Originally posted by Halitose
Here's a summary of my evidence for the humanity of the fetus i.e. that it is a human being:

1. There is overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that human life begins at conception. Let me quote from some scientific references for you:

"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear materia ...[text shortened]... on Seperation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Cong., 1st Sess., 1981

This simply proves that scientists have a poor grasp of ethical considerations.

This has been proven throughout history, as scientists continually spend time inventing more mind bogglingly nasty WMDs.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Yes, your point has been the self-autonomy of the pregnant woman,
I understand that. The vast majority of other posters have been
concerning themselves as to when life begins, more specifically when
it begins within the woman. You put yourself into my conversation
and then start talking about how I was not addressing the issue
you care about, duh! You ...[text shortened]... hose women, so you feel
it is justified to see them killed at another’s whim or desire.
Kelly

"Pieces of eight,
Pieces of eight"

Originally posted by Halitose
[b]what's there to debate?

The smoke and mirrors show of "personhood".[/b]

You don't understand ethics, rights, duties or moral agents.

Thus you would see 'personhood' as mere smoke and mirrors.

The confusion is your own.

Try to understand No1's and my posts, and educate yourself.

Originally posted by howardgee
You don't understand ethics, rights, duties or moral agents.

Thus you would see 'personhood' as mere smoke and mirrors.

The confusion is your own.

Try to understand No1's and my posts, and educate yourself.

You don't understand ethics, rights, duties or moral agents.

Have you even bothered to read more that the last 5 pages of this debate? I guess not. Your unbased assertions are ludicrous. Since I have never seen you string together a coherent moral or ethical argument (nevermind logical), I'm not in the least surprised that you would resort to unsubstantiatedad hominems to prove any of your points.

Try to understand No1's and my posts, and educate yourself.

Which posts?

Even No1 would back me up that you haven't ever made a point on this thread. You have only ridiculed posters such as KJ and spewed jaundiced ad hominems ad nausium. If you would like any consideration, try to let your arguments stand on their own without having lame strawmen, red herrings and ad hominems to prop up their limp substance.

Perhaps you should read through the rest of the thread and attempt to understand that personhood debate and its criticism; then bring your well constructed assertions to the table before you jump naked into this pit of needles. 😛

Originally posted by howardgee
This simply proves that scientists have a poor grasp of ethical considerations.

This has been proven throughout history, as scientists continually spend time inventing more mind bogglingly nasty WMDs.

I'm sorry. There was no attempt at making an ethical point in that post. No1 asserted that a fetus is not a human being; that was my rebuttal.

Scientists also continually spend time inventing medical advancements that save millions of lives, your argument is a red herring.

Originally posted by howardgee
You don't understand ethics, rights, duties or moral agents.

Thus you would see 'personhood' as mere smoke and mirrors.

The confusion is your own.

Try to understand No1's and my posts, and educate yourself.

What is there to understand about your point and that of no1?
You define life after birth correct? For you it is worthy of rights at
that point. Your concerns seem to be the rights of the mother over
the life within her.

Is that your view?

Others have their own points and views on when we call a human
life worthy of rights and worth, the bottom line is that something
is killed because it isn't thought worthy of life after you and others
define when life is worth keeping alive. You use birth, others use
personhood, both has man killing its own at an early stage.

We don't treat fish with such contempt, if you go fishing and you
catch some types of fish if they are not large enough you are legally
obligated to throw them back. With deer and other animals you
legally must wait till the seasons start before you can go kill some
to eat or do what you will with them. Both laws are man made, both
were made for a purpose, which places fish and some animals in
better stead than human life; since it is always open season on
human life, the smaller the better to kill.
Kelly

Originally posted by Halitose
Here's a summary of my evidence for the humanity of the fetus i.e. that it is a human being:

1. There is overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that human life begins at conception. Let me quote from some scientific references for you:

"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear materia ...[text shortened]... on Seperation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, Report, 97th Cong., 1st Sess., 1981

Halitose, you are confusing two concepts. "Life" begins at conception; a fetus is alive just like a tapeworm and the germs that cause bad breath. But it is not, and has never been, considered a human being i.e. a human entity with the same rights as a child. That is what your claim is and to that, science has no answer.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
One look at all the fat kids out there shows that (USA) society doesn't have strong laws against providing a crappy diet to kids after birth; there is no law that I am aware of that requires anyone to exercise regularly, or to force their offspring to do so. Therefore, I don't see any basis for forcing such laws on a pregnant woman, even if there was a legal finding that her fetus was human.

You are confused. A woman being overweight during pregnancy leads to a greater chance of serious birth defects and miscarriage. This is maiming or killing a fetus-human logically if a fetus is a human being. This is far different from raising a "fat kid".

Originally posted by no1marauder
Halitose, you are confusing two concepts. "Life" begins at conception; a fetus is alive just like a tapeworm and the germs that cause bad breath. But it is not, and has never been, considered a human being i.e. a human entity with the same rights as a child. That is what your claim is and to that, science has no answer.

Science does not deal in worth when it comes to life, we either care
for something or we do not. Science is blind to things like the love
of a mother for her children, it cannot measure love, it cannot
measure how a mother feels about her kids. We see the results
of people who care more about their happy lives than the lives
of what is currently within the woman, but we cannot say it is of
more or less worth than a tapeworm with science.

Some will care more about their children in or outside of the woman
than their own life, if someone cares more about anything else than
that life, it can lead to an abortion. The location of where that child
is, be it in or outside of the woman has nothing to do with how it is
cared for by anyone. Our actions and words review what is inside of
us, who or what is important to us and the type of people we are. Your
attempting to claim it is sciences job to assign worth is simply
passing off your lack of caring with a convenient excuse, to justify
the death of that human life at an early stage.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Science does not deal in worth when it comes to life, we either care
for something or we do not. Science is blind to things like the love
of a mother for her children, it cannot measure love, it cannot
measure how a mother feels about her kids. We see the results
of people who care more about their happy lives than the lives
of what is currently within ...[text shortened]... aring with a convenient excuse to excuse
the death of that human life at an early stage.
Kelly

Oh, shut up, Parrot. We get it. And since you can't read, it was Halitose's claim that science had something relevant to say about the "worth" of a zygote, not me.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Oh, shut up, Parrot. We get it. And since you can't read, it was Halitose's claim that science had something relevant to say about the "worth" of a zygote, not me.

I know you don't care about a zygote, I didn't make that error.
Kelly

Originally posted by howardgee
But if a parent fed the child nothing but bread and water leading to illness/disease and/or death, then the parent would be imprisoned for neglect.

If the Foetus was given rights, then every miscarriage must potentially be investigated fr similar nutritional abuse.

Not necessarily. There would have to be medical evidence that the cause of the miscarriage was malnutrition. I wonder how frequent such cases are.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Not necessarily. There would have to be medical evidence that the cause of the miscarriage was malnutrition. I wonder how frequent such cases are.

So you would support in theory every miscarriage being investigated as a potential homicide with possible criminal consequences IF the medical evidence showed that any act or omission by the carrying case (i.e. pregnant woman) was the cause of the miscarriage? You just don't think that there would be many actual cases?

Originally posted by no1marauder
You are confused. A woman being overweight during pregnancy leads to a greater chance of serious birth defects and miscarriage. This is maiming or killing a fetus-human logically if a fetus is a human being. This is far different from raising a "fat kid".

If the child lives, despite his birth defect, I'm not sure the argument changes, whether you are pro-life or pro-choice. A child is born with an obvious birth defect. His quality of life is irrepairably damaged. By now, both pro-life and pro-choice camps agree that he is a human being with rights. Doesn't it make sense to go after those responsible for damaging his present quality of life?

Originally posted by KellyJay
I know you don't care about a zygote, I didn't make that error.
Kelly

KJ:
Your attempting to claim it is sciences job to assign worth


Apparently then you can't read or write.