Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
A baby has done nothing wrong.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
We ain't talking about babies. We're talking about fetuses.
|
It’s funny; you want to argue semantics instead of the real issue. Fine, re-read my statement and insert fetus where I wrote baby. The point is the same. Does that change your interpretation of what I was trying to say?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
I’ve played along with your whole “consciousness = life” theory and you have yet to tell me when a human fetus gains consciousness or produces brain waves. This is crucial to your crumbling argument.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
Because every source I've seen has had different results. Some say the brain stem doesn't fully form until 6 months. Others say brain waves are detected at 8 weeks. Everyone is so (*)(*)(*)(*) biased.
|
Here is the problem. Initially your whole argument hinged on the instance when “consciousness” takes place to define a human being. Now that has evolved into the first detectable brain waves. I guess these are equal in your mind. Brain waves do not mean “consciousness”. A person can have brain activity but be unconscious. You don’t even know what you’re arguing anymore.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
If you cannot identify with 100% certainty the specific instance when a human fetus gains “consciousness / brain activity” then you could be murdering human beings.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
Early on when no brain waves are detected and not even a brain is formed, I think we can be 100% sure.
|
LOL. So when is “EARLY ON”??? LOL. It must be a specific instance, not a range! It’s obvious that you do not know this specific time, because you have failed to answer this question several times. Therefore your argument is done. 3 strikes and your out…more like 4 or 5.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
Then why are you still arguing your point. This discussion should be over.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
No, I think that murder/conciousness problem could be easily solved if we tried. Instead we got wackos screaming its a sucking its thumb at conception and others screaming that its part of their body at 8.5 months.
|
If we tried what?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
A corpse is not alive, which differentiates it from all the stages of a LIVING human being I mentioned earlier.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
A fetus is not yet a living human being either.
|
Hmmm. A human fetus has its own unique set of DNA. Its cells are growing, replicating and differentiating into tissues and organ systems. The organ systems are functioning. It has a metabolism. It responds to stimuli. Yeah, doesn’t sound like its LIVING to me…LOL.
By the way, when you use the term “fetus” in your posts; you’re talking about a human fetus as it pertains to our discussion, right? Human (female) + Human (male) = Human (fetus). Just want to make sure that you know that there is no “generic” fetus that all mammals have in common.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
They don’t develop into a human child, adolescent, adult, as a human fetus does.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
Exactly, develops into, not is a child.
|
What’s your point? A child is not an adolescent because it has not developed into an adolescent, and an adolescent is not an adult because it has not developed into an adult yet. That doesn’t make one stage worth more than another. Despite the stage, they are all phases of a living human being. A fetus is just another stage of human life.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roux-en-y
So it is obvious that the human fetus has significant worth according to the Bible.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by offspring13";p="
Not as significant as futher harm to the mother however. If that happens, eye for an eye and not just a fine.
|
So what do you mean by not as significant? Is it…say, 50% as significant, or maybe 75% or 99%. What do you think? How much significance is required to be worthy of life? LOL. One other thing to ponder is that people of that time could not have imaged that in the future, people would elect to annihilate millions of unborn babies each year for reasons of convenience. If what was going today was going on then, likely there would have been more teachings on the matter. And, as if said before 32 states recognize the unlawful killing of an unborn child as homicide in at least some circumstances. Not 50% homicide or 75% homicide…regular old 100% homicide. LOL.