Another Abortion Question

[mulimulix]

He doesn't even understand the difference between a baby and fruit!

And Christians say atheists always start arguments!

The point I am making is that a fruit is an unborn tree, just like a fetus is an unborn person!

 

[razeontherock]

And Christians say atheists always start arguments!

The point I am making is that a fruit is an unborn tree, just like a fetus is an unborn person!

In context, you were saying a fetus can't feel pain, and might as well be a vegetable. This is demonstrated to be wrong, LONG before the unborn is viable.
It's not new science, either.

 

[solarwave]

In context, you were saying a fetus can't feel pain, and might as well be a vegetable. This is demonstrated to be wrong, LONG before the unborn is viable.
It's not new science, either.

At 24 weeks the fetus can't feel pain and is unconscious and this is the latest findings.

 

[MattRose]

At 24 weeks the fetus can't feel pain and is unconscious and this is the latest findings.

Abortion Debate: Fetuses Can't Feel Pain Until 24 Weeks, Controversial Study Says - Health Blog - CBS News

Both sides of the Atlantic agree. I guess it's abortions for everyone.

 

[razeontherock]

How long do you suppose it will be before findings are made which contradict this? Please examine this research for sample size, validity of tests, etc. Why is all of this hidden? I know what was discovered over 30 years ago, and on what basis. I don't think our species changed that much in such a short time; I think there's personal bias masquerading as "science."

 

[mulimulix]

How long do you suppose it will be before findings are made which contradict this? Please examine this research for sample size, validity of tests, etc. Why is all of this hidden? I know what was discovered over 30 years ago, and on what basis. I don't think our species changed that much in such a short time; I think there's personal bias masquerading as "science."

I bet the side saying what you're saying would be more biased than this study.

 

[razeontherock]

Film doesn't lie.

 

[mulimulix]

Film doesn't lie.

Film doesn't show pain

 

[razeontherock]

Disagreed. You can clearly see normal human reaction to pain, in a life and death struggle! Just as, if you were to try to harm my unborn child, it would be clearly evident upon your face and your bodily reactions, and visible upon film if someone happened to be there to film it.
I do not recall the age of the "fetus" I witnessed engaged in this struggle though. Regardless, it is clearly BRUTAL MURDER. As much as I hate to admit it, I would rather see ru486. (Cute little name, eh?)

 

[mulimulix]

Disagreed. You can clearly see normal human reaction to pain, in a life and death struggle! Just as, if you were to try to harm my unborn child, it would be clearly evident upon your face and your bodily reactions, and visible upon film if someone happened to be there to film it.
I do not recall the age of the "fetus" I witnessed engaged in this struggle though. Regardless, it is clearly BRUTAL MURDER. As much as I hate to admit it, I would rather see ru486. (Cute little name, eh?)

I disagree further! You can't say a scientific study is wrong just because you've seen video which may suggest otherwise. And yes, that is a problem if you don't know how old the fetus is.

 

[Sketcher]

Similar to Oshulten's question about abortion, but different:

I recognise that many of you are against abortion for whatever reason (obviously, mainly religious reasons) but if you accept that it is a religious reason that you are against it, then how could you make it illegal? What I mean to say is that if you are against abortion because your religion tells you that (not that there's anything wrong with it), then why not keep it legal and the people who want to abort a baby can use it and the people who are against it don't have to.

The way I see a law like this which doesn't hurt people if you never need to be involved in it, is to make/keep it legal, simple as that. People shouldn't complain if it's legal, because they aren't the ones using it! I think the same goes for gay marriage.

Thoughts?

My faith instructs me on the value of human life, and that it should be protected by law. Ergo, murder should be illegal. My religion touches on the deepest of moral principals and provides direction. It doesn't mean that whatever my religion is against should be made legal. Otherwise, theft, regular murder, bribery, and so much more we take for granted as evil would be made legal.

Abortion is a human rights issue. It is the taking of an innocent human life in most cases for the sake of convenience. My religion honestly shouldn't be the only one that would motivate people to criminalize it. Heck, there are even atheists out there who are pro-life. Abortion isn't comparable to say, not being allowed to write a religious book unless you're an ordained minister or that you must pay a tax penalty if you don't follow the state religion or a law against tattoos. Big difference between stuff like that and protecting innocent human life. Heck, I'm against the recreational use of narcotics, and even though I'm against legalizing them, I would trade their illegal status if it would get me a solidly pro-life country in return (note to the nitpickers out there - I know it won't). The reason being is that I don't care so much what you do to yourself, but if you start directly harming other people - especially to the point of taking their lives - that's when someone needs to step in and stop you, one way or the other.

 

[razeontherock]

just because you've seen video which may suggest otherwise.

Pretty loose use of those bolded words. The camera doesn't lie. And the fetus was ELEVEN WEEKS old

 

[razeontherock]

PREBORN - 11 WEEKS AFTER CONCEPTION

HEART IS BEATING (SINCE 18-25 DAYS)
BRAIN WAVES HAVE BEEN RECORDED AT 40 DAYS
THE BABY SQUINTS, SWALLOWS, AND CAN MAKE A FIST
THE BABY HAS FINGERPRINTS AND CAN KICK
THE BABY IS SENSITIVE TO HEAT, TOUCH, LIGHT AND NOISE
THE BABY SUCKS HIS OR HER THUMB
ALL BODY SYSTEMS ARE WORKING
THE BABY WEIGHS ABOUT 1 OUNCE AND IS 2 1/2 TO 3 INCHES LONG
THE BABY COULD FIT COMFORTABLY IN THE PALM OF YOUR HAND
____________________________________________________________

Yet our OP thinks it's ok to rip him/her limb from limb. How many other would-be murderers have the guts to stand up and be counted? Gotta admire that.

 

[mulimulix]

Pretty loose use of those bolded words. The camera doesn't lie. And the fetus was ELEVEN WEEKS old

Can you please send me a link to the video?

I use those words because CAMERAS DON'T SHOW PAIN! You can't physically see pain, you can infer from someone's reaction.

 

[razeontherock]

Sorry, I saw it in the control room I was running, some 25 years ago. I'd be awfully surprised if it were available online, and if it were I bet the quality has degraded so far as to be mostly useless. And I already gave you proof positive that cameras DO show pain, as well as life-and-death struggle.

 

[MattRose]

How long do you suppose it will be before findings are made which contradict this? Please examine this research for sample size, validity of tests, etc. Why is all of this hidden? I know what was discovered over 30 years ago, and on what basis. I don't think our species changed that much in such a short time; I think there's personal bias masquerading as "science."

Hmm... goalposts moving again. Why do you lovingly embrace science to prove your case, and then kick science out of bed when she disproves your case? Science is self-correcting. The vast majority of scientific theories valid 30 years ago are... wait for it... STILL VALID!!!

Fetuses in the womb is an area where science is still young and missteps are common. You brought up the "proof" that science suggested abortion is painful to fetuses. Now you're running for cover when more advanced research shows your beloved theory is no more. Don't be a hypocrite! We both know that if the science of 30 years ago said fetuses felt no pain, but newer studies said they do, you'd be shouting it from the highest mountaintop.

Not only do these studies suggest that the fetus is incapable of feeling pain because the pathways for pain aren't developed, but even if they are developed (after 24 weeks), the doctors in the study say there is increasing evidence that the fetus is in a state of "continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation." And these scientists aren't your run-of-the-mill baldies. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists published these studies.
You'll have to move on to another reason to ban abortions as your friend "science" is really miffed at you.

I think there's personal bias masquerading as "science."

No question whatsoever, but not in the way you meant.

 

[mulimulix]

Hmm... goalposts moving again. Why do you lovingly embrace science to prove your case, and then kick science out of bed when she disproves your case? Science is self-correcting. The vast majority of scientific theories valid 30 years ago are... wait for it... STILL VALID!!!

Fetuses in the womb is an area where science is still young and missteps are common. You brought up the "proof" that science suggested abortion is painful to fetuses. Now you're running for cover when more advanced research shows your beloved theory is no more. Don't be a hypocrite! We both know that if the science of 30 years ago said fetuses felt no pain, but newer studies said they do, you'd be shouting it from the highest mountaintop.

Not only do these studies suggest that the fetus is incapable of feeling pain because the pathways for pain aren't developed, but even if they are developed (after 24 weeks), the doctors in the study say there is increasing evidence that the fetus is in a state of "continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation." And these scientists are you're run-of-the-mill baldies. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists published these studies.
You'll have to move on to another reason to ban abortions as your friend "science" is really miffed at you.

No question whatsoever, but not in the way you meant.

This.

Razeontherock:

If the video is 25 years old, how did you find out how old the baby in it was when you previously didn't know?