was able to find this old thread in a search Mathematicians say that the inside is the same as the outside
Well, at least you wandered back toward medicine. But, you aren't answering the questions raised by YOUR methodology. You aren't even fully specifying your methodology. Remember that your methodology is not even the only methodology!
How can you kill something that has no brain function? Or no heart? Or depends entirely on another for existence? The embryo / fetus is a part of the woman until it’s birth. I would much rather tell someone they can make the decision on their own bodily autonomy than saying the state is deciding it for them. If the true goal was to stop abortion y’all would be advocating more funds for pregnancy prevention including education — you would be advocating for vasectomies for all men. But you are not doing that. You seek only to punish the woman.
The point was that the issue really goes back to whether the fetus is seen as a person, and that your previous argument, which implied the woman has a right to kill it for another reason, doesn't really hold up. Sometimes in this discussion it feels like I'm engaging in a circular argument, because so many of you keep revolving the issues around. If we're talking about one issue, it's not really fair in that argument to say you're right because of another issue.
Yeah, but you would never let pro-lifers pass a law that bans elective abortion when it has a brain and heart. (If the law literally said an abortion is illegal when the doctor should know medically that brain function exists)
A fetus might could be construed as a person at some stages of development — that is up for debate even in the medical community. you can read some about the philosophical arguments here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/child/alive_1.shtml That is the crux of the issue. How can you argue it is murder when there is no “agreement in medicine, philosophy or theology as to what stage of foetal development should be associated with the right to life.” Your opinion is no more or less valid than mine but what is 100% fact, forcing a woman to carry to term a child she wishes to not have under penalty of death is absolutely insane. If you say that death is not what the punishment should be then you are agreeing that the fetus you are wanting to save is less than a life and your entire argument unravels.
While I don’t necessarily agree with term limits on abortions I would not fight them — there is a good argument for them. As long as they are reasonable and justified.
I'm going to tell you upfront that I am sure you must be ignorant about the issue if you would be okay letting pro-lifers pass a law that says (elective) abortion is not allowed if there is brain function. The idea of "brain function" can actually be a very nebulous vague and contentious thing here. Even if we were given all the facts in front of us, it's not like everyone could agree when brain function is there, and when it isn't there, in a developing human in this situation. I can only assume you did not realize that.
I never said brain function. I said “reasonable and justified”. I have always felt that when pain is able to be perceived by the fetus the rules should change, that occurs immediately prior to the third trimester
I'm going to disagree with you there. Some of these "studies" are less scientifically objective than you think. Give some money to some pro-life researchers and have them tell you when perception of pain starts. I can almost guarantee you it will be different.
The findings come from medical institutes and independent research. It doesn’t come from a pro-birth or pro-choice group. You asking for it to be given to pro-birth groups show you are not looking for impartial data but rather data that backs up your position.
These days sadly if it doesn't come from a "biased" source, it will be biased. Oh I would love to find a neutral organization to do it, but there is no neutral organization. Well, not in White English-speaking/Western European countries, at least.
So your assertions have now moved on to personal opinion based on lack of evidence due to conspiracy instead of fact. I guess we are done here then.
I'm willing to discuss with you the facts and details of scientific studies on brain function in the developing human. But not in this thread. Maybe another thread dedicated to that. Scientific data is open to a great deal of interpretation and perspective.
You are engaging in a circular argument because whenever you are shown to be wrong you ignore the post, disappear for a while , and then YOU SAY THE SAME THINGS OVER AND OVER again....
Ya, the hilariously and erroneously named "pro-life" side has very biased sites and findings yet you continue to use sites like Lifenews….because it has false information..
Science has it all figured out ….and despite your insistence that ALL SCIENCE is false, and the earth is flat, it isn't....
She is being forced to not kill a fetus which isn't a person with rights....so it would be false imprisonment and torture.. Should we lock up everyone and torture them so that they don't kill anyone?
You complain about bias and then you suggest mone is handed to openly anti-abortion organisations so that they can conduct research on the matter instead? As I have already said, a fetus' ability to feel pain would not change anything. Maybe they would just need to find another, less painful/painless way of performing abortion if it was ever proven to be the case that fetuses do feel pain. The standard of value would still always be the woman.
That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. In is out and thus "the woman is outside of the fetus". I mean, come on.
The point is, it's no dumber than the logic of saying "The fetus is inside the woman, ergo it has no rights".
No , but it IS logical and factual to say the fetus is inside the woman and ATTACHED to her body...It isn't born therefore it has no rights. Did you really think a fetus just floats around inside a woman for no reason !!!!!???
