The Certainty of Babies in the Womb

Philosophy Forums Science, Technology, and Math
21

Whether or not abortion is moral (and I;m undecided on this), it sure as hell is true that anti-abortion laws are infinitely more immoral.

22

Hi navigator. Thank you for the follow and happy thanksgiving. You said, ” I’m not going to play the game of trying to pin it down to a particular day.”

I didn’t ask you to. I said 50 days was hypothetical. If you don’t like that number, fine, pick your own; any day, time, or moment in the pregnancy that you want. It’s hypothetical. Once you have selected a time, comfortable to you, purely hypothetical, then tell us exactly what event happened in the immediate time PRIOR that caused the baby to then suddenly become a human life.

You said, ”What I will say is that the concept of “human being” encompasses certain mental attributes, including consciousness, sentience, intelligence, and the ability to think and feel.

At what time in the pregnancy do you say this occurs? And, what do you say happened immediately prior to that time that caused it to occur – to suddenly awaken the child and cause it to become a “human being.”

You said, ” Strictly speaking, we should not consider a fetus a “human being” until it exhibits these qualities, except in potential.”

When? At what point in the pregnancy do you think this occurs?

You said, Of course. But that has nothing to do with thinking or feeling.”

The baby is sucking its thumb in the womb for the purpose of “feeding” as well as “comforting” herself (which is what thumb sucking does in a child – comforts – which is directly tied to emotions). The baby feels the emotion of “hunger” (in the case of feeding) and the emotions that cause her to comfort herself.

You said, ” SOME of the neural circuits are as advanced as a newborn:…

I’m glad you see it.

You said, ” In any case, surely you can see that none of these neural circuits are developed at all at conception.”

They could not develop if they were not already present. They do not pop out of thin air.

You said, ” Why do you seem to have such a hard time understanding this?”

I understand it. I believe it is wrong.

You said, ” Once again, nerves and a brain DO NOT indicate thinking or feeling.”

I don’t agree. In the sixth to seventh weeks, the baby can bend the upper body as well as make motion with her arms. Such movements require thinking on some level as well as feeling. At 21 days the baby’s heart is already pumping, and it is pumping through a closed circulatory system. Even the baby’s blood type is different from the mother’s. The brain waves appearing early are already reliably present at about six week, and the reliability of those brain waves is an indication that those brain waves were already well underway prior. Nerves most definitely indicate the presence of “feeling” as does a brain, as do brain waves. You seem to think that “feeling,” taken in isolation, is the measure of life. But this is not the case. For example, a person under anesthesia is living yet they don’t “feel” or “think” while they are under it. Such a person doesn’t necessarily express emotions either.

You said, ” Of course, I’m pretty sure that towards the end of the third trimester, which is when most of the kicking takes place, the fetus is conscious, but we’re talking about early-trimester abortion here, so that’s not relevant. “

So, you are saying that at some point in time, immediately prior to the baby’s moving, that the baby obtains its conscious mind. By what process does the mind enter the baby at this specific point in time and why? Prior to the earliest first-trimester abortions, the baby already has every body part she will ever have. At 18 days the heart is already forming and the eyes have started to develop. By thirty days, before the mother even knows she’s pregnant, the baby has already grown in size by ten thousand times. In the earliest abortions, the baby is already clearly human in appearance. passion

23

Hi gemty. Thank you for the follow up and happy thanksgiving. You said, ” According to that logic then, each cell in your body is a human being. Therefore, if you kill a cell from your body, you have killed a human being.”

Not at all. It simply means that those cells are human cells only capable of existing in the human being as part of the human being. The baby at conception grows into a human being it does not grow into being a blood cell, other cell, etc. passion

24

passion, a happy thanksgiving to you my friend. (Although being Canadian the Thanksgiving I am accustomed to celebrating was something like 5 weeks ago :smiley: ). Either way, I hope you have a wonderful Thanksgiving.

The reason that I challenged your assertions in this thread is that I believe there are much more potent arguments against abortion than the one that the zygote/fetus in utero is literally human.

I think the far more effective argument to make is that the zygote/fetus posses all of the things that it needs to become a human. I believe this is a more effective argument because it is exactly the potential that you speak of that is the issue. Killing one cell now, is not an issue, it is the ending of the potential human life that is the problem.

The reason that I felt I should share this with you is that I am (for lack of a better term) pro-choice, and one of the only satisfying arguments against abortion I have run across is the one about potential.

Of course, if you disagree, you are free to pursue any argument that you wish, but as someone who might be on “the other side” of the discussion, the potential argument is, I think, much more powerful to many who do not agree with you.

cheers,
gemty

25

Value? I am considered almost poor, I would hardly think that someone with wealth deserves to live more than I do. I don’t speak of that quality, I don’t speak as a classist, I meant quality of living, of life, of love, of growth and positive. You don’t need material wealth for that. I am sorry you think that way.

Passion, If there are one hundred aborted fetuses, they obviously were unwanted, unloved, feared, hated, thought of as disgusting or disturbing, etc… For whatever negative emotional reason they were aborted, they were lucky. You see they did not have time to accumulate data information and become very self aware.

Passion, Fact is thousands of children die, end up missing, end up in morgues unidentified, end up broken in hospitals never to recover mentally or physically, end up being put into a system that is supposed to protect them but, the system is understaffed and underfunded so thousands of those kids end up like the above. This is yearly, Every year, every single year thousands of kids and babies end up living and dying in real life horror stories that make Freddie Kruger look like Mr. Rogers.

You are worried about a fetus dying, experiencing one minute or two minutes of pain. no doubt the body feels the pain., no doubt of that in my mind at all. I worry about the days, the weeks, the years of suffering and torture of babies and children. I work and donate time and money to help these kids. My position is simple Passion. Until the system is fixed I must be proabortion in order to save chldren’s minds and bodies from horrors that I hope and pray you never see.

An abortion protects a fetus from the depravities of those that would see it as chattel.

I would rather see people give up wanting to adopt babies that are not born yet in favor of rescuing and loving older kids that are stuck in a system that can not protect them as it should. I would rather Birth control that is guaranteed 100% effective for everyone be given freely to all than to have abortions. I would rather free tubal ligation and vasectomies along with cash rewards for getting it done, be given rather than abortions. This is not going to happen yet or maybe never. So I must side with the side that protects one child from the hands of possible monsters.

One child Passion in a body bag outweighs 100 fetuses in a body bag. Yes, I would rather see 100 aborted fetuses in a body bag then one sweet child. Abortion won’t stop it all, but it will protect potential victims from having to die in the hands of someone they thought would protect them. If one monster is denied its victims, the circles begin to break.

Abolishing abortions is creating stronger circles of depraved monsters.

26

Hi gemty. Thank you for your follow up and thanksgiving wishes. I appreciate them much.

You said, ”Although being Canadian…”

Canada is a wonderful place Gemty and Montreal is one of my favorite cities. It has some of the best restaurants in the world even though few seem to be aware of it. :slight_smile:

You said, ” I think the far more effective argument to make is that the zygote/fetus posses all of the things that it needs to become a human.

I hear you. Yet, my experience has been that many pro-abortion folks are often unaware of the more empirical facts concerning the baby’s development in the womb. Regardless, your suggestion is true.

You said, ” Of course, if you disagree, you are free to pursue any argument that you wish, but as someone who might be on “the other side” of the discussion, the potential argument is, I think, much more powerful to many who do not agree with you. “

Thank you gemty. Every angle of the subject should be explored. Unlike many other issues (philosophical and otherwise) where wrongs can be righted, the significance connected to abortion is that once that wrong is done it cannot be “undone.” Thank you again for comments gemty. passion

27

Hi kriswest. Thank you for the comments. I hope you enjoyed your Thanksgiving holiday. You said, ” Value? I am considered almost poor, I would hardly think that someone with wealth deserves to live more than I do.”

I agree. In your earlier post you referred to “quality of life” which I supposed you meant various comforts. What did you mean by “quality of life?”

You said, ” If there are one hundred aborted fetuses, they obviously were unwanted, unloved, feared, hated, thought of as disgusting or disturbing, etc…”

Sad but true in some cases. But not all; for many a mother has aborted her baby out of ignorance, not knowing all the facts surrounding her baby and its development, and being outright lied to by the so-called medical profession who profits ($) tremendously from her abortion. Many women who have had abortions suffer emotionally and physically afterwards because they know instinctively that something very terrible has happened to their baby once the abortion has happened. Many mothers are unaware that their baby had a beating heart, brain waves, and other recordable functions by the time they even knew they were pregnant. The abortion medical community rarely, if ever, tell these poor girls the whole story. Maybe that is why they won’t show the aborted product to the mother once the deed has been done.

You said, ” You see they did not have time to accumulate data information and become very self aware.”

We do know that the aborted baby is self-aware because, for example, it suffers tremendously while the procedure is underway. Sonogram/Ultrasound technology has demonstrated that the baby suffers very real organic pain when undergoing an abortion.

You said, ” Fact is thousands of children die, end up missing,…end up being put into a system that is supposed to protect them but, the system is understaffed and underfunded so thousands of those kids end up like the above.”

Killing the child in an abortion is not the solution to these very real problems you describe. Moreover, how could anyone know which child will end up as you describe and which ones not? – who then can decide, using your criteria, which child should be aborted and which ones not?

You said, ” Every year, every single year thousands of kids and babies end up living and dying in real life horror stories that make Freddie Kruger look like Mr. Rogers.”

Yes, life has many horrible events - and abortion is one of them. Killing at the hand of an abortionist or Freddy Kruger is still killing. Why not support life instead? No one knows the destiny of any individual including our own destiny. Who is to say which child will end up being a victim to a Freddy Kruger? No one knows. However, since abortion is a choice made by the mother, she has the power to say no! and thus prevent a Freddy Kruger moment.

You said, ” You are worried about a fetus dying, experiencing one minute or two minutes of pain. no doubt the body feels the pain., “

Kriswest, it is not just the pain but also the taking of the life. I appreciate your willingness to acknowledge that the baby feels pain. There are pro-abortionists who won’t acknowledge this fact.

You said, ” I work and donate time and money to help these kids. “

You are to be commended Kriswest. I respect and admire both your effort and your sensitivity to the problem. We are our brother’s keeper.

You said, ” Until the system is fixed I must be proabortion in order to save chldren’s minds and bodies from horrors that I hope and pray you never see.”

I’m aware of the great sorrows in the world Kriswest. I admire your courage to confront them head on. I’m suggesting that abortion is not the solution to such miseries or system inefficienies; and I would say that greater and more meaningful enforcement against those who prey upon the weak is a better solution. And who is weaker, more preyed upon and less protected than the child in the womb? Like the terrible circumstances that you described, abortion is a fantastic horror too.

You said, ” would rather see people give up wanting to adopt babies that are not born yet in favor of rescuing and loving older kids that are stuck in a system that can not protect them as it should. “

Why not both? There is a tremendous demand by infertile couples (for example) to adopt infant children. Demand is so strong, and supply so weak, that such parents often jump through hoops at great cost, and administrative hassle to adopt an infant child from countries such as Korea, Africa, and other places. Wouldn’t it be a “win-win” situation if a mother undergoing an unwanted pregnancy made her infant child available to a carefully screened family who desperately wants the child? Isn’t this a far better option than abortion?

You said, ” So I must side with the side that protects one child from the hands of possible monsters.”

Which child? Of all the pregnancies underway right now, how could anyone know which one of those children will fall into the hands of a monster and which ones would not? No one can know such a thing, and therefore aborting on such a premise (as wrong as the premise is to begin with) is not even possible. Thank you again for your thoughts kriswest. passion

28
29

That’s asking me to play the game of picking an exact date. If I do, then this discussion can get sidetracked into arguing over that date versus another. Since that is irrelevant to the discussion, and moreover since I’m not qualified to do it, I’m not going to give you a hypothetical date.

That is an answer to the next few questions, so I’m snipping them.

No. At that stage it’s purely a reflex with no emotional significance at all.

A fertilized ovum is a single undifferentiated cell. Not a nerve cell, not a bone cell, not a muscle cell, not a blood cell, not any of the other specific cells that form in the process of gestation. All of these emerge later on, not from “thin air,” but from division of cells. It’s a fascinating process which you really ought to study more, so as to avoid making statements like the above which demonstrate beyond doubt that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

No, they don’t. They only require that the motor nerves be functional.

Like the above, the next few paragraphs again demonstrate sheer ignorance of how the body and brain function. I’m not going to respond to them. Go and study the subject more. You have no idea what you’re talkinga bout.

I said nothing about movement. I am reasonably certain that the fetus becomes conscious some time before birth.

I did not mention any specific times. As to why, well, a newborn baby has a fully developed cerebral cortex, and as that is the part of the brain we think and feel with, it’s likely that a newborn baby is conscious. Since this organ does not instantly and magically appear during the birth process, it must develop some time during gestation. I don’t know exactly when, except that it occurs late.

Nonsense. The earliest first-trimester abortions are performed the day after pregnancy, using a morning-after pill. At that point, the embryo has NONE of the body parts it will ever have.

30

Hi navigator. You said, ” That’s asking me to play the game of picking an exact date. If I do, then this discussion can get sidetracked into arguing over that date versus another.”

There is no game. It is quite simple. You have stated that life begins at some point during a pregnancy. I have asked you to tell us when that time occurs during the course of the pregnancy - that point when you believe the baby becomes a human being. Then, I have asked you to tell us exactly what occurs at the moment just prior to that point when you say the child in the womb becomes a human being: what event during the pregnancy causes non-life to become life and when does that occur?

You said, ” A fertilized ovum is a single undifferentiated cell. Not a nerve cell, not a bone cell, not a muscle cell, not a blood cell, not any of the other specific cells that form in the process of gestation.”

You are correct to say that the moment of conception is not the creation of a nerve cell, bone cell, blood cell, etc - rather it is the creation of a complete human being. Age, size, and stage of development are simply differences in degree, not in kind.

You said, ” I said nothing about movement. I am reasonably certain that the fetus becomes conscious some time before birth.”

So, you are saying that the child is not a human being until it becomes conscious. Is that correct?

You said, ” …a newborn baby has a fully developed cerebral cortex, and as that is the part of the brain we think and feel with, it’s likely that a newborn baby is conscious.”

So, you are saying that a fully developed cerebral cortex is the measure of when life begins. Is that correct? passion

31

Hi kriswest. Thank you for your follow up comments. I appreciate it. You said, ” The reason these child mothers are ignorant of fetuses and birth control is because certain things are not allowed to be taught in school.“

I doubt very much that any sizable number of pregnant women would say that they were unaware of birth control. In addition, schools, peers, and many other sources teach plenty about birth control.

You said, ” Generally its the same groups that are against abortions that keep this information out of schools. Kinda stupid Huh?”

Such information is not kept out of schools, among peers, in magazines, on television, on the internet, radio, etc. Birth control exists, is readily available, and pregnant mothers in all but the most exceptional cases are not ignorant of it.

You said, ” The parents”

If a parent were to maintain that they would abuse their child if they couldn’t abort it, then there should be serious repercussions for that parent.

You said, ”I presume you mean say no to the abortion and hand the birthed infant over to the system.”

There is a waiting list a mile long comprised of good people, well screened adoptive parents, who would happily provide a safe and loving family environment for the child. Why not encourage such a win/win situation?

You said, ” Well of course but that requires effort on her part and pain and shunning from a society that thinks pregnant unwed females are whores, sluts and trash.”

On the contrary, the adoptive family would think of the mother as a saint, as an angel sent from heaven to answer their prayers. Adoption of the baby by a family well screened to assure safety turns the problem into a solution. Only the most venal elements of society would shun a pregnant mother or define her in the manner you mentioned.

You said, ” Generally its the same groups that are prolife, that think these things, and cause the mother anguish. “

I have never met a prolife person who thinks such things. There may be some like that out there, but they would be a distinct minority. Such ones who harbor such thoughts about pregnant women are not prolife as much as they are pro-hate. Anyone can cling to a “cause” and use it to defile another person. But a true pro-life person wants only the best for the child and the mother. The cause of the mother’s anguish is derived from her predicament; and that anguish is greatly multiplied by aborting her baby. And that is precisely what a real pro-life person is trying to help her avoid. Abortion cannot be undone once it is done, and a very large number of those who have had abortions are exceedingly remorseful afterwards. It is very sad because they were made victims by a system who did not tell them the truth and who are primarily interested in the profit motive from the highly lucrative abortion industry.

You said, ” Its not a baby it is a fetus, the two are not the same”

It is a human being at the moment of conception when it instantaneously becomes vested with 46 human chromosomes. Like the words newborn, infant, toddler, or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans but to human beings at particular stages of development.

You said, ” to the morgue and see these tiny bodies, donate time to clean them for a decent burial, go donate your time to help kids in hospitals, orphanages, halfway homes, centers that house abused kids, Go get your hands dirty for a few months or how ever long you can stand it. “

I know that there is massive horror in the world kriswest. But aborting babies only adds to the horror and in no way prevents it. The hideous by-product of abortions (like the “tiny bodies” that you mentioned) is the result of extreme violence to a human being resulting in a very bloody and very painful death to the child in the womb. The abortion procedure yields visual and psychic horror so terrifying that mothers are not allowed to see the results, abortion clinicians have become traumatized from witnessing it, and the result of abortion is positively hideous and monstrous in the extreme.

You said, ” How does this help the abused kids that desperately need loving homes? You just kicked them to the side like a fetus is more valuable than them.”

In my prior post I said, “why not both?” – which included both newborns and older children. I emphasized newborns because there is a “waiting list” for them. Finding well screened and safe homes for older children is no doubt more difficult, though certainly not impossible. The system is terrible exactly as you say, and this is largely due to truly inefficient management within the system. This could be remedied with professional management rather than careerist bureaucrats at the helm. But this, of course, is an entirely different subject. Thank you again for the comments kriswest. passion

32

The sense of your question is answered below. I cannot give you an exact time frame.

You need to define what you mean by “complete human being” before that statement can have any meaning.

What the phrase normally means is someone with a human personality and the ability to think and feel. But since, using that normal understanding, your statement is completely absurd, you must mean something else.

Exactly right.

Not of when life begins, but of when mere “human life” becomes a “human being.” Life actually begins before conception, since an unfertilized ovum and a sperm cell are alive.

33

Passion you have a good heart no doubt, but, you fail to see beyond the flag you have taken up. One must always stand by their beliefs, yes. But you must be able to see the broader picture.

I have said abortion causes the fetus pain, I have said that I would prefer better solutions. I will not put a fetus above a born child, or even equal to a born child. Worldwide babies are born everyday, Everyday babies die. you wish to keep adding more. There are more babies alive right now then there are good parents waiting to adopt, worldwide. Even should they drop all expenses and just give babies away there would not be enough safe loving homes. You just want to add more babies to a worldwide epedimic of overpopulation. This world is over populated because there are not enough feasable viable accessable resources to feed, clothe, house, educate, medicate all the humans alive. There actually is but, Gov’ts and corporations only care about power and money, not the people. Fix the system first, quite throwing bricks on analready overburdened mule.

you wish to add more human bodies to an overworked worldwide society. The world economies and population systems are at breaking points. Too many mouths and not enough resources. What happens when this occurs? Wars, crime, breakdowns in society, pandemic diseases. Death.

More babies are born than aborted. The abortion rate is far below the birth rate. Priority needs to be to protect what is, not what could be. A fetus is not equal to a child. Not in my book and it can never be equal as long as one child is horribly abused. More life in human societies is just cheapening human life itself. Protect what is, Give the living priority, fix what is broken, then worry about what could be.

34

Hi navigator. Thank you for the follow up. You said, ” The sense of your question is answered below. I cannot give you an exact time frame.”

I didn’t ask for an exact time frame. I asked what you believe is the time frame. You must have some idea don’t you? Is it 9 months? If no, what about 8 months? If not 8 months is it 7 months? 6? 5? If you don’t know when the time is, then how could you suggest any abortion option at all? How would you otherwise know if the abortion that you support might be performed on a baby who is already vested with the conscious mind that you say marks the beginning of a human being?

Since you acknowledge that a human being is created in the womb at a point during the pregnancy when the child receives a conscious mind (your definition) then aren’t you obligated to know when that time is lest run the risk of killing a human being, in the event that an abortion is performed upon a baby already vested with a conscious? Without defining when the baby becomes a human being, then isn’t this pro-abortion stance a crap shoot with life hanging in the balance?

Also, you didn’t answer the second part of my question which was ”…tell us exactly what occurs at the moment just prior to that point when you say the child in the womb becomes a human being: what event during the pregnancy causes non-life to become life…?”

In my last post I asked you; So, you are saying that the child is not a human being until it becomes conscious. Is that correct? and you replied by saying; ” Exactly right.”

What event occurs in the womb that causes the baby to suddenly go from non-conscious mind to conscious mind? Or, from non-human being to human being (to use your definition of what it means to be a human being). passion

35

Hi kriswest. Thank you again for your follow up comments. You said, Aware of birthcontrol does not mean understanding birthcontrol and reprecussions of sex. Most do not fully understand.

Do you really think that people who are aware of birthcontrol are not aware that they might become pregnant if they don’t use it? I’d be amazed if it were so.

You said, ” All sorts of things can happen mentally and physically to her, the list is long, too long to list here.”

Yet it is abortion that does such things to the mother. The abortion procedure is a nightmare on the mother’s body and her mind. In addition, the statistics on abortion complications and its risks are often understated due to the obvious inadequate means of gathering data.

You said, ” Sure the new born wins, the adopting parents win. You are left with two people hurt as opposed to just the fetus. that is not a win/win situation.”

The newborn wins as you recognize - and that alone should be enough because the baby should get the priority. The adoptive parents win as they receive the joy and happiness of raising a child, the mother wins because she is spared the abortion and has the comfort of knowing that her baby has been placed in a loving and safe home where her baby will have a shot at life that she deserves and to potentially become a wonderful and happy member of the human race. The only other option is to end the baby’s life with an abortion which is obviously not the better option.

You said, ”… Their families and peers are who they look to for support. These people rarely if ever give it, thanks to their religious beliefs and or morals. Venal elements of Society? Wrong choice of word here. Her society is her family and peers.”

A family that pushes for their daughter’s abortion could hardly be said to have “religious beliefs” or morality associated with them or their decision. Most teenage mothers who have kept their child have never regretted that choice.

You said, ” You need to talk to those protesting Prolife folks that stand outside clinics and hurl insults and throw things at these young ladies. Oh and those really nice people that bomb clinics.”

People who hurl insults and throw things at anyone are malicious and vulgar. All violence is abominable and this is also true of the violence that takes place in the mother’s womb with every abortion.

You said, ” I can’t see a prolifer ever saying, Your decision was right, You did the only thing you could do. I can’t see a prolifer supporting a female that just aborted.”

Yes, you are correct on the first sentence but not the second. A prolifer might very well console a woman who has suffered an abortion even advising her that although she made a terrible mistake, forgiveness is always available if and when she feels the need for it; and in many cases that day does come when women who have had an abortion feel that need – and some feel it very desperately.

You said; ” Prolifers are far better at spewing guilt than supporting and helping. You say her agony would be less, Is it not ironic that it is those that support prolife hurl the most agonizing guilt trips via the media?”

True prolifers speak out against abortion because they believe/know that abortion is the taking of a human life. If they use the media they use it no differently than the pro-abortion side uses the media (and I rarely see the prolife perspective portrayed in the media but rather always see the pro-abortion perspective in the media). If pro-abortion people feel “guilty” it may be because they know instinctively the truth about abortion. Guilt comes from within not from without.

You said; ” Prolifers are the ones who force her to agonize and shove the guilt down her throat almost as much as her society does.”

To feel “guilty” about something can only mean that the premise behind the guilt is deemed accurate. Otherwise the feeling would be more like nonchalance or perhaps anger; but not guilt.

You said; ” …Oh and churches are just as bad.”

Sadly, this can be true. Some churches are bad. Thankfully, many are not.

You said; ” A fetus in the mid to late 2cnd trimester and third will start reacting to outside influences,.”

Not so. With existing technology it is known that the heart is already beating by six weeks and a heart cannot beat unless it is influenced by outside influences including a brain and its activity. The formation of the “neural tube” from which the nervous system derives is already known to be in place at only 2-3 weeks old (and there is every reason to believe that it may be even sooner). It has been demonstrated that the spinal cord and the peripheral nerves within it are functional by 7 weeks provoking clear reflex reactions (and there is every reason to believe that it may occur even sooner). These are just some of the things that are already known with existing technology about the baby at conception through the earliest stages of pregnancy – long before the mother even knows that she is pregant. And as technology has gotten better, these dates keep getting pushed back and back; and I have no doubt this trend towards truth will continue as technology continues to get better.

You said; ”…this is when self awareness is beginning and the soul develops or comes to being

By what process does a soul come into being from non-soul? What is a soul?

You said; ” You again prefer quantity over quality. Death is never pleasant. It is not supposed to be. You would prefer the child to be born and suffer years of horror over a few minutes of horror…”

I prefer life over death. Quality of life is a separate issue from the right to live. Nobody knows what destiny may hold for any of us.

You said; ”You seem to not care.”

I hope our dialogue might demonstrate that I do care.

You said; ” Passion you have a good heart no doubt…”

Thank you for your kind comment kriswest. I do appreciate it much.

You said; ” but, you fail to see beyond the flag you have taken up. One must always stand by their beliefs, yes. But you must be able to see the broader picture.

I hear you kriswest. Your comments are valuable to me. Yet, I’m very sensitive to “other side” on this issue. This is because I do see the broader picture – the big picture. The pain of abortion does not end once the deed is done. Not at all! Unlike the child, the pain of abortion lives on. Unlike many other serious matters in life, abortion cannot be undone or remedied once it is performed. Regrets are inevitable. And they are unfixable. Abortion not only destroys a human being, it also destroys the happiness and hope of many who have undergone it. None of us are immune from the disappointments of life. And yet I know that life, regardless of where and what place we find ourselves in it, is still the better option. With life there is always hope – however distant that hope may sometimes seem. Thank you again for your comments kriswest. passion

36

Passion, because you do obviously care and because you are unfailingly polite I am going to help you out a bit. This is not an oral debate or discussion. This is a written disscussion. In an oral debate or disscussion sentences, phrases and arguments can be avoided, taken out of context and twisted without weakening your stance. You can pick and choose what to address,. But, written, the words hang there visibly. And can be picked up and chucked back in your face.

You are weakening your stance on the subject by doing these certain things. I don’t know wether it is lack of time or if you just don’t have a reply, or knowledge to or about certain things. Or perhaps it is just because the posts are so long you feel you can’t address it all. Also you should avoid any jumping to conclusions. Don’t assume you know what the person feels or thinks. If there can be any doubt address it and question, don’t just assume and put a negative spin on it. All of this plus a couple of other little things are weakening your position.

Your posts could be picked apart so easily if Navigator and I were of a mind to, if you were not so nice I have no doubt we would be ripping you apart. So for you and I, I will keep it shorter and address one item per post. Just remember this is not oral, it is written so more care and thought needs to be put into what is written since it does not disappear into thin air as spoken unrecorded words do. OK? I mean no insult just giving a bit of advice to help your stance.

First subject.

My quote: Aware of birthcontrol does not mean understanding birthcontrol and reprecussions of sex. Most do not fully understand.

Your qoute:Do you really think that people who are aware of birthcontrol are not aware that they might become pregnant if they don’t use it? I’d be amazed if it were so.

My full reply to your statement below:

Aware of birthcontrol does not mean understanding birthcontrol and reprecussions of sex. Most do not fully understand. Also Self esteem plays a huge part of teens and young ladies having sex. Getting pregnant is a byproduct of lack of education and self esteem. Most abortions are done by teenage girls and young ladies in their early twenties. Not mature women.

Your statement: I doubt very much that any sizable number of pregnant women would say that they were unaware of birth control. In addition, schools, peers, and many other sources teach plenty about birth control.

Do you see what you did here? You ignored most of what I said. You yanked that one sentence out of context. Just adressing that without addressing the whole quote is a weak stance and is easily picked apart by your opponent, Because, your reply does not make sense to what I originally wrote.

Look at both yours and mine and see if you understand what I am talking about, if you don’t understand I will try to explain better.

Address fully the entire answer I gave not just the one sentence. Remember again this is not oral, it is recorded. We all forget this to a degree. I do it too :laughing: I just feel that this disscussion is important enough to keep on track and all issues in it need to be addressed full and clear OK?.

37

If I were actually faced with that decision, then indeed I would need to know. As I’m not, exactly when I think the line is crossed has no relevance to this discussion. I can put it in the ballpark of somewhere in the third trimester, though. And that means to me that the standard of Roe v. Wade, which allows abortion to be regulated, curtailed, or even banned altogether in the third trimester, works pretty well as law. Not only does that recognize the law’s interest in protecting a human being once it becomes a human being, but it also allows plenty of time for any pregnant woman to abort the pregnancy before getting to that point.

If you want detailed medical descriptions of how the cerebral cortex grows and become active, I am not qualified to answer the question, and you’d be better off asking a medical doctor specializing in prenatal care, or perhaps a researcher into the question.

I don’t know how sudden it is. All I know is that we think and feel with the cerebral cortex of the brain. An organism with a human cerebral cortex is a human being; an organism without one is not. As to what it feels like – sorry, but I can’t remember. :wink:

38

Hi kriswest. Thank you for your follow up thoughts. You said; ”You are weakening your stance on the subject by doing these certain things. I don’t know wether it is lack of time or if you just don’t have a reply, or knowledge to or about certain things.”

I have re-read some of my posts and I’m comfortable with my comments. My apologies if some of them are long. I will try to be more concise on follow ups.

You said; ”Your posts could be picked apart so easily if Navigator and I were of a mind to,”

Please do not hesitate to do so if it will add to the dialogue/debate. It is not a contest. You, navigator and I are just presenting what we believe concerning a very important subject. Philosophy and seeking answers is all about exploring ideas and asking questions. The ideas that you and navigator have suggested are valuable and meaningful to the subject matter as well as to me.

You said; ”if you were not so nice I have no doubt we would be ripping you apart.”

I appreciate your kind comment kriswest. As for ripping any of my ideas apart, I welcome it. That is what philosophy is supposed to do. Isn’t that what we have been doing in this dialogue/debate?

You said; ” Do you see what you did here? You ignored most of what I said. You yanked that one sentence out of context.”

I don’t see any conflict in these responses kriswest. My point was that people who are aware of birth control know/knew the intended function of birth control. Wasn’t that the essence of what we were discussing?

You said; ” I just feel that this disscussion is important enough to keep on track and all issues in it need to be addressed full and clear OK?.”

Certainly. I agree. Thank you again for the follow up kriswest. passion

39

Hi navigator. Thank you for the follow up comments. You said; ”If I were actually faced with that decision, then indeed I would need to know. As I’m not, exactly when I think the line is crossed has no relevance to this discussion.”

But there are those who are faced with the decision every day. Given the enormity of that decision, isn’t it important that they know with a certainty? Shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt go to preserving life if for no other reason than there is uncertainty? If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person or a deer, would this uncertainty lead him to fire or not to fire? If you’re driving your car at night and you think the dark figure on the road may be a child, even though it may just be the shadow of a tree, would you drive into it or do you put on the brakes?

You said; ”I can put it in the ballpark of somewhere in the third trimester, though.”

Okay, you say that the baby in the womb becomes a human being somewhere in the ballpark of the third trimester; which begins at 28 weeks or 7 months. What do you think occurs between the 6th month and 7th month that causes a supposed non-human being at 6 months to become a human being at 7 months? Wouldn’t this be a momentous occurrence, easily definable and with clear evidence? After all, we are talking about a non-human being become a human being. The prolife evidence is plain enough and easily verifiable in any lab; the moment of conception marks the moment when a human being is created as evidenced by 46 human genome chromosomes. It is momentous and verifiable. Where is the hard evidence or any evidence at all that a conscious mind marks the beginning of a human being’s existence?

You said; ”If you want detailed medical descriptions of how the cerebral cortex grows and become active, I am not qualified to answer the question,”

No one is. What is known is that the cerebral cortex develops from the neural plate. The neural plate folds and closes to form the neural tube. It is known that the neural tube exists at 2-3 weeks. If the neural plate forms into the neural tube, which is known to exist at 2-3 weeks, then the neural plate must exist even prior than 2-3 weeks. The nervous system/spinal cord functionality is known to be working by 7 weeks and there is every reason to believe that as future technology improves the dates will get pushed back further and further still (as has been the trend). If these things already exist at 2-3 weeks or earlier, its existence demonstrates that it has a function.

Of course, I’m only addressing this idea about consciousness defining when a human being becomes a human being because this is what you have proposed and I’m challenging the idea. As I mentioned in an earlier post, a fully grown adult under anesthesia is not conscious and yet we recognize that he is a human being despite his lack of consciousness.

You said; ” All I know is that we think and feel with the cerebral cortex of the brain. An organism with a human cerebral cortex is a human being; an organism without one is not. As to what it feels like – sorry, but I can’t remember.”

Would it be fair to say that you don’t’ remember because you didn’t have a conscious mind at the time? If not, then by your own definition you wouldn’t have been a human being at the time your cerebral cortex was already developed. Thank you again for the comments navigator. passion

40

Of course. But at this time, it’s not important that I know. And in fact, I don’t.

If I were a pregnant woman, however, I would want to make the decision on whether to abort as early in gestation as possible, just to make sure.

I’ve already answered that question.

Of course it has a function. It just doesn’t have the function of feeling or thinking.

Ah, this is better. I was wondering when you were going to bring that up, because it does present a better challenge than anything about the process of gestation itself.

A fully grown adult under anaesthesia has established his/her rights as a human being already, and we recognize the anaesthesia as a temporary state. Technically, the anaesthetized person isn’t a “human being” by the definition I was using while under anaesthesia, but he was one before going under and he’ll be one after he wakes up. Since anything done to him will persist when he wakes up, the pre- and post-state rights bridge the gap.

An organism that has never been a human being (like an embryo), or one that will never be one again (like a permanently comatose person), does not retain the rights of a human being.

No, I don’t think that’s right. I suspect rather that we don’t remember in-utero experiences or those of infanthood because our adult memories are so language-dependent. We remember what we put words to, although of course the memories themselves go beyond the words.