02-04-2002 06:21									#211
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Substantial problems for precise definition of this view [that life begins at conception] are posed, however, by new embryological data that purport to indicate that conception is a "process" over time, rather than an event, and by new medical techniques such as menstrual extraction, the "morning- after" pill, implantation of embryos, artificial insemination, and even artificial wombs.

From this site, which has the expedited opinions of the supreme court in the Roe vs. Wade decision. Emphasis is my own.

	02-04-2002 06:27									#212
	Put an end to popups!

Loin, what did you think of the diagram I provided?

What exactly is this embryological data?

	02-04-2002 06:35									#213
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by November Adam Loin, what did you think of the diagram I provided?

It's an oversimplification.

quote: What exactly is this embryological data?

I'm wondering that too. I'm looking around for it, but only half-heartedly; I'm busy looking for a simplification on partial summations for the harmonic series, which takes top priority at the moment.

	02-04-2002 07:13									#214
	Got spare money?

I'm kinda pettering out on this one... wanna pick it up later?

	02-04-2002 07:17									#215
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by November Adam I'm kinda pettering out on this one... wanna pick it up later?

Works for me.

	03-04-2002 08:10									#216
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by loinburger Is it self-mutilitation to have a tumor removed?

A tumor is going to kill the body. A baby is not. IN the cases when a baby IS then I fully support abortion.

quote: It matures into a fetus/newborn, a separate entity, thereby completing the process of procreation. So I suppose "metamorphosis" might be an apt description.

Thus, it is going to become a baby anyway- thus if nature is allowed to proceed it will become a breathing human- why can you not understand that stopping it by killing it equals killing a future human.
If someone is willing to sue people for destroying the environment by radiation killing the next generation, then people whould be able to sue abortion advocates for killing the next generation as well.

quote: Our sperm have a limited life span, after which they die and are replaced. Does this mean that failure to frequently have sex, i.e. failure to make use of our sperm, amounts to murder? , an egg is ejected during the menstruation cycle. Does this mean that failure to get pregnant during every ovulation, i.e. failure to make use of eggs, amounts to murder? These are matters that are under our control (unlike, for example, the frequent failure of the zygote to implant itself on the uterine wall), and so we are culpable for our wasted sperm/eggs.[/

No, because that is natural.
I am arguing against unnatural abortions.

And I am being consistent.
Humans do not cause those problems.

	03-04-2002 08:14									#217
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by loinburger I'm speaking in favor of consistency. I consistently believe that abortion of an embryo is fine and dandy since an embryo is not a human. You, on the other hand, believe that abortion of an embryo is murder, but that it's okay to abort (i.e. murder) an embryo that resulted from an incestuous relationship, since the embryo might develop into a retarded child and that retarded children have less of a right to live than non-retarded children. It is the last of your beliefs given above, the belief that retarded people have less of a right to live than non-retarded people, that I find to be, unequivocally, morally repugnant. It is this belief of yours that I hope that you reconsider and revise. Whether you believe abortion to be right or wrong is of little concern to your everyday life, but whether you consider an entire class of humans to be inherently inferior is of great concern in your everyday life.

Yes, well, I am consistnt- I belive in a Master Race of Humans- devoid of defects due to sceince- I am hoping for a day when all ailments and retardations are cured- until that day, I will support suicide for the retarded if they wish suicide!

And it is horrid and punishing to cause more of them to live and to cause mothers to suffer for caring for them if the mothers do not wish to- thus they should be allowed to abort in that case.

I consider my argument incontrovertible (not the one above, but the 3 step one I cited earlier) and this does not bridge it, but merely legislates on it.

	03-04-2002 09:00									#218
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud A tumor is going to kill the body.

Not all tumors are terminal. However, both the tumor and the embryo take nutrients from the human they are integrated with, and the excision of either would benefit the health of the human being harmed by their presence.

quote: why can you not understand that stopping it by killing it equals killing a future human.

From Douglas's opinion in Roe vs. Wade:

quote: To say that life is present at conception is to give recognition to the potential, rather than the actual. The unfertilized egg has life, and if fertilized, it takes on human proportions. But the law deals in reality, not obscurity -- the known, rather than the unknown. When sperm meets egg, life may eventually form, but quite often it does not. The law does not deal in speculation. The phenomenon of life takes time to develop, and, until it is actually present, it cannot be destroyed. Its interruption prior to formation would hardly be homicide, and as we have seen, society does not regard it as such.

There you have it, "killing a future human" is not equivalent to "killing a human." Castrating somebody does not amount to murder any more than aborting an embryo amounts to murder.

quote: If someone is willing to sue people for destroying the environment by radiation killing the next generation, then people whould be able to sue abortion advocates for killing the next generation as well.

I have heard of lawsuits in which polluters are sued for contaminating this generation, but never have I heard of a lawsuit in which polluters are sued for contaminating an as-yet-unborn generation.

	03-04-2002 09:09									#219
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud ...until that day, I will support suicide for the retarded if they wish suicide!

You're not talking about suicide. If you believe that an embryo is a human, then you're talking about murder.

quote: And it is horrid and punishing to cause more of them to live and to cause mothers to suffer for caring for them if the mothers do not wish to- thus they should be allowed to abort in that case.

This isn't even a matter of placing a higher value on the life of a non-retarded person than on the life of a retarded person, since in the example you're talking about the life of a non-retarded person is not being threatened. What you're advocating is murder out of convenience; the life of a retarded person has so little value in your example that you would advocate the wholesale murder of the retarded if their deaths are convenient for the non-retarded.

	03-04-2002 09:33									#220
	I'm back! Increase Your PM Length

Hey Loin, did you know that fish perform external reproduction?
Meaning that the female lays her eggs in the water, and the male sprays the eggs with sperm, thus the egg and sperm fuse to create a zygote, which is external. Now is this zygote, which is a fish (from previous discussions), be a body part of the mother, or the father, or it's own?

	03-04-2002 09:36									#221
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by November Adam Hey Loin, did you know that fish perform external reproduction?

I suspected it, since I knew that frogs did...

quote: Now is this zygote, which is a fish (from previous discussions), be a body part of the mother, or the father, or it's own?

Well, it couldn't be a body part of the mother or father since it is completely detached from both. Therefore it would have to be its own.

	03-04-2002 09:39									#222
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

okay, so if the zygote is it's own organism in fish, why is it not in humans?

	03-04-2002 09:57									#223
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by November Adam okay, so if the zygote is it's own organism in fish, why is it not in humans?

Humans aren't externally fertilized.

Regardless, I would say that the zygote in fish is not its own organism in the same sense that a hatched egg in fish is its own organism. Until the zygote is independent of its egg, I would still classify it as "not alive as a fish," but only "alive as a fertilized egg." It is an integrated part of the egg, and not a "fish."

Similarly, if a human embryo is grown in vitro, it is not "alive" by virtue of the fact that it is existing independently of another living organism. It is "alive as a fertilized egg" just as it would be if it were maturing inside of a womb, not "alive as a human." It is an integrated part of the apparatus used to keep it alive, and not a "human."

Another example is a brain-dead human being kept "alive" on a machine. Such a human is "alive as an integrated part of a machine," but is no longer "alive as a human," which is why I see nothing immoral about "pulling the plug" on someone who is braindead.

	03-04-2002 21:41									#224
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud A non-issue.

How's that a non-issue? That is the issue. Human zygotes and embryoes most definitely do not exist as humans, and my previous point follows from there.

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud Another, and more obvious non-issue. Spontaneous abortions do happen, and I acknowledged it, however the natural process is for a baby to be born. It even makes sense! You would not be here if you were not born!

Hm? I was saying that is is not certain that a fertilised egg will become a baby DC. Please read what I was responding to before just waving your hands.

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud If the birth rate=0 and people die, then there will soon be no more people.

This is a strawman. I have never indicated the natural birthrate is 0. My contention is it is less than 1 as you have implied. Maybe around 60% or so IIRC.

	03-04-2002 23:07									#225
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by loinburger Regardless, I would say that the zygote in fish is not its own organism in the same sense that a hatched egg in fish is its own organism. Until the zygote is independent of its egg, I would still classify it as "not alive as a fish," but only "alive as a fertilized egg." It is an integrated part of the egg, and not a "fish." Similarly, if a human embryo is grown in vitro, it is not "alive" by virtue of the fact that it is existing independently of another living organism. It is "alive as a fertilized egg" just as it would be if it were maturing inside of a womb, not "alive as a human." It is an integrated part of the apparatus used to keep it alive, and not a "human." Another example is a brain-dead human being kept "alive" on a machine. Such a human is "alive as an integrated part of a machine," but is no longer "alive as a human," which is why I see nothing immoral about "pulling the plug" on someone who is braindead.

So do I understand that you are saying that there is an individual organism. I'm not talking about "alive", rather a distinct organism that is not it's parent?

I'm going to disregard your statement regarding brain-dead adults, at this point as it is not directly relevant to what we are discussing.

	03-04-2002 23:20									#226
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

To all those opposed to choice:

I cannot understand why you bother the poor souls who are trying to abort their 1st trimester fetuses.

If you truly believe that life begins at conception, you must begin by attacking Bristol-Meyers and all the pharmaceuticals who manufacture birth control pills, and rather than targetting abortionists, target any doctor who prescribes birth control pills.

If destroying a zygote is murder, than abortions are a miniscule fraction of the "murder" that is going on.

Because contrary to the name "contraceptive" birth control pills do NOT prevent conception. They prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterine lining.

So, for each year a woman is on BCP, there are probably an average of four "murders". Do the math.

	03-04-2002 23:23									#227
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Viking If destroying a zygote is murder, than abortions are a miniscule fraction of the "murder" that is going on. Because contrary to the name "contraceptive" birth control pills do NOT prevent conception. They prevent fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterine lining. So, for each year a woman is on BCP, there are probably an average of four "murders". Do the math.

Partially incorrect, some birth control "pills", create a mucusy lining that the sperm cannot get through to get to the egg.

Also other forms of birth control include a rubber... no sperm getting out there.

Besides what make you think that someone who thinks the zygote is human doesn't have problems with birth control that prevents the zygote from attaching to the lining?

	03-04-2002 23:33									#228
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Besides what make you think that someone who thinks the zygote is human doesn't have problems with birth control that prevents the zygote from attaching to the lining?

Well, maybe that the REACTION to this is ZERO, whereas the reaction to D&C abortion is, well, nuclear.

Maybe most of them are too stupid to understand...

Or maybe their "belief" that life begins at conception is simply posturing to bolseter their stance opposing D&C abortions; and they really know that a zygote is not a human.

	03-04-2002 23:40									#229
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by The Mad Viking Or maybe their "belief" that life begins at conception is simply posturing to bolseter their stance opposing D&C abortions; and they really know that a zygote is not a human.

You seem to be mixing concepts here. Life obviously begins at conception. I was under the impression that the debate was over whether or not that life qualifies as human.

	04-04-2002 01:43									#230
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by November Adam So do I understand that you are saying that there is an individual organism. I'm not talking about "alive", rather a distinct organism that is not it's parent?

Yes.

quote: I'm going to disregard your statement regarding brain-dead adults, at this point as it is not directly relevant to what we are discussing.

Fair enough, I was just explaining how something with human DNA (or fish DNA) can be a "separate organism" (living outside of its parent) and yet still not be "human" (or a "fish"). The obvious parallel between external fertilization is in vitro fertilization, and I wanted to put a preemptive end to any argument that attempted to exploit this.

	04-04-2002 01:54									#231
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by loinburger Fair enough, I was just explaining how something with human DNA (or fish DNA) can be a "separate organism" (living outside of its parent) and yet still not be "human" (or a "fish"). The obvious parallel between external fertilization is in vitro fertilization, and I wanted to put a preemptive end to any argument that attempted to exploit this.

If the zygote is a seperate organism when outside the body, it shows that it's environment is not necessary, to distinguish it's individual nature.

Virus' are an integral part of their host, are not considered "alive" yet are distinct organisms.

	04-04-2002 06:45									#232
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

sha na na na, na na na, na na... bump, bump.

	04-04-2002 08:16									#233
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger This is a strawman. I have never indicated the natural birthrate is 0. My contention is it is less than 1 as you have implied. Maybe around 60% or so IIRC.

Urban Ranger- natural birthrate is around 5 or so... How else do you explain the expansion of the human race and the populations in Chihna and india and durign the dark ages in Europe! People had 4 or more children!

The averages in birth have been going down because of contraception since the turn of the century. Natural birthrate is extremely high!

	04-04-2002 08:19									#234
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by loinburger This isn't even a matter of placing a higher value on the life of a non-retarded person than on the life of a retarded person, since in the example you're talking about the life of a non-retarded person is not being threatened. What you're advocating is murder out of convenience; the life of a retarded person has so little value in your example that you would advocate the wholesale murder of the retarded if their deaths are convenient for the non-retarded.

Yes?
I thought that was waht I sadi- if the retarded want to commit suicide- or anyone for that matter- they should be allowed to- the world would be better off.
-
And yes, abortion of convienence, it helps society to eliminate people who, through no fault of their own, will leech off it. (Until a cure for retardation is found )

	04-04-2002 08:23									#235
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by loinburger Not all tumors are terminal. However, both the tumor and the embryo take nutrients from the human they are integrated with, and the excision of either would benefit the health of the human being harmed by their presence.

Ah, but the baby leaves naturally and the womans health is frequently restored. The Tumor will not leave naturally.

quote: When sperm meets egg, life may eventually form, but quite often it does not. The law does not deal in speculation

Um, whoever said this missed the point. That is natural. The woman would not be pregnant if sperm did not meet egg.
And all that you 'proved' was that the government said that killing sperm was wrong- it said nothing about killing 'life' such as the embryo- which is clearly alive inside the mothers womb.

Now as to whether it is 'human', probably not in the early stages, but I maintain- since It forms INTO a human without outside influence (It does not need to be impregnated again) it has all that it needs INSIDE the body, then it should be counted as Human...

quote: I have heard of lawsuits in which polluters are sued for contaminating this generation, but never have I heard of a lawsuit in which polluters are sued for contaminating an as-yet-unborn generation.

I don't think that I was incorrect agbout the lawsuits, but since I cannot prove that and your explanation makes more sense- I shall cede you the point on this

	04-04-2002 09:42									#236
	lets play the word game! Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

life cycle
n.
1.The course of developmental changes through which an organism passes from its inception as a fertilized zygote to the mature state in which another zygote may be produced.
2.A progression through a series of differing stages of development.


Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


hu·man Pronunciation Key (hymn)
n.
1.A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
2.A person: the extraordinary humans who explored Antarctica.


Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

zygote

n : the cell resulting from the union of an ovum and a spermatozoon (including the organism that develops from that cell) [syn: fertilized cell]

Source: WordNet ® 1.6, © 1997 Princeton University

em·bry·o Pronunciation Key (mbr-)
n. pl. em·bry·os

1. a) An organism in its early stages of development, especially before it has reached a distinctively recognizable form.
b) An organism at any time before full development, birth, or hatching.

2. a) The fertilized egg of a vertebrate animal following cleavage.
b) In humans, the prefetal product of conception implantation through the eighth week of development.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

	04-04-2002 10:33									#237
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by DarkCloud And yes, abortion of convienence, it helps society to eliminate people who, through no fault of their own, will leech off it.

Or, more to the point, murder of convenience; if you believe that an embryo is human, then you aren't merely advocating assisted suicide for the retarded, but murder of the retarded.

Also, be aware that quite a few retarded people contribute to society. One of my professors here has two retarded children, both of whom have a great deal of independence and ability to contribute to society (i.e. "work," not "leech").

quote: And all that you 'proved' was that the government said that killing sperm was wrong- it said nothing about killing 'life' such as the embryo- which is clearly alive inside the mothers womb.

"When sperm meets egg" does not refer to the sperm and egg, but to their product (the zygote/embryo).

quote: Now as to whether it is 'human', probably not in the early stages

Then it is not murder to abort the embryo. If something isn't a human, then killing it isn't murder.

quote: but I maintain- since It forms INTO a human without outside influence (It does not need to be impregnated again) it has all that it needs INSIDE the body, then it should be counted as Human

But you just said that it isn't a human yet. Therefore, it isn't a human during its embryonic stage, regardless of what it might develop into during a later growth stage.

	04-04-2002 10:40									#238
	Re: lets play the word game! Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by November Adam life cycle...

You've already posted your life cycle diagram.

quote: hu·man...

This definition contributes nothing to your argument.

quote: zygote...

This definition was never under contention, IIRC. I'm no biologist, but I remember enough from AP Biology to get by.

quote: em·bry·o...

I don't believe this definition was under contention, either.

	04-04-2002 19:30									#239
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Dinodoc:

quote: You seem to be mixing concepts here. Life obviously begins at conception. I was under the impression that the debate was over whether or not that life qualifies as human.

No mixing. When I say "life" in this instance, I mean "human life".

The point here is, if you believe that human life begins at conception, then it is illogical to focus on the thousands of D&C abortions, when millions of pharmaceutical abortions are performed every year.

Ergo, anti-abortionists KNOW that a zygote is NOT a human life. They FAKE that position, to avoid the slippery slope of debating when a fetus becomes human.

If anti-abortionists really believed that a zygote was a human life, they would be protesting birth control pills.

	04-04-2002 20:06									#240
	Re: Re: lets play the word game! Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by loinburger You've already posted your life cycle diagram. This definition contributes nothing to your argument. This definition was never under contention, IIRC. I'm no biologist, but I remember enough from AP Biology to get by. I don't believe this definition was under contention, either.

okay, so we have:

1. A seperate organism
2. That is not a part of the mother (no more than a host/parasite relationship)
3. That is begining it's life cycle.
4. That is a homo sapien, (look at it's DNA)

when all are put together, you have a human.