Siamese Twins and Abortion

[BFritz21]

(04-13-2016, 10:10 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: No they don't.  We don't abort, other than for extreme circumstances, after 24 weeks.  The ability for a fetus to feel pain doesn't happen until after 28 weeks.

A paralyzed person can't feel pain in the parts of their body that are paralyzed, so does that make it ok to kill them?

(04-13-2016, 11:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No it is not.

This is the basis for the entire argument.  The fetus is not an individual and therefore not entitled to individual rights that are superior to those of the mother.

I fully understand why you might have a different opinion, but you can't just say that something is correct because it is your opinion. 

The one twin can't live without the other, so how's he an individual then?

[SteelCitySouth]

(04-13-2016, 02:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: A paralyzed person can't feel pain in the parts of their body that are paralyzed, so does that make it ok to kill them?

A paralyzed person can certainly feel pain as well are cognoscente beings provided all of the protections of a person.   If you are trying to say a person that is a vegetable.  Well then yes we do that as well.

[BFritz21]

(04-13-2016, 03:15 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: A paralyzed person can certainly feel pain as well are cognoscente beings provided all of the protections of a person.   If you are trying to say a person that is a vegetable.  Well then yes we do that as well.

Um......  do you know what paralysis is?

They can't feel pain in the part of their body that is paralyzed because the nerves can't tell the brain it's in pain because the connection through the spinal cord is severed.

[SteelCitySouth]

(04-13-2016, 10:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Um......  do you know what paralysis is?

They can't feel pain in the part of their body that is paralyzed because the nerves can't tell the brain it's in pain because the connection through the spinal cord is severed.

Are you now trying to compare the cognizance of a person and that of a 24 week old fetus?  Cuz that would be silly.

[*PhilHos*]

(04-14-2016, 09:50 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Are you now trying to compare the cognizance of a person and that of a 24 week old fetus?  Cuz that would be silly.

Even before you were a fetus, even when you were a sperm and egg cell, you were capable of rationale thought. Hasn't anyone ever seen Look Who's Talking? 

[SteelCitySouth]

(04-14-2016, 11:24 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Even before you were a fetus, even when you were a sperm and egg cell, you were capable of rationale thought. Hasn't anyone ever seen Look Who's Talking? 

[fredtoast]

(04-13-2016, 02:52 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: The one twin can't live without the other, so how's he an individual then?

They are two individuals sharing an organ.

An organ is not an individual.

I am not sure I understand your definition of "individual".  How exactly do you define "individual"?

[Benton]

(04-14-2016, 11:24 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Even before you were a fetus, even when you were a sperm and egg cell, you were capable of rationale thought. Hasn't anyone ever seen Look Who's Talking? 

Give it 10 years. We're almost dumbed down as a society to the point where you could enter that movie as evidence in a court trial.

[BFritz21]

(04-12-2016, 03:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.  Democrats are more concerned with protecting individual rights than Republicans who want the government to make these decisions for women.

I don't know a single Democrat who thinks abortion is a good thing.  But we still value individual rights over government control.

A woman's right to make decisions about her own body?  Ok:

   

[GMDino]

(04-15-2016, 12:36 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A woman's right to make decisions about her own body?  Ok:

Go to the March for Life protest.

Also do some research on why abortion is legal.

[fredtoast]

(04-15-2016, 12:36 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: A woman's right to make decisions about her own body?  Ok:

Yes.  that is the exact point.

(04-13-2016, 11:12 AM)fredtoast Wrote:   The fetus is not an individual and therefore not entitled to individual rights that are superior to those of the mother.

I fully understand why you might have a different opinion, but you can't just say that something is correct because it is your opinion. 

[BFritz21]

(04-15-2016, 11:34 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.  that is the exact point.

It may not be able to live on its own, but it is an individual that is growing and developing.

The mother may have created it with the help of a father, but you can't create something and then say it doesn't exist.

When an egg is fertilized, life begins, because dead matter doesn't grow or evolve, and that's the point.

[fredtoast]

(04-15-2016, 04:01 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: It may not be able to live on its own, but it is an individual that is growing and developing.

The mother may have created it with the help of a father, but you can't create something and then say it doesn't exist.

When an egg is fertilized, life begins, because dead matter doesn't grow or evolve, and that's the point.

I have always understood your position on this.

Abortion is the one issue that is pretty much impossible to argue because the difference is on a philosophical level.  Both sides have an opinion, but it is just an opinion.

Personally i don't see how you can call a glob of cells an individual human that deserves individual rights greater than the mother.  And you think I am wrong.  At this point there is nothing really to argue about.  All we will do is keep repeating "I am right.  You are wrong." and it is all based on nothing but opinion.

[Belsnickel]

(04-15-2016, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Personally i don't see how you can call a glob of cells an individual human that deserves individual rights greater than the mother.  And you think I am wrong.  At this point there is nothing really to argue about.  All we will do is keep repeating "I am right.  You are wrong." and it is all based on nothing but opinion.

See, my argument is independent from the embryo/fetus being an individual or not. It is not the government's role to value one individual's rights over another individual's. By criminalizing abortion, the state is doing just that. Abortion as an issue is one that is far too complex and nuanced for any law to be able to cover every contingency in a fair manner. When that is the case, as someone that values limited government, the decision should be left to those involved. The argument that the rights of the unborn are not taken into account by the mother deciding to have an abortion is one of the more ridiculous ones out there, to me. As someone that has known women struggling with the decision I can attest that many, if not most, of those women that decide to end their pregnancy of their own volition think long and hard about that decision.

[BFritz21]

(04-15-2016, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have always understood your position on this.

Abortion is the one issue that is pretty much impossible to argue because the difference is on a philosophical level.  Both sides have an opinion, but it is just an opinion.

Personally i don't see how you can call a glob of cells an individual human that deserves individual rights greater than the mother.  And you think I am wrong.  At this point there is nothing really to argue about.  All we will do is keep repeating "I am right.  You are wrong." and it is all based on nothing but opinion.

This is not based on an opinion:  once the egg is fertilized, it is growing and developing, and therefore no longer just a glob of cells that is dead matter.

Living things can't just grow from nothing because that's not how life works and that's not how living matter works.

[fredtoast]

(04-15-2016, 04:39 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: This is not based on an opinion:  once the egg is fertilized, it is growing and developing, and therefore no longer just a glob of cells that is dead matter.

Living things can't just grow from nothing because that's not how life works and that's not how living matter works.

An apple seed is not the same as an apple tree.  That is not an opinion.  That is a fact.

A glob of undifferentiated cells is not a individual entitled to individual rights.  That is my opinion.  

Your opinion is that I am wrong.  I can understand why you think your opinion is correct, but it just your opinion.  Not a fact.

[Belsnickel]

(04-15-2016, 04:39 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: This is not based on an opinion:  once the egg is fertilized, it is growing and developing, and therefore no longer just a glob of cells that is dead matter.

Living things can't just grow from nothing because that's not how life works and that's not how living matter works.

That is not the opinion to which he is referring. The opinion, the philosophical conundrum, that exists within the abortion argument is not whether the embryo is living, but whether it can be considered a separate individual if there is no feasible way for it to be separated from its host, the mother, and survive even with medical intervention. It's the same philosophical question you posed in the OP, really. The differences being, one, conjoined twins have individual identities and are treated as individuals by the government whereas an unborn child has no name, SSN, nothing. And two, the possibility of a conjoined twin surviving something like you describe is there, it is much more feasible to occur than a first or second trimester embryo.