tough time surviving.
12 weeks in only 3 months.

[Bronco Bob]

This is what a 12 week old fetus looks like. Are you claiming something
this primitive can survive on its own?

[kappys]

This is what a 12 week old fetus looks like. Are you claiming something
this primitive can survive on its own?

They look more like this. http://www.mothermayibeborn.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/2_61_tiny_baby1.jpg

Any guesses how long itll take before the baby you posted could survive on its own?

[Bronco Bob]

They look more like this.

Any guesses how long itll take before the baby you posted could survive on its own?

22 weeks is the minimum gestation period for viability, though even at
24 to 26 week it has a tough time surviving.

[kappys]

22 weeks is the minimum gestation period for viability, though even at
24 to 26 week it has a tough time surviving.

What is the infant mortality rate for full term infants without any access to medical care?

The point is that we have progressively lowered the age of potential survival - are these children born at 22 weeks lacking in some element that makes us human? What about when we can save children born at 12 weeks?

[cutthemdown]

lol even a baby that goes full term can't survive on it's own. What a stupid argument.

[cutthemdown]

This is what a 12 week old fetus looks like. Are you claiming something
this primitive can survive on its own?

even a healthy baby can't survive on it's own.

[Bronco Bob]

even a healthy baby can't survive on it's own.

It can breathe on its own and process nourishment. Something a 12 week old fetus can't do.

[kappys]

It can breathe on its own and process nourishment. Something a 12 week old fetus can't do.

Well the 12 week old fetus also processes nourishment.

As for breathing on its own I can assure you those 22 week old babies that are surviving are not breathing on their own and require mechanical ventilation.

[epicSocialism4tw]

It can breathe on its own and process nourishment. Something a 12 week old fetus can't do.

"Process nourishment" ?

Given that definition, one can define a child as a living human just after the cortical reaction.

I would recommend becoming familiar with all of the accepted standards for the definition of life before continuing with this debate, especially as passionately as you have been. Take into consideration that they are not easy concepts, and are not even really a consensus among biologists.

What you should find if you understand the concepts is that every stage of development post-cortical reaction is consistent with being defined as a unique, living being.

What you will also find with a brief look into cladistics is that there is no other way to describe the living thing other than as a human. If you do describe it as "not human", then you are going well outside the bounds of science and are venturing into purely subjective, speculative political and legal philosophy that deserves not a single aknowledgment by the scientific community.

This is the place that the pro-abortion argment lands you...outside of the standards and reason of biologists at large around the planet.

That's just the way it is.

[bowtown]

"Process nourishment" ?

Given that definition, one can define a child as a living human just after the cortical reaction.

I would recommend becoming familiar with all of the accepted standards for the definition of life before continuing with this debate, especially as passionately as you have been. Take into consideration that they are not easy concepts, and are not even really a consensus among biologists.

What you should find if you understand the concepts is that every stage of development post-cortical reaction is consistent with being defined as a unique, living being.

What you will also find with a brief look into cladistics is that there is no other way to describe the living thing other than as a human. If you do describe it as "not human", then you are going well outside the bounds of science and are venturing into purely subjective, speculative political and legal philosophy that deserves not a single aknowledgment by the scientific community.

This is the place that the pro-abortion argment lands you...outside of the standards and reason of biologists at large around the planet.

That's just the way it is.


Just curious, are you pro or anti-death penalty?

[baja]

It can breathe on its own and process nourishment. <b> Something a 12 week old fetus can't do.

There are hospitals and old folks homes full of people that fit this description. What happens to someone that uthenized one of them, and they most likely have already lived a full life.

[bowtown]

There are hospitals and old folks homes full of people that fit this description. What happens to someone that uthenized one of them, and they most likely have already lived a full life.

Depends on which state you are in.

[epicSocialism4tw]

How is that even possible? Are you saying a protozoa is conscious?
Because biologically they are the same, a single cell.

LOL

NEVER is a zygote anything similar to a protozoan. It is a zygote. Its anatomy is different, its habitat is different, its nutritious needs are different, it metabolizes food differently and with different purpose, it secretes different wastes, it communicates differently, it grows differently, it has a quite different gene pool, it makes different proteins, etc. Just because a thing is a "single cell" for a moment (about a day) doesnt make it anywhere near something that could be considered physiologically universal.

The idea that this is in any way similar to a protozoan is preposterous in every sense.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Just curious, are you pro or anti-death penalty?

This is my personal opinion, and not a scientific one. I would never want to deprive a person of a chance at reconcillation with God.

We do not live in a theocracy though, and many believe in the philosophy of "an eye for an eye". I do not fault them for feeling this way, because it makes sense. The offender inflicts severe loss upon the victims, and some people would not feel the burden of such loss lifted unless the offender was removed from their life permanently and with prejudice.

Personally, I would try to forgive them and pray for them so as to hope that they know the Lord. However, I do not expect someone who has been wronged that does not know what its like to know the forgiving God to come to that same conclusion.

[bowtown]

This is my personal opinion, and not a scientific one. I would never want to deprive a person of a chance at reconcillation with God.

We do not live in a theocracy though, and many believe in the philosophy of "an eye for an eye". I do not fault them for feeling this way, because it makes sense. The offender inflicts severe loss upon the victims, and some people would not feel the burden of such loss lifted unless the offender was removed from their life permanently and with prejudice.

Personally, I would forgive them and pray for them. However, I do not expect someone who has been wronged that does not know what its like to know the forgiving God to come to that same conclusion.

So you are saying that you don't personally agree with it, but you can understand where others who are for it might be coming from, and maybe see how their opinons and views on it could also be just as valid as yours considering their background and their own specific circumstances? Does that sum it up pretty well?

[epicSocialism4tw]

So you are saying that you don't personally agree with it, but you can understand where others who are for it might be coming from, and maybe see how their opinons and views on it could also be just as valid as yours considering their background and their own specific circumstances? Does that sum it up pretty well?

In the case of the death penalty, I would say that the offender made a choice that put him/her in the circumstance with death as a possible option. That is what makes this issue much different than abortion. Abortion is a case of civil rights. It is a case of the right to be alive after you are conceived. The issues are much different.

As for the death penalty, personally I am not a proponent.

[bowtown]

In the case of the death penalty, I would say that the offender made a choice that put him/her in the circumstance with death as a possible option. That is what makes this issue much different than abortion. Abortion is a case of civil rights. It is a case of the right to be alive after you are conceived. The issues are much different.

As for the death penalty, personally I am not a proponent.

Fair enough. think that's pretty general and oversimplified but I'll accept it for now. How about euthenasia? Pro or anti?

[baja]

Fair enough. think that's pretty general and oversimplified but I'll accept it for now. How about euthenasia? Pro or anti?

A person should be allowed to chose when he or she makes their transition.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Fair enough. think that's pretty general and oversimplified but I'll accept it for now. How about euthenasia? Pro or anti?

This is a case where current science is limited in its understanding, and future understanding could clear this one up quite a bit. However, as of today we do not have that understanding. So, according to the hippocratic oath, I think that a doctor should exhaust all resources no matter how much or for how long to attend to the best wishes and interests of the patient. If the patient has already issued an executive order and is incapacitated then you have no other alternative. However, we are not talking about suicide here, which is a different issue altogether. In that case, I would hope that one stick it out. If not, dont ask a doctor to kill you. Go fling yourself off a bridge. That's about as dignified an end as you deserve. Suicide is an undignified act of selfish cowardice, and should never be encouraged or softened.

[bowtown]

This is a case where current science is limited in its understanding, and future understanding could clear this one up quite a bit. However, as of today we do not have that understanding. So, according to the hippocratic oath, I think that a doctor should exhaust all resources no matter how much or for how long to attend to the best wishes and interests of the patient. If the patient has already issued an executive order and is incapacitated then you have no other alternative. However, we are not talking about suicide here, which is a different issue altogether. In that case, I would hope that one stick it out. If not, dont ask a doctor to kill you. Go fling yourself off a bridge. That's about as dignified an end as you deserve. Suicide is an undignified act of selfish cowardice, and should never be encouraged or softened.

What about those who choose to die, but are not able to get to a bridge to throw themselves off and need asistance, seeing how those are the ones that usually are pleading to have their lives ended? Also not quite sure how you find it to be selfish for a person in pain and with a terrible quality of life to want that to end. It would seem much more selfish to me for someone else to force them to prolong their suffering in order to cling to their own memory of that person when healthy, or worse yet, to advance an ideology.

[epicSocialism4tw]

What about those who choose to die, but are not able to get to a bridge to throw themselves off and need asistance, seeing how those are the ones that usually are pleading to have their lives ended? Also not quite sure how you find it to be selfish for a person in pain and with a terrible quality of life to want that to end. It would seem much more selfish to me for someone else to force them to prolong their suffering in order to advance a memory of that person when healthy, or worse yet, an ideology.

When a persons will to live goes, their body tends to follow.

[bowtown]

When a persons will to live goes, their body tends to follow.

Oh come on, you are smart enough not to just try and slide that one past. That's a pretty loose and convinient argument, with absolutely no evidence or data to back it up. How long does it take to follow? One day, two days? A week? A month?

We were having a nice discussion here, please don't introduce thoughtless rhetoric now.

[Bronco Bob]

"Process nourishment" ?

Drink milk, digest the milk, and crap out the part it can't digest.



Given that definition, one can define a child as a living human just after the cortical reaction.

So at that point in time it can also drink milk, digest it, and crap out the
part it can't digest?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Drink milk, digest the milk, and crap out the part it can't digest.

So at that point in time it can also drink milk, digest it, and crap out the
part it can't digest?

I guess that the child is growing without consuming nutrients from its environment while in the womb? Its magically growing?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Oh come on, you are smart enough not to just try and slide that one past. That's a pretty loose and convinient argument, with absolutely no evidence or data to back it up. How long does it take to follow? One day, two days? A week? A month?

We were having a nice discussion here, please don't introduce thoughtless rhetoric now.

In cases of extreme illness like you alluded to in your previous post, people tend to lose the fight when they give up. Not that all people who die give up, but a person without the will to live is less likely to survive. I think that you'll find this the case in many critically ill patients. When a person feels that its alright to let go, then they let go. I dont think that its ever alright to "put down" a person or to "send someone out to pasture."

[Bronco Bob]

I guess that the child is growing without consuming nutrients from its environment while in the womb? Its magically growing?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?
The fetus obtains the nourishment from the mother's blood.
The same way a cancer tumor sustains itself. Are you
saying a cancer tumor could survive on it's own without
the oxygen and carbohydrates and other substances the
blood provides?
Where-as a viable fetus, ie one over 22 weeks old, can
breathe on its own, and process food on its own.
It doesn't need the mother to sustain its life.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?
The fetus obtains the nourishment from the mother's blood.
The same way a cancer tumor sustains itself. Are you
saying a cancer tumor could survive on it's own without
the oxygen and carbohydrates and other substances the
blood provides?
Where-as a viable fetus, ie one over 22 weeks old, can
breathe on its own, and process food on its own.
It doesn't need the mother to sustain its life.

Ha!

So now you are equating a fetus with a wad of mutant cancer cells?

So what is it? A protozoan or a tumor?

[kappys]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?
The fetus obtains the nourishment from the mother's blood.
The same way a cancer tumor sustains itself. Are you
saying a cancer tumor could survive on it's own without
the oxygen and carbohydrates and other substances the
blood provides?
Where-as a viable fetus, ie one over 22 weeks old, can
breathe on its own, and process food on its own.
It doesn't need the mother to sustain its life.

No it can't.

A 22 week old fetus is going to require intuation to breathe for it, and is very likely going to need TPN(total parenteral nutrition) - meaning that all nutrients will come from IV preparations.

[epicSocialism4tw]

Just as a bit of information to help you be more detailed in your classification of the child in utero...

You cannot classify a blastula, zygote, whatever as a tumor or a protozoan. It doesnt make sense physiologically or phylogenetically.

A tumor is a human cell that has mutated DNA, and is proliferating uncontrollaby....turning into a neoplasm. It is a rogue cell that divides into many rogue cells. The DNA is that of the person carrying the tumor. It is not following any pattern of development regarding specification to become a functional tissue or organ, but is rather running roughshod. It is a missile gone awry. Unlike a growing human embryo, a cancerous mass does not have purposeful development, does not have pluripotent cells for specialization, does not have triploblastic germ development, does not have 2N DNA that is specific from its "host" (or parent in terms of the child), etc. I could go on, but that should be enough for now.

As for the protozoan, all that you have to do is simply look at a phylogeny to see that one-celled protists are very, very different from any type of human cell, much less a blastula, gastrula, or any other complex multicellular human developmental stage.

[bowtown]

In cases of extreme illness like you alluded to in your previous post, people tend to lose the fight when they give up. Not that all people who die give up, but a person without the will to live is less likely to survive. I think that you'll find this the case in many critically ill patients. When a person feels that its alright to let go, then they let go. I dont think that its ever alright to "put down" a person or to "send someone out to pasture."

Again, for someone who seems so interested in "scientific" definitions, you are throwing around an awful lot of very unscientific terms here to suit your argument, but let's leave that for now.

Next, I would like to know how you would outlaw abortion. Would you treat it and try it like murder? Would it be murder one? Manslaughter? How about for the doctor performing it?