Fair point, well made. I wanted to cover all accidental pregnancy situations, though, from multiple birth control systems failing to not using anything at all and hoping that your swimmers would get lost. A lack of wisdom in past decisions shouldn’t remove your options for the future.
I was thinking along the lines of someone from an accident or disease who is taken to the hospital and supported by machines, but has no brain activity.
We normally wouldn’t call them a corpse, until someone decides to turn off the machines. It’s interesting how and why we draw the lines of person hood.
I’ve thought about this as well and what seems to work for me is that the concept of personhood is tied so closely with humanity and how we treat other beings that once personhood is established as present, it’s quite a big step to remove that status from the being. However, even a dead person is treated with some reverence and respect. You can’t just go abusing a dead body because that body is still associated with a person.
Certainly fewer unwanted pregnancies is a better option. I just think it’s reasonable to expect we’ll still have a lot of them until contraception becomes better, and widely available. I doubt insisting women keep unwanted pregnancies helps, and I don’t see it as making them responsible.
Hey, I was drunk and visiting my friend in the morgue and it just happened okay!!
Why won’t they ever let me forget? {sob}
on a more serious note, I tend to agree. I can also understand the desire to honor and protect a potential human life, but I think trying to legally make women biological slaves to a fetus is not the way to deal with it.
Educate and promote contraception and responsible sexual activity.
Offer real life practical alternatives to pregnant women including whatever financial support they need. On that note though I’ll mention something else.
I happened to have COPS on a couple of weeks ago and was surprised to see an incident where a woman was trying to get possession of a 3 or 4 year old she had left with someone else. She had 5 or 6 kids that seemed to be shuttled out here and there. I got the impression that the kids were used as commodities for their welfare checks. It was truly heart breaking as the woman dressed the tyke to be shuffled off ..again.
How is it honoring human life to insist on more unwanted children being born , when we still haven’t done a great job taking care of the ones already here?
This is the kind of thing that I find offensive. You claim over and over you’re righteously defending the lives of innocents, except when it comes to practical aide to them, and then “It’s not my responsibility” So much for the sanctity of human life lip service.
Um, Although common people have an influence on law makers they don’t make the laws. Human rights is the legal issue I mentioned before. That’s why I linked to the fetal rights pages. One has a series of landmark cases on the subject.
Is it human? is a differrent question than, does it have human rights?
It’s the difference between biology and philosophy. A fetus is scientifically human because of it’s unique DNA. There’s no question about that. Is it A human, is more of a question about person hood, and that has not been answered clearly because it is more philosophical than scientific.
Here’s an interesting page briefly covering some of the key points.
It has some, which is how fetal rights is relevant. In general I agree. Most abortions are done in the 1st trimester , before there’s a functioning brain. The ones after that are often associated with the health of the fetus or the mother. That indicates to me that women in general are making responsible decisions.
IMO, the difficulty is balancing the rights of the woman to control the course of her own life and body, and the potential of the human life created in pregnancy.
An embryo, or fetus without a brain, shouldn’t be able to physically enslave the mother if the pregnancy is unwanted. I just don’t see how that is just, or beneficial to society.
Bu7t we would expect doctors to do everything within their power to save that non person wouldn’t we? Somewhere in our hearts and minds, that fetus is a baby, a human being.
Of course. It’s a very controversial area.
Total hijack here – the reason I am here on this board today is that waaaaaaaay back in the mid-80’s, I was in a bookstore close to my campus and idly picked up a copy of “The Straight Dope.” I flipped to a random page and my first exposure to the Perfect Master was his answer to this question, which started off (paraphrased from my spotty memory): "It stands for Harold, as in ‘Our Father who art in Heaven, Harold be Thy name (snort).’ I about lost a kidney with trying to suppress my snickering in the quiet store, bought the book, and looked up the Straight Dope online when the internet came into being and I had access to it.
End of hijack – back to nobody changing anybody’s opinion on a divisive and polarizing issue. Carry on!
I will!! 
I knew that Bricker. I stated so in my post above. I’m not the idiot here. i stated in simple terms that a sperm and an egg is needed to create a human. A sperm by itself does not make a human.
Get your pro-choice hands off me:p
This whole thread has become a joke. It never was a good thread to begin with though.
That’s good:rolleyes:He has 7073 posts on the board buddy boy. I feel like changing the color of my eyes to blue or green all of a suden.
I’m going to send you some old Biology text books from Grade 10 Biology class. Aren’t you embarrassed by what you claimed?
Oh my goodness. You are annoying. An egg that has been fertilized by a sperm is human nitwit.
You’ll always have brown eyes to me.
Because you’re so full of crap, you see?
Apologies, actual Brown Eyed Girl
Reducing the risk is not eliminating the risk. I think it’s interesting what you deem I deem.
It’s not a perfect world and never will be. There will always be exceptions. And if you’re 15 and pregnant out in the middle of bumfuck, you’re probably going to be delivering that baby and your father will probably be out hunting the father with a shotgun.
No, sorry. Schizosaccharomyces pombe spends most of it’s life cycle as a haploid except, during times of scarce resources, it has sex and makes a diploid, which then undergoes meiosis to form haploid spores. No one would call a haploid pombe a non-pombe life. No one would call a diploid pombe a non-pombe life. Likewise, no one should call a sperm or an egg a non-human life. It’s a gamete in a reproductive organism’s life cycle.
Putting aside the questionable applicablity of yeast to people, the fact remains that the moment of fertilization is when two gametes contributed by the different individuals form a third, heretofore non-existant individual. That is the distinction which drives me to declare that while a sperm or an egg cell is not an individual, a fertilized egg is.
Why are sperms and eggs not individuals just because they’re haploid?
BTW, pombe is an excellent model system for lots of things regarding humans.
I deemed a deem in time gone byyyy
when hope was high and life worth living.
I deem, you deem, we all deem for …for um… ah fuck.