Abortion

[No Swansong]

and this argument cuts both ways.

is a sperm and an egg scientifically different than a sperm inside of an egg after conception?

Yes they actually become something different Scientifically. Do you need proof of this?

 

[Nathan45]

Yes they actually become something different Scientifically. Do you need proof of this?

you want to give me proof that a zygote is different from a sperm inside of an egg? oh and "Scientifically".

Does it undergo a chemical reaction? I bet it does. Do you base your ethics on chemical reactions?

 

[Nathan45]

Let me draw this out in ascii:


SPERM EGG
-----> (O)

Combined value: Worthless

ZYGOTE:

(>O)

VALUE: Priceless! Every bit as valuable as me! We know this through SSCCIIEENNCCEE!

talk about the whole being worth more than the sum of it's parts... lol.

 

[TheBear]

Yes. He gives life and can take it away.

So, he's operating on a different standard than he's commanding us to. It's more like - 'Do as I say, not what I do'. Got it.

 

[Nathan45]

So, he's operating on a different standard than he's commanding us to. It's more like - 'Do as I say, not what I do'. Got it.

in all seriousness it seems silly to hold God to any kind of ethical standard... morals/ethics are the product of human social relations, that has nothing to do with God. Blaming God for anything going bad in the world makes about as much sense to me as blaming Steven Spielberg because someone got eaten by a dinosaur in Jurassic Park.

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

That is such a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make any sense. What are your thoughts?

Whoa, if you want to talk contradictions, what about in the ten commandments where it says 'Thou shalt not kill'. And yet later on it says adulterers and homosexuals should be put to death? That is such a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make any sense. What are your thoughts?

 

[Nathan45]

Whoa, if you want to talk contradictions, what about in the ten commandments where it says 'Thou shalt not kill'. And yet later on it says adulterers and homosexuals should be put to death? That is such a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make any sense. What are your thoughts?

should be translated "Thou shalt not murder", murder meaning to kill illegally. If the killing is done as punishment for a crime (granted, even with the stupidity of making homosexuality or adultery a death-penalty offence), it's not technically murder.

If you're looking for a contradiction, read the genealogy in Matthew 1, then compare it to the one in Luke 3.

 

[HumbleServant94]

Whoa, if you want to talk contradictions, what about in the ten commandments where it says 'Thou shalt not kill'. And yet later on it says adulterers and homosexuals should be put to death? That is such a blatant contradiction. It doesn't make any sense. What are your thoughts?

The only exception to that law is being put to death for breaking the law. That's it.

 

[No Swansong]

you want to give me proof that a zygote is different from a sperm inside of an egg? oh and "Scientifically".

Does it undergo a chemical reaction? I bet it does. Do you base your ethics on chemical reactions?

You answered the first question in your last comment. There is indeed a difference chemically. And no I do not base my ethics on chemical reactions. All I was pointing out was that there is Scientifically a difference between a sperm and an egg and a zygote.

 

[Nathan45]

The only exception to that law is being put to death for breaking the law. That's it.

or war. you forgot about war.

Numbers 31:15-18

15Moses said to them, ‘Have you allowed all the women to live?

16These women here, on Balaam’s advice, made the Israelites act treacherously against the Lord in the affair of Peor, so that the plague came among the congregation of the Lord.

17Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known a man by sleeping with him.

18But all the young girls who have not known a man by sleeping with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Don't forget about those righteous, godly wars, apparently that's not murder either

 

[HumbleServant94]

or war. you forgot about war.

Numbers 31:15-18


Don't forget about those righteous, godly wars, apparently that's not murder either

True the only other exception is war. Thanks for reminding me!

 

[PhilosophicalBluster]

The only exception to that law is being put to death for breaking the law. That's it.

So where exactly does it say that? I never saw an asterisk leading to a statement that said 'not including those who break the law', I just saw 'Thou shalt not kill'.

 

[Nathan45]

You answered the first question in your last comment. There is indeed a difference chemically. And no I do not base my ethics on chemical reactions. All I was pointing out was that there is Scientifically a difference between a sperm and an egg and a zygote.

I don't consider the distinction relevant. I think that a zygote is just one cell, a sperm inside of an egg...

it has nothing in common with a person except for DNA, it is not entitled to the same protections that a person is.

 

[No Swansong]

I don't consider the distinction relevant. I think that a zygote is just one cell, a sperm inside of an egg...

it has nothing in common with a person except for DNA, it is not entitled to the same protections that a person is.

I think it's pretty obvious that is where you were going, but it is not germain to the point I was originally making. I was responding to the idea that a child 5 minutes before birth is essentially the same as a child 5 minutes after birth. Whether a Zygote is a person (which I believe) is not in any way applicable to the discussion that was taking place.

 

[Skaloop]

It's pretty basic, actually. According to the law (generally) an abortion requires two things. One, that it be performed by a licensed doctor, and two, that the pregnant woman consent. Clearly, if the fetus dies by the act(s) of a non-doctor against the pregnant woman's wishes, that is violating the law. And as such constitutes murder. A doctor performing an abortion is exempted from such a charge because that meets the legal criteria for abortion. There's no contradiction, there's no double standard.

 

[Nathan45]

I think it's pretty obvious that is where you were going, but it is not germain to the point I was originally making. I was responding to the idea that a child 5 minutes before birth is essentially the same as a child 5 minutes after birth.

for the record i agree that it is essentially the same (I don't like late term abortion, if anyone bothered to read to the end of my very long abortion post that i linked here).

Whether a Zygote is a person (which I believe) is not in any way applicable to the discussion that was taking place.

It seems to me, that whether a zygote has the same rights as a person is intimately related to whether or not abortion should be legal. As i said, the argument cuts both ways.

 

[Nathan45]

as for the original post, as i already stated, legislators make laws, there's no rule that said laws have to make sense logically, it only matters that they're easily applied (in this case, the laws clearly don't apply to abortion)

I don't think an unborn fetus is worth the same as a person... but I'm not going to cry any tears about the injustice of someone going to jail for murder after punching a pregnant woman in the stomach.

the simple answer to the OP is, that's just the way they wrote the law. Has nothing to do with the morality of immorality of abortion.

 

[TheBear]

in all seriousness it seems silly to hold God to any kind of ethical standard... morals/ethics are the product of human social relations, that has nothing to do with God. Blaming God for anything going bad in the world makes about as much sense to me as blaming Steven Spielberg because someone got eaten by a dinosaur in Jurassic Park.

Let me make this clear.

It is my opinion that god(s) are nothing more than a construct of the human imagination. Therefore, blaming god(s) for anything is as insane as blaming Santa Clause for anything. There is no Santa Clause, and there are no gods. Mind you, that's just my opinion.

So, I won't be going down the path of blaming god(s) for anything. I'm just keeping my remarks within the context of the storyline. And that's all it is to me - a storyline. Nothing more.

 

[No Swansong]

for the record i agree that it is essentially the same (I don't like late term abortion, if anyone bothered to read to the end of my very long abortion post that i linked here).



It seems to me, that whether a zygote has the same rights as a person is intimately related to whether or not abortion should be legal. As i said, the argument cuts both ways.

It is intimately related to the OP it is not related to my post at all.

 

[Nathan45]

Let me make this clear.

It is my opinion that god(s) are nothing more than a construct of the human imagination. Therefore, blaming god(s) for anything is as insane as blaming Santa Clause for anything. There is no Santa Clause, and there are no gods. Mind you, that's just my opinion.

So, I won't be going down the path of blaming god(s) for anything.

i know this. sorry i should have clarified my post better.

I'm just keeping my remarks within the context of the storyline. And that's all it is to me - a story line. Nothing more.

I still think that, if god exists, it doesn't make sense to hold god accountable for miscarriages because i don't think that god would be under any obligation to turn the world into some kind of hedonistic paradise where nothing bad or unhappy ever happens.