|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 16:39:25 GMT -5
damn you got me, all of science cannot definitively be more than a set of theories, and abundant "proof" does not necessarily translate to the fact itself being "proven." i guess we'd better mosey through life dismissing everything, then.
|
|
|
Post by Poe's Coats Host Toast on Feb 5, 2017 17:31:30 GMT -5
can you scientifically prove that there is a difference between an undeveloped mass of cells and a human? yes face it, you're attacking a straw man and you know it. the discussion is exactly about the very gap, or developmental process between a fetus in the earliest stages (I guess what you misname a mass of cells?) and a human... a gap of 9 months which you willfully ignore. you and pandora's cute reductionism only gets you so far.
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 17:43:37 GMT -5
we know the gap enough for legal purposes. fetal viability has been tested. we don't have to stroke our chins and philosophize about a fetus being a human when we know for a fact that its skin will fall off immediately outside the womb.
|
|
|
Post by Isadora Is a Door on Feb 5, 2017 17:55:53 GMT -5
I wouldnt count the definiton of not-human as 'something that has skin which falls off.'
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 18:02:18 GMT -5
an embryo or fetus isn't just the same as an infant. disagreeing with this isn't philosophical, its ignoring facts to support personal beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Isadora Is a Door on Feb 5, 2017 18:04:33 GMT -5
an embryo or fetus isn't just the same as an infant. disagreeing with this isn't philosophical, its ignoring facts to support personal beliefs. I'm not entirely sure if this post is specifically aimed at me, but I don't think anyone in this thread has said that?
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 18:07:10 GMT -5
so hey big shocker, im pro choice. ideally, i think sex education and contraceptives should be utilized to limit the amount of abortions. but i think a lot of people are really trying to control women's bodies and view female sexuality as something that is punishable and its kind of hard to meet those people half way. women deserve autonomy over their bodies and if you aren't going to allow abortions then there should be a way to prevent the need for them.
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 18:11:47 GMT -5
I wouldnt count the definiton of not-human as 'something that has skin which falls off.' it was merely one example of the traits which healthy fetuses (that can't survive outside the womb) share. and, if you're so committed to your "never knowingly be serious" fallback, why are you participating in DD, the one forum for serious discussion?
|
|
|
Post by Isadora Is a Door on Feb 5, 2017 18:13:45 GMT -5
but it's not a board where non-serious posts are forbidden, especially in a thread witch such a dubious host.
|
|
|
Post by Isadora Is a Door on Feb 5, 2017 18:30:15 GMT -5
so hey big shocker, im pro choice. ideally, i think sex education and contraceptives should be utilized to limit the amount of abortions. but i think a lot of people are really trying to control women's bodies and view female sexuality as something that is punishable and its kind of hard to meet those people half way. women deserve autonomy over their bodies and if you aren't going to allow abortions then there should be a way to prevent the need for them. Okay, so while i'm actually in this thread, I will restate my ~controversial~ opinion on abortion, which is that I don't like or agree with the idea of abortion exsisting, and that i do believe abortions should only take place in certain circumstances and should be as limited as possible But i also know that humans are evil and pathetic, and that any situation in which people take control of such a thing as this would automatically cause multiple problems, far worse than the origional The situation we have now is not one that I agree with, but it's far better than the consequences of what would or could happen if the situation I just described (or any other alternative) was put in to effect. Plus I don't have a womb, which rather limits my knowledge and feelings about such matters to the category 'not an opinion that matters or should be listened to'
|
|
|
Post by Poe's Coats Host Toast on Feb 5, 2017 18:47:53 GMT -5
we know the gap enough for legal purposes. fetal viability has been tested. we don't have to stroke our chins and philosophize about a fetus being a human when we know for a fact (etc) and there you go: for legal purposes. yes, based on science, but not science in itself. Your only argument for telling others not to "stroke our chins and philosophize about a fetus being a human" is because others have stroked their chins and philosophized for you in the name of the law. It's a conservative stance forbidding healthy discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Reba on Feb 5, 2017 19:33:35 GMT -5
it is not philosophizing to legally put the latest you can get an abortion at 20 weeks. that is conservative in the sense that there is scientific evidence for 0% fetal viability at that point, but further on it really does become guesswork, so courts have usually chosen not to permit abortions at later weeks. there is merit in the question "at what point after 20 weeks does a fetus become a person?" because science really can't confirm that, and the answer could possibly extend the available period for abortions. but the question that pro-life people want to ask is "does a fetus become a person before 20 weeks?", and that's ignoring actual evidence in favor of arbitrary philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by Charles Vane on Feb 5, 2017 20:00:14 GMT -5
so hey big shocker, im pro choice. ideally, i think sex education and contraceptives should be utilized to limit the amount of abortions. but i think a lot of people are really trying to control women's bodies and view female sexuality as something that is punishable and its kind of hard to meet those people half way. women deserve autonomy over their bodies and if you aren't going to allow abortions then there should be a way to prevent the need for them. Okay, so while i'm actually in this thread, I will restate my ~controversial~ opinion on abortion, which is that I don't like or agree with the idea of abortion exsisting, and that i do believe abortions should only take place in certain circumstances and should be as limited as possible But i also know that humans are evil and pathetic, and that any situation in which people take control of such a thing as this would automatically cause multiple problems, far worse than the origional The situation we have now is not one that I agree with, but it's far better than the consequences of what would or could happen if the situation I just described (or any other alternative) was put in to effect. Plus I don't have a womb, which rather limits my knowledge and feelings about such matters to the category 'not an opinion that matters or should be listened to' dude im not sure where you think you're being controversial, i agree with everything you said. i don't consider myself not pro-life but i also don't think i have the right to tell others what to do with their body.
|
|
|
Post by Linda Rhaldeen on Feb 6, 2017 8:43:39 GMT -5
Why are all the latest posts except for Pandora's from (I'm assuming cis) guys? All you non-uterus havers just need to shut up and stop debating something that doesn't apply to you.
|
|
|
Post by Linda Rhaldeen on Feb 6, 2017 8:56:44 GMT -5
Also, being able to approach this as a philosophical or logical debate rather than the human rights issue that it is is the height of privilege.
|
|