[Abortion Thread] (YET ANOTHER POLL!) Taking measure.

[Oxes Republic]

My point I’m trying to make is that, if the child is alive and having a greater strain on the women’s life and came from her body and lives in her house, does that make that child property? And what difference does it make from a child in the womb sucking away a woman’s potential. Does this mean the fetus is the woman’s property even though it occupies its own genetic code by still relies on the mother?

No, it means no one has the right to use your organs without your consent.
No one can have sex with you without your consent.
No one can sue you to force you to transfuse them or give them an organ, even if they will die without them.

Born kids can be put in the extremely problematic, underfunded, overcrowded foster care system where approximate half a million kids are stuck, with roughly 50 thousand a year aging out and only a quarter getting adopted. Not to mention the tragedies where foster kids or unwanted children are sometimes neglected and abused to death by their carers.

Or you can prevent suffering and raising taxes to support welfare by not demanding every pregnancy be carried to term.

I agree we need to increase foster care because not everyone has the means to support a child. And then again I think there is currently a senator who was homeless throughout most of her youth and now is a major US political figure

[Katganistan]

I am pro-choice but also want to see the number of abortions decrease through smart family planning and fixing the socioeconomic system that forces many couples from holding off on families.

Yes, this would be the best plan. Unfortunately, there is a lot of screaming about welfare leeches and still societal stigma about single parents, and bull-headed abstinence only! sex-ed proponents to overcome first.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Murder is defined as the killing of another individual/person by another. Seeing as how a fetus is not an individual nor a person it doesnt apply. The only ones I can see trying to make this based entirely on beliefs or politics are those that desperately try to find ways to legislate their personal morals and beliefs onto others by grasping at straws.

Well the basis of this argument is if the fetus is a person that the women had the choice to make or not and she did. Stating it as already decided is a horrible argument I.e. how a few countries had slavery till the 1980s and the US had it for almost a century

You....do realize the woman does not choose when a fetus is formed.....right? Like, that is not a conscious action taken by women? Oh dear.

[Northern Davincia]

My point I’m trying to make is that, if the child is alive and having a greater strain on the women’s life and came from her body and lives in her house, does that make that child property? And what difference does it make from a child in the womb sucking away a woman’s potential. Does this mean the fetus is the woman’s property even though it occupies its own genetic code by still relies on the mother?

No, it means no one has the right to use your organs without your consent.
No one can have sex with you without your consent.
No one can sue you to force you to transfuse them or give them an organ, even if they will die without them.

Born kids can be put in the extremely problematic, underfunded, overcrowded foster care system where approximate half a million kids are stuck, with roughly 50 thousand a year aging out and only a quarter getting adopted. Not to mention the tragedies where foster kids or unwanted children are sometimes neglected and abused to death by their carers.

Or you can prevent suffering and raising taxes to support welfare by not demanding every pregnancy be carried to term.

How often do pro-choice folk support foster care reform?
Those tragedies you speak of are inherent to life. The existence of cars means automobile fatalities, it doesn't mean we ban cars. I am willing to wager that even kids in the foster care system prefer to be alive than dead.

Naturally I'm of the opinion that life begins at conception, and the very fact that stillbirths happen indicates that life does not begin after the child has exited the womb.

Life =/= person.

It should be apparent that pro-lifers take issue with the current legal definitions and wish to have them changed.

But until that time, we will use the definitions as given.

I don't care much for the legal definition of personhood, which is why I speak of life instead. It removes the semantics.

[Katganistan]

Again did you ignore my argument that life begins at conception or...

No, you ignored the legal definition of person. Repeatedly.

And you assert it begins at conception. You haven't proved it.

[Oxes Republic]

Well I am pretty sure that more people think life begins at conception than people think the earth is flat and Obama is a terrorist

Popularity of an idea is not an indicator of the validity of said idea.

I was just proving it’s not some sort of backwoods idea only 5 people have. That goes to the life at birth argument to that Congress decided. Popularity of an ideal does not confirm its validity, and birth=life was popular enough to become law but still can be an invalid idea which many believe

[Katganistan]

You asked what defines a person. I offered you an answer. Take it or leave it.

The point of this is to argue abortion and its morality and recognizing legal flaws is a main party of many arguments, so I believe that that is a legal flaw and it should be up to debate on when life begins if we are arguing the topic as purely as possible and not by political borders set by a superior state that has definite bias

Religion does not define the laws of the United States.
Abortion has been legal FAR longer than it was proscribed, throughout world history.

So if we're supposed to think that because for maybe a hundred or so years people said oh it's icky that trumps pretty much human society, sorry. That dog won't hunt.

[Genivaria]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

Even after we grant that a fetus is a person then you have simply made the situation equivalent to a child requiring an organ or blood transfusion and you can't force anyone to give it.

[Genivaria]

Popularity of an idea is not an indicator of the validity of said idea.

I was just proving it’s not some sort of backwoods idea only 5 people have. That goes to the life at birth argument to that Congress decided. Popularity of an ideal does not confirm its validity, and birth=life was popular enough to become law but still can be an invalid idea which many believe

Then congratulations, you've made an irrelevant point.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Popularity of an idea is not an indicator of the validity of said idea.

I was just proving it’s not some sort of backwoods idea only 5 people have. That goes to the life at birth argument to that Congress decided. Popularity of an ideal does not confirm its validity, and birth=life was popular enough to become law but still can be an invalid idea which many believe

Yeah great. That still doesnt mean anything and doesnt somehow give it any credibility simply because more people think that than think Obama was a terrorist. I'm really struggling to continue to follow your erratic thought process.

[Ulrich Schmid]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

Even after we grant that a fetus is a person then you have simply made the situation equivalent to a child requiring an organ or blood transfusion and you can't force anyone to give it.

No you can't, and shouldn't. But I think we can agree that not giving an organ or blood transfusion to a child who needs it is immoral.

On a side note, do donate your blood folks. Even a bit can save lives, and the process is completely safe.

[Godular]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

No you can't, and shouldn't. But I think we can agree that not giving an organ or blood transfusion to a child who needs it is immoral.

On a side note, do donate your blood folks. Even a bit can save lives, and the process is completely safe.

I'm not allowed to give blood.

[Genivaria]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

No you can't, and shouldn't. But I think we can agree that not giving an organ or blood transfusion to a child who needs it is immoral.

On a side note, do donate your blood folks. Even a bit can save lives, and the process is completely safe.

And stealing blood or organs from someone who needs it is also immoral, horribly so.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

Even after we grant that a fetus is a person then you have simply made the situation equivalent to a child requiring an organ or blood transfusion and you can't force anyone to give it.

I still maintain a pro-lifers job isnt done until they actually give a shit about ensuring the wellbeing of the fetus after its born.

[Oxes Republic]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

[The New California Republic]

Life =/= person.


But until that time, we will use the definitions as given.

I don't care much for the legal definition of personhood, which is why I speak of life instead. It removes the semantics.

It leads us to some fucking bizarre places if you rely on a vague concept of "life" and completely discard the concept of "person". An apple is life. A tree is life. An ant is life. Are they the same as an adult human being?

[Bezkoshtovnya]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

So is a squirrel. Living thing does not equate to a person. Seriously?

[Godular]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

Cool irrelevant story. I'm fairly certain most of us here are quite aware of what makes a living thing a living thing.

[Genivaria]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

What is the relevance to it being a person?

[The New California Republic]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

This proves nothing. People accept that it is alive.

[Oxes Republic]

The point of this is to argue abortion and its morality and recognizing legal flaws is a main party of many arguments, so I believe that that is a legal flaw and it should be up to debate on when life begins if we are arguing the topic as purely as possible and not by political borders set by a superior state that has definite bias

Religion does not define the laws of the United States.
Abortion has been legal FAR longer than it was proscribed, throughout world history.

So if we're supposed to think that because for maybe a hundred or so years people said oh it's icky that trumps pretty much human society, sorry. That dog won't hunt.

Pretty sure hundreds of years ago people killed eachother, exploited entire continents, and began the idea of racial superiority. I am also not arguing on religious grounds for I have not brought up the world “soul” or “God” once

[Oxes Republic]

An organism is defined as “(1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being.” (Merriam-Webster)

The fetus has many interdependent and subordinate elements (I.e. brain by 4 weeks, heartbeat by 16 weeks, cells reproducing massively, different genetic structure than mother)

“whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole” yes if the child cells stop reproducing, the fetus is considered “dead”

The fetus has a stomach, it has cells, it has various organs independent from the mother just relying on her for nutrients. It is a living being

What is the relevance to it being a person?

This definition stresses the interaction of parts in the context of a coordinated whole as the distinguishing feature of an organism. Organisms are “living beings.” Therefore, another name for a human organism is a “human being”; an entity that is a complete human, rather than a part of a human.

[Northern Davincia]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

Even after we grant that a fetus is a person then you have simply made the situation equivalent to a child requiring an organ or blood transfusion and you can't force anyone to give it.

You also can't force anyone to give money to the poor.
At least until 1913.

If we do accept that an unborn child is a person, it cannot be deprived of life without due process.

[Godular]

Because some posters want to ignore this point I'll state it again.
In order to claim that abortion is murder than you have to demonstrate why we should view a fetus as a PERSON.
Even then the work of a pro-lifer isn't done.

You also can't force anyone to give money to the poor.
At least until 1913.

If we do accept that an unborn child is a person, it cannot be deprived of life without due process.

Self-defense says otherwise.

[Genivaria]

What is the relevance to it being a person?

This definition stresses the interaction of parts in the context of a coordinated whole as the distinguishing feature of an organism. Organisms are “living beings.” Therefore, another name for a human organism is a “human being”; an entity that is a complete human, rather than a part of a human.

*blinks*
That's a really round-about way of not answering the question.
What does have to do with a fetus being a person?