# I find it ironic (abortion and freedom) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 19, 2003, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532 "2003-07-19T02:59:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![VarlosZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d78d45/32.png) [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/41 "2003-07-19T21:31:45Z")
It’s not important to agree on terminology. Whether we call the thing inside a pregnant woman’s womb a “person” or an “entity” or a “fetus” is irrelevant. What _is_ relevant is the discussion between people who (A) think that that thing commonly called “abortion” should be legal and/or is morally justified and people who (B) disagree. These issues do not turn on whether we call the thing being evacuated from the womb a “person” or a “fetus.” That only really matters to PR men. – VarlosZ (pro-unborn-baby-killing) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/42 "2003-07-19T21:42:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by VarlosZ \* > \*\*It’s not important to agree on terminology. Whether we call the thing inside a pregnant woman’s womb a “person” or an “entity” or a “fetus” is irrelevant. What _is_ relevant is the discussion between people who (A) think that that thing commonly called “abortion” should be legal and/or is morally justified and people who (B) disagree. > > These issues do not turn on whether we call the thing being evacuated from the womb a “person” or a “fetus.” That only really matters to PR men.\*\* Yes and no. Maybe this has gotten too far into semantics but it is still important to an extent. The very nature of the argument for those opposed to abortion is to define the fetus/zygote/whatever as a distinct human being with its own right to life. Thus an abortion is murder to them just as if someone killed you. To me allowing ‘animate being’ and ‘entity’ to be used to describe the fetus gives up this very important and pivotal point. As to the ‘pro-life=anti-choice’ I probably let that go too far for no purpose except to be contrary. Sorry about that. ---
**Author:** ![VarlosZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d78d45/32.png) [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/43 "2003-07-19T22:12:24Z")
> [@](#): > > The very nature of the argument for those opposed to abortion is to define the fetus/zygote/whatever as a distinct human being with its own right to life. Thus an abortion is murder to them just as if someone killed you. To me allowing ‘animate being’ and ‘entity’ to be used to describe the fetus gives up this very important and pivotal point. As you said, yes and no. I think we can agree that what people are trying to argue about (ultimately) is whether society’s common ethical and legal protections ought to extend to _that thing_ in the womb. To an extent, arguing over terms such as “animate being” and “person” is just shorthand for that very issue; you say “person” so you don’t have to say “a thing deserving of the same ethical and legal protections as commonly apply to you and me.” Perfectly reasonable. The problem is that the debate frequently degenerates into a squabble over the words themselves instead of the meaning of the words. Person A says that Person B’s use of a certain word is inappropriate, stating the objection a bit too literally, and then B counters with another too-literal point (by, say, quoting the dictionary). And now we’re arguing over the proper wording of a given definition, we’ve lost sight of the fundamental disagreement, and any progress grounds to a halt. (I certainly don’t mean to single you out; we all do this.) So I see no reason why we can’t object to the use of a given term, but it should be made clear that we’re ultimately objecting to the thing implied by that term, as used in that particular instance – we have to remind ourselves that the word is just a tool: a stand-in for meaning. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/44 "2003-07-19T22:15:21Z")
Discussion of the rhetoric is informative and thus, by the standard of fighting ignorance, legitimate. If someone doesn’t want to read about it then, as has been pointed out innumerable times, they are free not to. I am both pro-choice and pro-abortion. I think women should be allowed to chose and I believe that many, including I suspect, myself, are not fit to be parents. I have no problem with the other side calling themselves pro-life because they want to keep the fetus alive. I don’t complain about the term just because in other contexts ( I am thinking about capital punishment ) the pro-lifers on abortion take the anti-life position. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/45 "2003-07-19T22:51:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Actuary \* > \*\*Don’t chase fruitless rabbits. \*\* A rolling stone makes hay while the sun is on cloud nine. **Actuary** You’ve asked for someone to define the point at which ‘human’ becomes applicable as a definition; I believe the the definition ‘human’, apart from being a diverse one (do you mean the legal definition, the biological definition etc?), I think it is a little like asking how many hairs constitute a beard. In fact tell me how many hairs constitute a beard. if I have _just_ the requisite number of hairs on my chin, I am defined as ‘bearded’ - If one of them falls out, am I suddenly ‘beardless’? In a process that is smoothly continuous, it is impossible to find transitions. Arguing that a fertilised ovum is suddenly fully human is like asserting that a single hair on your chin is a beard. ---
**Author:** ![Soup\_du\_jour](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@Soup\_du\_jour](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Soup_du_jour)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2003, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/46 "2003-07-19T23:24:36Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by Actuary_ > **Come on ya’ll !** Sorry. Pet peeve here. “Y’all” is a contraction of “you all.” Thus, the apostrophe should be between the ‘Y’ and the ‘A’ On the debate, I’ve got nothing much more to say than to agree with **Mangetout** on the “what constitutes life” thing. Quite eloquent there. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/47 "2003-07-20T05:25:06Z")
Bob Cos: Simply because one could make an argument that “pro-choice” is inaccurate does not make it so. Simply presenting one argument why “pro-choice” is inaccurate, and placing it alongside the argument why “pro-life” is inaccurate, does not establish that the two arguments are equally valid. While referring to someone as “pro-choice” does leave out information, it is information which it is absurd to expect. Asking someone to add “in the area of abortion” at the endof “pro-choice” is akin to asking a sports announcer to refrain from calling the football simply a “ball” out of concern that it might be confused with a baseball. The term “pro-choice” omits information that should be obvious. The term “pro-life” implies information which is false. I don’t see how you can equate a lack of information with inaccurate information. As for the “human” issue, I think that y’all (thanks, Soup\_du\_jour) are missing an important distinction: there’s a difference between being human, and being a human. A drop of blood from a human is human blood, but it’s not a human. I believe that a fetus is human, but not a human. ---
**Author:** ![Zap\_Rowsdower](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3da27b/32.png) [@Zap\_Rowsdower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zap_Rowsdower)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/48 "2003-07-20T06:09:51Z")
This character has just been banned from another list I am on for spamming and being a complete jerk. The following should explain everthing. I did get the authors permission to post this: > [@](#): > > When this guy showed up, I went to the Atheist Network and talked to some people over there. They told me that he has been banned from their forums as well as [infidels.org](http://infidels.org) and the freethought radio forum. I decided to do some more indepth research and found that he has been banned multiple times from these groups under different screen names and he has been banned from our group many times under a different screen name. For those who are interested, here is what I dug up on him. > He goes by Maximus Illuminati and Solomon Tulbure and has set up a number of websites that are not working. He has written 3-4 books: Christianity Exposed, Islam Exposed, The Illuminati Manifesto, and some thing that is anti-Bush. They are listed here at Amazon: > > [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=Tulbure%2C%20Solomon/002-7320560-8326448](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author=Tulbure%2C%20Solomon/002-7320560-8326448) > > Here is his biolgraphy at [AuthorZone.com](http://AuthorZone.com) > > [http://www.authorzone.com/view\_authors.php?&authorid=8](http://www.authorzone.com/view_authors.php?&authorid=8) > > and apperantly some people aren’t happy with him and his lack of payment at [Authorzone.com](http://Authorzone.com): > > [http://otoole-in-the-blog.blog-city.com/readblog.cfm?BID=4972](http://otoole-in-the-blog.blog-city.com/readblog.cfm?BID=4972) > > It says: "No wonder Author Zone has been a mess for months! I just received an e-mail from a man named Mike Bergman (who created Author Zone), and he went into an explanation as to why the site has been a disaster form the get-go. Apparently, Mike was contracted to create Author Zone per the request of Max the loon (who was running it from the beginning), but when it came time to pay for the web services, Max was no where to be found. I’ve pasted part of the message below: > My name is Mike Bergman and I am the developer of [AuthorZone.com](http://AuthorZone.com). The one who used to be in control of the site was Maximus Illuminati (Solomon Tulbure) but he has refused to pay for the web site I have build for him and I have decided to take control and run it myself. I know many members were burned by his control and harsh posts on the site and forum. I assure you that things will be much more civilized now and also I am looking to include members in the active management and development of the site. Many of the old posts in the forum have been removed, Maximus has no control of the site anymore and I request everyone’s help to stabilize the new site. > > This explains so much! I had truly wanted to delete my “account” from Author Zone after the debacle “Hitler” forum (please refer to December 2 blog entry titled “Author Forums”). What kind of crap is a “hate forum” in a place supposedly for authors to discuss and display their work? But perhaps I’ll leave it as is and see what the “new” owner can do with it. It’s a relief to know I wasn’t the only one affected by the mismanagement, and that I wasn’t over-reacting to the idiocy!" > > He even had an article written about him at PRWeb: > [http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/6/prweb40694.php](http://www.prweb.com/releases/2002/6/prweb40694.php) > > And it says: > "From HOMLESS BUM To President & CEO of [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) Corp. > Solomon Tulbure, a former homeless man launches a major dating website [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) targeting both single and married swingers. But the story of Mr. Tulbure’s rise from homelessness is one which is sure to touch your heart. [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) is now LIVE and ready for business. > > Solomon Tulbure, a former homeless man launches a major dating website [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) targeting both single and married swingers. But the story of Mr. Tulbure’s rise from homelessness is one which is sure to touch your heart. [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) is now LIVE and ready for business. > The Divorce > "After my divorce, I was left with nothing, I soon found myself homeless, sleeping in abandoned buildings, hallways or back stairways. It was a painful time which words cannot possibly bring to light. I was devastated and suicide became the dominant thought. I attempted suicide 4 times. What can I say, when a man looses everything, including the woman he loves and finds himself homeless it is a very painful and unbearable situation. My wife became obsessed with synagogue life while I became and atheist, and that was the end of it. > > Soon I thought of hanging out in the library, as it was the middle of winter and I could not stomach the nasty homeless shelters and the trash people which hang out there. The smell of the unwashed homeless savages was something which made my stomach turn. Being a system engineer, I knew how to use the internet computers available at the library. I soon stumbled across a discussion forum where someone was talking about a particular penny stock which was about to go up to $5. I saved all the money would get from begging, and opened a online trading account. I made a nice profit and was very happy." > > [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) > “Being homeless was very lonely, a time of horror for me. I decided I would start a website for lonely people, for single people. The problem was finding a domain which was easy to remember. I started searching for available domains and for domains which were for sale. I knew if my website was to be successful it had to appeal to the personal aspect of our intimate nature. I thought of the word “My Computer” and decided to find a domain with the “my” pretext. [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com) was not available, so I decided to go see what kind of site the owner had. When I got there all I found was ‘this domain is for sale. If you want to buy it, email me at …’ So I emailed the guys, even though I did not have much money. To my surprise the guy was from South Korea and only wanted $800 for the domain. I quickly arranged to set up an escrow account, he transferred the domain to me, I paid him and the deal was done. The I found a programmer to do the software, and now we are ready for launch.” > > [MyEmail.Com](http://MyEmail.Com) > “While spending time on the internet from the library, I had to use a hotmail account. The irritating problem was that even though I never gave out my email address to anyone, after several weeks I was getting 200 junk emails week. So I searched for an email domain, and [MyEmail.Com](http://MyEmail.Com) was not available. The owner had a for sale page too. She wanted $90,000 for it. I emailed her and told her that all I had was $19,000 in my savings and I had no way to get more. She replied back and said that for $20,000 she would sell it to me. So I cashed in my stock, we arranged for an escrow account and the deal was finalized a few days later. BUT, unlike other email services, I figured out a way to make a email service SPAMM FREE. I instructed the software people where I bought my WebMail software to make a modification, to only allow people to send email to a member if they are on the member’s contact list. So, now I offer a 1Mb free normal webmail package, and a Spam FREE account for $10 per year > with 10Mb of space and other special features. My service is the first in the world to offer 100% spamm free email service and I am sure that professionals and serious people will find my service priceless. No more JUNK email” > > [AuthorZone.Com](http://AuthorZone.Com) > “While having so much free time on my hands to do nothing but think and read books, I decided to write my own book, to and finally started writing my first book 'Christianity Exposed” and then The Illuminati Manifesto and am now publishing my 3rd book 'President Bush Is a Moron: Islam Is NOT Peace". But finding a community of authors where I could get some help and have a place to hang out and exchange views with other authors was a hard task. There simply is no real nice and warm website for authors on the whole internet. So, I finally found [AuthorZone.Com](http://AuthorZone.Com), bought it for $5000 from the former owner. This website I hope to have up very soon." > > “Now I find myself broke. Yes, a poor guy who owns 3 domains worth several million dollars, trying to get my websites known, but am left with no money to market the websites, so I have allot of work on my hands. But, this homeless BUM is President and CEO of his own company, and if I find some investors, there is no limit to where I can go.” > > Please visit and use my services [MyMatchmaker.Com](http://MyMatchmaker.Com), [MyEmail.Com](http://MyEmail.Com), and soon [AuthorZone.Com](http://AuthorZone.Com)" > > But this sob story of his doesn’t fit other storys about him that I have heard. Some say that he lives with his parents and that he sets up internet sites to sell products (like described above) and then takes the money and runs. Some claim that the FBI is investigating him because of fraud…but these are rumors, so far. > > There is a group with a Yahoo group set to ‘expose him’: > > [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maximus-Illuminati-Exposed/](http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Maximus-Illuminati-Exposed/) > > and [nodiety.com](http://nodiety.com) doesn’t have nice things to say about him: > > [http://nodeity.com/tulbure.html](http://nodeity.com/tulbure.html) > > here is another website that doesn’t speak well of him: > > [http://www.thelodgeroom.com/jul0602.html](http://www.thelodgeroom.com/jul0602.html) > > With all the searching I did, only one forum spoke well of him and it was the “Abovethetruth” forum which is full of over the top conspiracy theorists. One of the funniest things I read that Solomon wrote was here: > > [http://www.ariescomputer.com/illuminati/message\_forum/messages/273.html](http://www.ariescomputer.com/illuminati/message_forum/messages/273.html) > > and he said: "Posted by Solomon Tulbure on November 24, 2002 at 01:16:01: > > It is my deepest regret to inform you that the Illuminati Order is no more. Due to the overwhelming attempts on my life by the Christian Coalition and the Islamic brotherhood in alliance with the higher order members of the Illuminati who have turned their backs on me, I have folded under the pressure. I cannot stand their constant attacks upon my life. Only a few days ago members of the higher order Illuminati tried to inject me with the HIV virus which I developed for them myself. It is not fair. I cannot take this anymore. The pressure is to much for me. I apologize to all those who paid me for memberships in the Illuminati. I cannot afford to reemburse you. I need every cent that I have to merely survive. > kindest regards, > max " > > And people felt sorry for him! > > So although I like to give people the benefit of doubt, I think he is over the top. Someone at the AtheistNetwork told me that he tried to get a group of atheists together to poison meat that would be eaten by Christians. Anyway, has anyone read his books? The Christians don’t like him for sure and I haven’t heard many atheists speak well of him. No one knows what type of ‘Dr.’ he is and he seems to have alot of anger. > > I posted this because I thought some of you would want the ‘lowdown’ on this guy. We should keep an eye out for his other screen names: Solomon, Lord Satan, Solomon Tulbure, Maximus Illuminati, OneWorldOrder, AtheistRevolution, ChristianityExposed, IslamExposed, etc… ---
**Author:** ![johnny\_miles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/65b543/32.png) [@johnny\_miles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/johnny_miles)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/49 "2003-07-20T07:54:27Z")
For all you anti-lifers, Isn’t it kind of hypocritical for you to be pro-choice considering you’ve already been born? ---
**Author:** ![VarlosZ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d78d45/32.png) [@VarlosZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VarlosZ)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 8:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/50 "2003-07-20T08:14:00Z")
> [@](#): > > For all you anti-lifers, Isn’t it kind of hypocritical for you to be pro-choice considering you’ve already been born? What, being born is inherently better than not being born? I’m a happy guy and I like life, but it wouldn’t be so bad (for the world or for “me”) if I never was. ---
**Author:** ![sugaree](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cc9497/32.png) [@sugaree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sugaree)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 12:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/51 "2003-07-20T12:05:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by johnny miles \* > \*\*For all you anti-lifers, Isn’t it kind of hypocritical for you to be pro-choice considering you’ve already been born? \*\* Look, I’m the result of a pregnancy that took two teenagers by surprise. I’m thrilled to be alive, personally. But saying that abortion should be illegal because otherwise I wouldn’t be here is like saying that all teenagers should be having sex without birth control because otherwise I wouldn’t be here. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/52 "2003-07-20T16:08:15Z")
How is supporting someone’s right to make a decision that your own family didn’t make hypocritical? That’s like saying it’s hypocritical for a Democrat to support someone’s right to vote Republican. Sure, if everyone voted Republican the Democrats would up shit creek, but that’s a personal decision for the voter and only the voter to make. As for my personal situation, I was an unplanned but wanted pregnancy. I was just a few months earlier than they’d really planned. (Mom wanted me to be born in the early summer so she’d have time off work to be with me, but I was a January baby.) To say that she should have aborted a pregnancy she wanted is stupid, and that is never the position of those of us who are pro-choice/anti-life/pro-abortion-rights/pick your term. Having me was the choice that happened to fit her life and her priorities. Other women, with other pregnancies, aren’t in the same situation. They don’t want to be pregnant. They can’t afford to be pregnant. It would exacerbate their diabetes and permanently damage their kidneys to be pregnant. They’re carriers for devastating genetic disorders. For whatever reason, continuing the pregnancy isn’t a choice that fits their lives and priorities. ---
**Author:** ![Actuary](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Actuary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Actuary)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/53 "2003-07-20T19:32:00Z")
Why do you need to ask? I stated it clearly and repeatedly. From a biological and genetic point of view (not legally yet), when does the “it” become a human (I’ll get to that later – you’re right, --The Ryan–, to make the distinction). But you still did not answer the question. You cannot really answer the question, can you? Y’all (thanx) admitted as much. It’s a continuum. Mangetout - You talked about the definition of a beard. If you have some hair on your chin/face, wouldn’t it be really, really important to YOU how a country that you were to visit defined a “beard” if they had laws that permitted people to KILL YOU for not having a “beard”. It would be really important to YOU, wouldn’t it? When in doubt, err on the side of LIFE. ---
**Author:** ![Actuary](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Actuary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Actuary)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/54 "2003-07-20T19:34:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sugaree \* > \*\*Look, I’m the result of a pregnancy that took two teenagers by surprise. I’m thrilled to be alive, personally. But saying that abortion should be illegal because otherwise I wouldn’t be here is like saying that all teenagers should be having sex without birth control because otherwise I wouldn’t be here. \*\* There’s a huge difference between preventing a life from coming into existence AND killing it after it starts in its most helpless state. ---
**Author:** ![Actuary](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Actuary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Actuary)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/55 "2003-07-20T19:43:44Z")
Hold off the matter of affording it or not. CarzyCatLady – Are you familiar with the concept among pro-choicers that says, “If the women wants the baby it’s a life worth protecting (and even prosecuting over if killed), but if she doesn’t want the “it” – it can be aborted.” Think about it, whether it’s a LIFE worth protecting depends on whether the mother wants it? Walk down that road a piece. What are the implications? Why do we not apply that principle to other life-death choices? A high view of LIFE would never define it as such. A low view of life (and high view of self) will finds numerous spurious reasons to kill a nuisance baby. ---
**Author:** ![Actuary](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Actuary](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Actuary)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/56 "2003-07-20T19:55:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > \*\*Bob Cos: > there’s a difference between being human, and being a human. A drop of blood from a human is human blood, but it’s not a human. I believe that a fetus is human, but not a human. \*\* The “it” is more than merely human. It is a human (but still in development). “It” has human DNA and unique human DNA (I have forgotten how early in gestation it is discernable). “It” has separate and distinct DNA from it’s mother. Labs do DNA testing in a court trial, to identify a person (separately and distinguishably from other suspected person). When they find the DNA distinct they declare the person tested to be a separate and distinct person. Bob Cos – What if lab personnel had tested the DNA of the “it” that “became” you at a later, but unknown time? What if they held in the results in the files until now? What if they tested you now. Of course they would find a perfect match. The “it” was really YOU, back then. Not a pre-YOU. This is all just basic science. Don’t keep resisting the scientifically obvious for your emotional, self-image, spurious, reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/57 "2003-07-20T20:20:13Z")
Thanks for posting those links, **Zap**. You’d think that after three books Illuminati would be able to spell the word “many.” And am I the only one who strongly suspects that he moonlights as a ventriloquist? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/58 "2003-07-20T21:27:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Actuary \* > **The “it” was really YOU, back then. Not a pre-YOU.** I’m going to call bullshit on this one; the newly fertilised ovum that became ‘me’ may well be ‘pre-me’ in a purely genetic/chemical sense, but a heck of a lot has happened since then (I developed a brain and senses, was born, learned to speak, read, write, feel pain, built relationships, formed opinions, laughed, cried etc); the ‘it’ was not a person at that stage - all the stuff that happened in between was what makes me a person. However, you’ll now ask me to define the _ **moment** _ at which the transition to ‘person’ took place. I shall reiterate that moments of transition are not discernible in a smoothly continuous process. Five weeks ago, I was clean shaven, but I have a beard now; at no _ **moment** _ did I suddenly ‘have a beard’, having ‘no beard’ the previous moment; there is no moment of transition because the state of beardedness/lessness is not a boolean function. So it is (I believe) with personhood and/or humanity; the law may be forced to have an opinion as to when the ‘moment’ occurs, but that is all it is; an opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/59 "2003-07-20T22:42:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Actuary \* > \*\*Bob Cos – What if lab personnel had tested the DNA of the “it” that “became” you at a later, but unknown time? What if they held in the results in the files until now? What if they tested you now. Of course they would find a perfect match. > > The “it” was really YOU, back then. Not a pre-YOU. > > This is all just basic science. Don’t keep resisting the scientifically obvious for your emotional, self-image, spurious, reasons. \*\* You need to read more closely if you’re inferring that I have the beliefs you seem to be disputing. I have no spurious reasons to resist science that shows human life begins at conception, since I happen to agree with this notion. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2003, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532/60 "2003-07-20T23:03:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by The Ryan \* > **Bob Cos: > Simply because one could make an argument that “pro-choice” is inaccurate does not make it so. Simply presenting one argument why “pro-choice” is inaccurate, and placing it alongside the argument why “pro-life” is inaccurate, does not establish that the two arguments are equally valid. While referring to someone as “pro-choice” does leave out information, it is information which it is absurd to expect. Asking someone to add “in the area of abortion” at the endof “pro-choice” is akin to asking a sports announcer to refrain from calling the football simply a “ball” out of concern that it might be confused with a baseball. The term “pro-choice” omits information that should be obvious. The term “pro-life” implies information which is false. I don’t see how you can equate a lack of information with inaccurate information.** This doesn’t become less nonsensical just because more than one person asserts it. Let me try one more time. “Pro-choice” is not technically accurate, since that camp is not for all choices, and neither is the pro-life side against all choices. It is a name that is ambiguous, even if unintentionally so, and that ambiguity could lead the uninitiated to the wrong conclusion. Now, here’s the point you so conveniently missed: You are asserting that, despite the fact that the term by itself may not be absolutely clear, it is implicitly obvious just what “choice” the “pro-choice” crowd is for. Then explain why “pro-life” is not just as clear to anyone who hears it–i.e., it describes someone who is “pro” protecting the life of the unborn. You know what? This is not that big a point, but it is amusing how strenuously people will torture logic here. If you want names that are not in any way ambiguous or misleading, then you’ll have to abandon “pro-choice.” It is not an argument to say, “but everyone knows what that means” unless you are willing to concede that this argument also applies to the term “pro-life.” Why would I have to needlessly add information like “pro-life of the unborn”? That would be like asking a sports announcer to refrain from calling the football simply a “ball” out of concern that it might be confused with a baseball. Look, both sides have chosen a term that connotes something noble and that could imply something base about the opposition. I recognize this, and frankly I think it’s self-evident. Just be consistent in the logic you apply regarding which terms are worthy of your use. Or…you can just believe as I do that it is common courtesy to refer to people as they prefer, which is why I have no reluctance at all to call people pro-choice. Again, feel free to ignore a simple request. But I recognize it for exactly what it is–pandering pettiness. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-find-it-ironic-abortion-and-freedom/189532.md?page=4)