That was exactly my point. And the teratoma example was only in response to the “comparing zygotes to cancer cells is crazy”. I don’t want to hijack the discussion with teratomas but, biologically, they have more in common with an early embryo.
I think pro-life people put huge moral importance on the potential to become human. But from a biological perspective, it’s probably gonna only end up being a few initiating transcription factors that separates a cancer cell or a teratoma from a totipotent stem cell like a zygote or an early embryo.
So, what I don’t understand, is why some anti-choice people think “human potential” has moral significance? (besides the religious arguments)
More Hijack: So, Jackmannii, your Terrortoma developed some kind of primitive central nervous system? :eek:
Look at cloning. Almost every cell in the human body has “human potential”. The DNA inside a cell can be turned into a new human being at least in theroy, all it needs is the proper growth medium like an egg and a womb and a little kick start like Dolly.
There *is *no argument beyond the religious or metaphysical. The significance of the potential to develop into a human being is entirely predicated on there being something special and unique about humanity as a form of life, i.e., ensoulment. If we have a soul, clearly it has to show up at some point, and the development process doesn’t have any clear delineators, so they go with conception.
Wow, good for you; that’s a sign of maturity you know. So?
Speaking of so fucking thick - none of this has anything to do with my original question. Which was - why does it make you so angry that someone else repeated a mistake. However, it seems the answer is that everything that you don’t like or agree with makes you angry. To the point of over compensating…
So is pregnancy, yet many women repeat that mistake over and over - does that also make you irrationally upset?
Since you couldn’t be bothered to quote what you are responding to, and I don’t feel like scrolling thru a whole pile of crap to find it - I have no idea what you are talking about. If you are trying to state that a fetus is “alive” from conception on, and you have “science” to prove it, I’d sure be interested to see if you can come up with a link to support that idea.
Well, that is a question - when did it become the question?
This is untrue. Planned Parenthood, to use one example, offers all of those things (prenatal care, contraception education, adoption assistance).
Really, you are projecting. The anti-choice side is the one that doesn’t care about anything as long as the baby is brought to term. The pro-choice side aren’t the ones fighting against contraceptives (like most anti-choice people are)…
I am reminded of when this subject came up on another message board. A woman there told the story about how her parents forced her to get an abortion and how this traumatized her and was a huge reason why she was anti-choice.
I explained to her that what she went through was abhorrant, however the difference between her and myself is that I found it equally abhorrant if a girl is forced to give birth to a baby she doesn’t want. And I still do feel that way.
The key word that both of those situations share is: “forced”. It appears the woman missed the point. So traumatized by having your choice taken away from you that you support taking away that choice from every other women? boggle
This is a silly question. If your plane crashed in the Andes and you were starving to death, you’d eat human meat. It’s a social construct that keeps living people safe from being served on someone else’s dinner table and (probably prevents some type of mad human disease). In a life and death situation, that social construct is deconstructed because survival is of greater value than it.
I like to think I value humanity, though. Not sure why “potential to become human” is required.
I think Brown Eyed Girl pretty much summed it up for me. Most human cultures have death aversions probably due to disease and due to most of them not wanting to believe a loved one is gone when they die. But when push comes to shove, they’ll eat people. Also, there’s plenty of evidence of cannibalism in prehistoric people. But abortion and infanticide happened a lot, even in ancient cultures. In fact, many religions, until very recently, considered abortion up to the point of “quickening” to be OK. “Quickening” is when the soul entered.
Humans don’t instinctively value humanity. There is some instinctual altruism but, generally, humans don’t naturally value humanity.
Why does such a debate matter? Fine, a fetus is a human, a person, sentient, looking forward to taking long walks in the rain and voting Democrat… whatever… The whole labeling argument is a waste of time and I cheerfully stipulate to any anthropomorphic claims anyone wants to make about the fetus.
So we have two people, and their interests are in conflict. After weighing the impacts, I side with the mother as being the better option.
:eek: Holy crap! I was just guessing! :eek: That is disturbing! Especially this part:
The dysmorphism evident in the infection rates—kuru was 8-9 times more prevalent in women and children than in men at its peak—is because while the men of the village took the choice cuts, the women and children would eat the rest of the body including the brain, where the prion particles were particularly concentrated.
Some religions believe ensoulment happens at conceptions, other at quickening, others when a baby takes its first breath after birth.
Some religions mandate abortion to save the life of the mother, others feel that abortion, even to save the mother’s life, is still wrong.
Other than respecting the religious and cultural beliefs of the pregnant woman religion has no place in the abortion debate…mostly because you then have to decide whose religion you’re talking about.
Because. I fucking hate. Stupidity. You. Thick. Fucking. Cow.
I’m also pissed off at women who get pregnant over and over when they don’t want to and/or can’t properly care for the kids. It’s just another form of stupidity–or perhaps ignorance about the availability of birth control.
I ask you again: do you think that a fetus can die? (Because they can.) Something can’t die if it’s not alive in the first place. What do you think a stillbirth is, you fucking retard?
When we were discussing the ethics of abortion. Duh? The life of a fetus is self-evident, as is the life of a mosquito. The only significant question is whether or not a fetus is a person. You can have killing without murder, but you can’t have murder without a person.
**JESUS FUCKING CHRIST WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE THAT NONE OF YOU READ THIS FUCKING THREAD. **Are you really that fucking thick? I not only EXPLICITLY STATED that Planned Parenthood was a great example of an organization that I would characterize as pro-choice (barely fifty posts into the thread, even), I **quoted **that post at least once or twice in response to *other *illiterate fucking retards like you who couldn’t be bothered to read past the first post that said something that they thought was calling them a bad name. Seriously, people. You’re not doing the pro-choice movement any favors by being this fucking stupid. Do us all a favor and shut your fucking mouths.