Is it okay to kill this?

[DallasApple]

Before it's born, it's a metronome. After it's born, it's a xylophone. I'm entitled to my opinion, after all, and words mean whatever I want them to mean.

Hey thats a timer and an instrument..you arent playing "fair words"..

Love

Dallas

 

[McBell]

Hey thats a timer and an instrument..you arent playing "fair words"..

Love

Dallas

Fair?
I want to go to the fair.
I have not been to a fair in like four years :no:

 

[Walkntune]

we are very different about this, that's all i can say. to me it is a baby after it was born or ten minutes before it was born

.

Because you see with a heart and a conscience instead of trying to let logic dictate your morality and ethics.Logic twists morality to what seems to be the easiest path instead of standing up with integrity even if it means taking a more difficult path.

 

[Walkntune]

Fine, then Kathryn. Take responsibility for your actions and live with the consequences of your decisions. Return to your adulterous first husband.

I hope this is not what it seems like and your our taking a cheap shot into her personal life.

Frankly, showing pictures of your grandchildren is a cheap emotional ploy that demonstrates the weakness of your argument.

Since when is using the heart and the conscience a weak argument for morality.Morality should be based off of good conscience and not manipulated through logic to justify ones actions when they have a seared conscience as in taking a cheap shot into someone's personal life.

 

[Smoke]

I hope this is not what it seems like and your our taking a cheap shot into her personal life.

"If you didn't want to live with him you shouldn't have married him" makes at least as much sense as "If you didn't want a baby you should have kept your legs together."

Because you see with a heart and a conscience instead of trying to let logic dictate your morality and ethics.Logic twists morality to what seems to be the easiest path instead of standing up with integrity even if it means taking a more difficult path.

It's just so beautiful when you have the courage to stand by your convictions whether they make any sense or not, isn't it?

Since when is using the heart and the conscience a weak argument for morality.Morality should be based off of good conscience and not manipulated through logic to justify ones actions when they have a seared conscience as in taking a cheap shot into someone's personal life.

Kathryn's using her daughter and grandchild to argue against abortion makes exactly as much sense as if she'd used them to argue against contraception or chastity. For instance:

For example, my oldest daughter got pregnant at age 19. She and I both were emotionally distraught. She was an honor student and was a sophomore in college. This could ruin her life! It was not what either of us had planned for this bright, intelligent young woman who "had" such potential. She wasn't even still with the father when she found out she was pregnant - and he was nothing more than an irresponsible 18 year old who wasn't even in college. All he did was play in a garage band and work in a coffee shop! I cried for four straight days.

Contraception proponents wouldn't have seen a problem with her using contraception and going forward with her life plans (to become an attorney). But thank God she didn't choose contraception. She conceived and kept that baby, even though up till the moment she held her she considered giving her up for adoption. She decided to remain open to the possibility of life by rejecting contraception, and now we have our beautiful Maggie in our lives.

My daughter never did finish her degree. But she did meet a fantastic guy who was attracted to her initially BECAUSE he knew her story and respected her decision not to use contraception. Their friendship started when she was about 6 months pregnant. They were nothing more than friends but after she had the baby, Josh fell in love with both of them, and they both fell in love with him.

Now they have two more children between them, and have adopted a baby from Korea. And I'm so glad that HIS single mother didn't use contraception either!

For example, my oldest daughter got pregnant at age 19. She and I both were emotionally distraught. She was an honor student and was a sophomore in college. This could ruin her life! It was not what either of us had planned for this bright, intelligent young woman who "had" such potential. She wasn't even still with the father when she found out she was pregnant - and he was nothing more than an irresponsible 18 year old who wasn't even in college. All he did was play in a garage band and work in a coffee shop! I cried for four straight days.

Chastity proponents wouldn't have seen a problem with her waiting till she got married to have sex and going forward with her life plans (to become an attorney). But thank God she didn't choose chastity. She had a short-term sexual relationship and conceived and kept that baby, even though up till the moment she held her she considered giving her up for adoption. She decided to remain open to the possibility of life by rejecting chastity, and now we have our beautiful Maggie in our lives.

My daughter never did finish her degree. But she did meet a fantastic guy who was attracted to her initially BECAUSE he knew her story and respected her decision not to wait till she got married to have sex. Their friendship started when she was about 6 months pregnant. They were nothing more than friends but after she had the baby, Josh fell in love with both of them, and they both fell in love with him.

Now they have two more children between them, and have adopted a baby from Korea. And I'm so glad that HIS single mother didn't wait till she got married to have sex either!

 

[Walkntune]

"If you didn't want to live with him you shouldn't have married him" makes at least as much sense as "If you didn't want a baby you should have kept your legs together."

Different consequences for the the action where the consequences of abortion involve another innocent victim. I know your logic doesn't see the unborn as a victim (doesn't want to see it) so it twists the concept anyway it can to deny the unborn it's rights by denying it is human etc...
Morality and ethics should be based on what is good for all so this is why your logic has to twist the truth and deny the unborn its rights.

It's just so beautiful when you have the courage to stand by your convictions whether they make any sense or not, isn't it?

Yes sometimes the truth can bring conviction even when we don't logically have an understanding yet.That is if we truly live by conviction instead of only being led by what seems logical at the time.

Kathryn's using her daughter and grandchild to argue against abortion makes exactly as much sense as if she'd used them to argue against contraception or chastity. For instance:

She has demonstrated that the greatest blessings come even outside of our own self interests and what we think is best for ourselves.She has demonstrated that love defies logic.

 

[Madhuri]

Life began a long long time ago and is a continuous ongoing process.
Further, Life does not "begin" at conception.
It can't.
For if either the sperm or the egg is dead, there is no conception.

How does that even make sense?

 

[Madhuri]

Not in any sense that we use to differentiate between ourselves as self-aware beings and other animals.


Of course not; if you think killing all life is wrong, than I can't argue why is should be acceptable.. though; I am still curious to the speculation on how one defines consciousness between plants and animals making plants ok to kill.

A rat is not a plant. A rat might not be capable of self-reflective thoughts but it is a conscious creature able to experience pain, fear and suffering.

I never said that killing all life is wrong. Whether killing plants is ok or not is for a different thread/topic.

 

[Madhuri]

I agree. For instance, it's ridiculous to give medical treatment to people who are fat and sedentary, smokers, drinkers, or eaters of fast food.

I think this is a very weak argument. You are comparing killing life (abortion) to saving life (medical treatment).

 

[Madhuri]

So you allow for the plan 'B' pill, perhaps, but prohibit most abortions. Say a woman doesn't suspect she's pregnant until she's a week late. That puts the pregnancy at five weeks, which only gives the woman one week to confirm the pregnancy, decide what to do, find a clinic, find the money to pay the clinic (if it's not covered under some form of health insurance), get there (which can be a task in itself if she's in a rural area or has to come in from another jurisdiction), and actually obtain the abortion.

If she has an irregular menstrual cycle, she might not even realize she's pregnant until after the 6 weeks have passed.

Does this sound reasonable?


A fetus becomes conscious at birth.

Actually, slightly after birth, when the mental and physiological changeover from fetal circulation to post-natal circulation occurs and the baby takes its first breath. Until that moment, the brain is in a suppressed state where even many normal autonomic functions don't occur. This is why fetuses don't suffocate in the womb. It's also why comparing a premature baby with a fetus of the same gestational age is something of an apples-to-oranges comparison.

You make a good point up top. 6 weeks gives very little time for a woman to find out if she is pregnant.

As for the conscious state of the baby do you have credible sources to back up your claim? I was under the impression that the baby can even hear and experience noise and can recognise the mother's voice after birth as a result.

 

[Madhuri]

So abortions are not responsibility?

That depends on the circumstance. I think that in most situations, if a person creates a life irresponsibly, they should take care of that life istead of doing what is easy for them and killing it. But we are talking about morality here and thus we can only conclude through subjective opinion.

 

[dust1n]

so if someone decides to exploid his body with TNT on a street full of people, it is OK?

.

And that point, there isn't really anyway to punish the action. It's not a civil issue; but if someone gets caught attempting to do so, then it is attempted murder, which he can still be charged with. He is harming people who have the same rights as himself. A baby, however, does not have rights. Not a citizen to this country, he has no say and his mother does.

 

[Smoke]

Different consequences for the the action where the consequences of abortion involve another innocent victim.

Kathryn went on at some length about taking responsibility for your one's actions, and not just in the context of pregnancy, either. If that's an important principle, then let's apply it across the board.

Morality and ethics should be based on what is good for all so this is why your logic has to twist the truth and deny the unborn its rights.

It is not always good for a woman to give birth. You abandon logic to deny women their rights.

Yes sometimes the truth can bring conviction even when we don't logically have an understanding yet.

Yes, I know -- you think the fact that your position makes no sense proves you're morally superior.

 

[Smoke]

I think this is a very weak argument. You are comparing killing life (abortion) to saving life (medical treatment).

No, I'm talking about people being forced to live with the consequences of their actions, which has been urged several times in relation to women with unwanted pregnancies.

 

[dust1n]

A rat is not a plant. A rat might not be capable of self-reflective thoughts but it is a conscious creature able to experience pain, fear and suffering.

I never said that killing all life is wrong. Whether killing plants is ok or not is for a different thread/topic.

Than the 23 week fetus should be no problem for you neither;

"Fetuses cannot feel pain until at least the 28th week of gestation because they haven't formed the necessary nerve pathways, says Mark Rosen, an obstetrical anesthesiologist at the University of California at San Francisco. He and his colleagues determined that until the third trimester, "the wiring at the point where you feel pain, such as the skin, doesn't reach the emotional part where you feel pain, in the brain." Although fetuses start forming pain receptors eight weeks into development, the thalamus, the part of the brain that routes information to other areas, doesn't form for 20 more weeks. Without the thalamus, Rosen says, no information can reach the cortex for processing."

When Does a Fetus Feel Pain? | Family Health | DISCOVER Magazine

 

[Madhuri]

No, I'm talking about people being forced to live with the consequences of their actions, which has been urged several times in relation to women with unwanted pregnancies.

I don't think that you can properly compare your own child to a long-term unhealthy lifestyle. Being sedentary or eating fast food affects your own health. Creating a human life affects more than just your own life.

 

[Madhuri]

Than the 23 week fetus should be no problem for you neither

Thanks for providing a link that contradicts the consciousness argument. Now we know that the baby has conscious experience prior to birth.

 

[Walkntune]

It is not always good for a woman to give birth. You abandon logic to deny women their rights.

There is always room to evaluate circumstances that could be detrimental but that should not be license for every woman to make a decision to end a life on a selfish whim.

Yes, I know -- you think the fact that your position makes no sense proves you're morally superior.

Hmmm! Are you about discussing the subject at hand or just cackling off meaningless comments for your own ego.

 

[dust1n]

Thanks for providing a link that contradicts the consciousness argument. Now we know that the baby has conscious experience prior to birth.

Sure, I guess the consciousness argument is out of the bag (though I still don't think it changes anything on my opinion about abortion in the third trimester, but that is a thread on its own). This baby is 23 weeks old, and as my source suggest, would not feel any pain, suffering, or fear as the baby's brain is not capable of doing so until the 28th week.

So it is quite OK to kill this.

Unless there is something else about consciousness for a zygote that makes this situation morally unsound...

 

[Smoke]

Hmmm! Are you about discussing the subject at hand or just cackling off meaningless comments for your own ego.

It would be more appropriate to ask yourself that question. You prattle on at every opportunity with self-congratulatory blather about how your "morals" are superior to logic and reason.