Actually, the U.S. dropped 2 atomic bombs on Japan, you think they cared about life!?!?! The fact is, the only life the U.S. wanted to protect is that of their own citizens, at the disposal of other life which it believed had less value.

Life in prison also works as a deterrant. Some people who apparently "forfeit their right to live" are given life in prison, while some are executed. Seems unfair, but like they say life is unfair, especially if you are a fetus.

Of course a fetus has done nothing wrong. I was just trying to prove that the government duty is protect the life only of its own citizens and that some seemingly pointless killing is lawful.

A fetus has no right to life. It exists in someones womb, that person has complete control over his/her body and can deport the fetus as desired. Just like if you live in someone eleses house, that person can throw you out, no questions asked. The government cannot deny women the right to remove a fetus anymore than it can deny a building owners right to remove tenants. It is a privledge to live in in someones womb, just like it is to live in someones building.

__________________
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." — John Stuart Mill

Deterrent for the actual murderer or other potential murderers? The actual murderer is behind bars so is no longer a threat to the public. Execution is NOT a deterrent to other potential murderers. All it does is teach that society deems it ok to kill someone in certain circumstances...they use that to justify their crime.

And the same to those who push the executioner switch?

Not backpeddling, just trying to show the hilarity of trying to present something so primitive as a human being.

I'm no doctor, but I know enough about science and have enough common sense to know that you can't have a conciousness without a brain or brain waves.

Totally agree.

A corpse is also a stage.


Of course, just as human cancer is alive or your foot alive. Just because it is living human tissue doesn't mean it deserves merit as an individual entity.

What the verse basically says is that if the woman only miscarries, the offender only pays a penalty, but if the woman dies, the offender shall also be put to death. So basically, your Bible is saying that a fetus is NOT of equal worth to an adult woman. That actually justifies abortion more than detracts from it.

The death penalty is both a deterrent for the murderer and the future murderer. The murderer is now dead and cannot kill again and the future murderer sees the consequences of that illegal action and might reconsider a criminal act. I personally disagree with the death penalty. However I can see the reasoning behind it. In contrast, innocent babies don't deserve to die. It makes more sense that a convicted murder would deserve to die in certain situations, because they are guilty of a heinous crime. A baby has done nothing wrong.


What are you talking about???

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. 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. I don’t know how to explain this any simpler. AGAIN, PLEASE GIVE ME A SPECIFIC POINT IN GESTATION!


Then why are you still arguing your point. This discussion should be over.

A corpse is not alive, which differentiates it from all the stages of a LIVING human being I mentioned earlier. Not sure what your point is.


A cancerous tumor and human foot are not the same as a human being. They don’t develop into a human child, adolescent, adult, as a human fetus does. When a male and a female have sex, they don’t produce a baby foot or a little baby tumor. They produce another human being. It is important that you understand this basic concept of human reproduction.


Here’s what you missed. If someone ACCIDENTALLY causes a woman to miscarry then they must pay a fine determined by the family and approved by the courts. The verse does not go on to discuss the penalty of INTENTIONALLY causing a woman to miscarry. Common sense would say that the punishment would be more severe. So it is obvious that the human fetus has significant worth according to the Bible.

Or the murderer is behind bars and can't hurt anyone else either. Same difference.

We ain't talking about babies. We're talking about fetuses.

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.

Early on when no brain waves are detected and not even a brain is formed, I think we can be 100% sure.

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.

A fetus is not yet a living human being either.

Exactly, develops into, not is a child.

Not as significant as futher harm to the mother however. If that happens, eye for an eye and not just a fine.

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?



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.


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.



If we tried what?





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.



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.

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.

It does change the interpretation. I'm not arguing semantics. A baby is very much a live human being. A fetus is not.

Even an unconscious person still has a consciousness. They are merely unconscious at the present time. I don't know why you are arguing my point though. Brain waves would come earlier than other instances so would actually make abortions be performed later. Sorta helps your cause.

I could quote you multiple specific instances now if I wanted. Every study I've read has different answers from 8 weeks to 6 months. Thats why I say we need a definitive unbiased study.

To actually discuss science instead of throwing around political/religious agendas. I'm talking about the study.

I would like to hear more about this part and when it occurs. Still, responses don't necessarily mean conciousness but could.

Some are worth more than others when it comes to the issue of murder. A corpse or fetus cannot be murdered.

And 50 states, or 100% do not recognize abortion as homicide. Whats your point?


Don't look at me, its not my Bible. It just clearly says that harm to fetus < further harm to the mother.

How many times do we have to do this??? How do you know that a fetus is not alive??? Given the multitude of opportunities, you have not indicated when “consciousness” comes about. If you don’t know when this time is, then you cannot say that a fetus is any different than an infant, child, adult, etc. Again, you entire argument hinges on this piece of information.



My point is that brain waves do not equal consciousness. So are you are changing your definition of life? Which is it? I’m just trying to get you to commit to one of your definitions of life. We’ve been discussing this topic for some time now and you’re still not sure when life begins.



Tell us the sources. I’d like to read them. Really, I would. I guess it doesn’t really matter because they are so contradictory to one another.

So you agree that Abortion should stop until we design an experiment where by we can determine the first onset of “consciousness”?

Do you think that you are the first person to pose such a ludicrous idea? As I’ve said before, take this idea of yours to a medical / ethics committee and see what they say.



Science will tell you that sex between a male and female human can produce another human. This is called reproduction. It is very scientific and natural. Stopping it is unnatural. You don’t have to “throw around a political / religious agendas” to be for or against abortion. I believe life begins at conception. There is nothing political or religious about that statement. If anything, it is supported more by science.



Two quick examples are when you press on a pregnant woman’s abdomen the fetus often responds with movement or a kick. Or if she drinks something cold and sweet, the fetus will often respond with more movement. Your right, a response doesn’t mean consciousness, but it does mean brain function. So are you going with your “brain function” or “consciousness” definition of life?




First of all, you have yet to tell me when life begins so by your own definition, it IS possible to murder a fetus. All you have to do is tell me a specific time! DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS???

SO, if you believe that a fetus(living) and a corpse(already dead) cannot be murdered, then what are the remaining stages of human life that are worth more than others when it comes to the issue of murder??? (child, adolescent, elderly, etc?)



Don’t you think it’s interesting how if a murderer kills a pregnant woman they could face two counts of homicide, not just one. But on the other hand if the mother elects to terminate the unborn baby through an abortion, it’s perfectly fine? If the fetus is not alive like you say it’s not, then there should be no penalty for causing a woman to miscarry. Right?




No. You’re wrong. Please read more carefully. You are not comparing apples to apples. If someone ACCIDENTALLY causes a woman to miscarry, then a fine must be paid. Key word ACCIDENTALLY. The Bible does not discuss what the consequence of INTENTIONALLY causing a woman to miscarry would be. Again, common sense would say that it would be more severe than a fine. What that punishment is, we don’t know. Maybe eye for an eye? An abortion is INTENTIONAL not ACCIDENTAL. Do you see my point?

Its 'alive', just like a tree. It has no formed brain or brain waves so it has no consciousness.

Brain waves do not necessarily equal consciousness, but the lack of any does equal no consciousness.

My definitions of life as defined by you. Quit trying to put words in my mouth.

Unnatural does not always equal wrong.

A fetus is living tissue, yes. An individual counscious human entity, no.

These kinds of things happen further along in the pregnancy at like 5+ months. I will agree with you that the baby is alive at that point and abortions should not be permitted.

All stages in between are equal and are subject to murder. Don't think I'm some cruel person trying to condone baby killing. I'm just trying to go against the propoganda that Lil Johnny is down there practicing for football when its still a glob of tissue.

Agreed, this is hypocrisy. All this of course, depends on how far along in the pregnancy either event occurs.

Sometime during the second trimester. My stance is that abortions should be limited to first trimester only, except in the case of the health of the mother. Happy?

I see what you are trying to say, and if it is true, it further shows stupidity of the Bible. Punishing someone for a true accident?

You have to see what I'm saying also though. Despite whether it is intentional or accidental, it says that further harm to the mother is of greater importance than the miscarriage.

good post offspring....

i agree completely. and i think one thing the people against abortion don't fully take into account is that when / if it is made illegal, we will only have more mothers and children dying due to the coat-hanger abortions that used to be common before clinics were open. the deaming of abortions as illegal will only cause more trouble and make mothers who are insistant on getting one to resort to illegal / unsafe means to get them. it won't stop the problem, only enhance it and cause more deaths and injuries

Good point, the posters making the anti-abortion argument completely ignore problems that would arise in the future.

For example, if abortion is made illegal, or worse, is considered an act of murder, how would they ever attain a conviction?

All it would take is one jury member believing that the right to choose should not be trampled on, and there goes your potential conviction down the toilet. Given that public opinion on abortion is about 50/50 in the U.S., it is reasonable to assume that no prosecuter would even try a case or no judge would waste his time.

This is what happened in Canada, the Quebec government went after an abortion doctor 3 times in a row in the 1970s, and each time, the Jury acquited him. The Jury consistantly agreed that women have the right to choose, therefore the government changed the laws and abortion was made legal. Wow, what a surprise, a Jury agreeing that human rights shouldn't be a trampled on by the state.

The same thing would just happen in the U.S., a Jury would not accept having their rights revoked, and thus they would acquit or at worse end up hung. The government would be forced to change the law back.

How does the anti-abortion crowd intend to approach this issue? Well, they have no approach, they are ignorant, they have no critical thinking skills, they don't look ahead and even worse, they are determined to repeat the mistakes of the 1970s Quebec government. What else is new?

__________________
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." — John Stuart Mill