The Abortion Question

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 12:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It does not have to do with humans being considered property.  It has to do with superiority of an individuals rights.  Calling your own body your own property is just semantics.

I guess a better example would be saying that I can not be charged with assault if I cut off my own hand.

But your not cutting anything that's yours. The fetus is a separate entity, and only is attached to the mother.

[fredtoast]

(10-07-2015, 12:18 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: But your not cutting anything that's yours. The fetus is a separate entity, and only is attached to the mother.

No.  The fetus is not an individual.  It is a part of the mothers body until it is possible for it to survive separate from the mothers body.

[*bfine32*]

(10-07-2015, 12:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  The fetus is not an individual.  It is a part of the mothers body until it is possible for it to survive separate from the mothers body.

Then how can it be considered a separate murder?

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 12:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  The fetus is not an individual.  It is a part of the mothers body until it is possible for it to survive separate from the mothers body.

The fetus is an individual. It's illogical to judge if someone is an individual based on if we can keep it alive. It doesn't even start out a part of the mothers body. It attaches itself to it after fertilization.

[*bfine32*]

(10-07-2015, 12:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess a better example would be saying that I can not be charged with assault if I cut off my own hand.

If I cut off your hand and then kill you can I be charged for a double murder? 

[fredtoast]

(10-07-2015, 12:21 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Then how can it be considered a separate murder?

Good question.

The mother has individual rights over the fetus.  It is part of her body.  She has the right to terminate the life of the fetus, but no one else does.  

The fact that the mother has individual rights greater than those of the fetus does not mean that other people have rights superior to those of the fetus and mother.

[fredtoast]

(10-07-2015, 12:24 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: The fetus is an individual. It's illogical to judge if someone is an individual based on if we can keep it alive. It doesn't even start out a part of the mothers body. It attaches itself to it after fertilization.

It is illogical to call something an individual when it is absolutely impossible for it to survive as an individual separate from the mother.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is illogical to call something an individual when it is absolutely impossible for it to survive as an individual separate from the mother.

How do you define "individual".

a separate person

in·di·vid·u·al

ˌindəˈvij(o͞o)əl/

noun

noun: individual; plural noun: individuals
1.
a single human being as distinct from a group, class, or family.

[fredtoast]

(10-07-2015, 12:44 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: a separate person

exactly 

(10-07-2015, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is illogical to call something an individual when it is absolutely impossible for it to survive as an individual separate from the mother.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is illogical to call something an individual when it is absolutely impossible for it to survive as an individual separate from the mother.

How is it illogical to call something what it is? It's not a part of the mother. Just because it can't survive at the moment away from the mother doesn't mean that it's not an individual. It would be logical to look at the facts that we have right now, and say that it's not a part of the mother, and it's an individual because it has a separate brain, separate organs, separate blood, and the only thing that it shares is nutrients and oxygen.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 12:46 AM)fredtoast Wrote: exactly 

something can be a separate entity and still be attached.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-06-2015, 09:35 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I only tried to argue that people don't stop being an individual because you tried to assert that as the case.

Completely false.

(10-02-2015, 11:34 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I see two problems with your argument:

1. When someone dies they are still an individual. 

Quote:You haven't done anything to refute my case. Just keep covering your eyes and plugging your ears while the government allows people to kill unborn babies.

Your case keeps changing.  See above for an example.

[fredtoast]

(10-07-2015, 12:48 AM)Brownshoe Wrote:  Just because it can't survive at the moment away from the mother doesn't mean that it's not an individual.

But it does mean that it can not have individual rights greater than the mother.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 01:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: But it does mean that it can not have individual rights greater than the mother.

Ok, but the mother shouldn't have the right to kill an unborn baby because it's inconvenient. If it's the mothers life vs the fetuses life that's different.

The right of an innocent life trumps all other individual rights, do you not agree?

[Brownshoe]

(10-02-2015, 11:34 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Completely false.

(10-02-2015, 11:34 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: 1. When someone dies they are still an individual. So why should we use the opposite criteria for death to establish individualism? 

implying people are individuals after death

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-07-2015, 12:24 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: The fetus is an individual. 

Is an embryo an individual?

Quote:It's illogical to judge if someone is an individual based on if we can keep it alive. 

It isn't if we can keep it alive, it is if it can keep itself alive.

Quote:It doesn't even start out a part of the mothers body. It attaches itself to it after fertilization.

Where does the ovum come from?  The mother's ovary.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 01:45 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Is an embryo an individual?



It isn't if we can keep it alive, it is if it can keep itself alive.



Where does the ovum come from?  The mother's ovary.

no, it doesn't have a brain or a heartbeat (unless it does, then it is)

no, it's if we can keep it alive. if it was about if it can keep itself alive then abortions would be legal way past 24 weeks

it comes from the ovary, but the fertilized egg isn't a part of the mother. It's separated from her until it attaches itself. The other half of the fertilized egg doesn't even come from the mother either.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-07-2015, 01:36 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: implying people are individuals after death

And you stated people never stop being individuals and you argued people don't stop being individuals . . . after you claimed I argued they did, but I never argued that.

[Brownshoe]

(10-07-2015, 01:53 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: And you stated people never stop being individuals and you argued people don't stop being individuals . . . after you claimed I argued they did, but I never argued that.

You claimed they did first, and I just argued that point. Look at your quote. It's clearly claiming that people are individuals after death.

Stop getting hung up on this anyways. It's irrelevant at this point.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-07-2015, 01:50 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: no, it doesn't have a brain or a heartbeat

You contradict yourself again because at 6 weeks it is still considered an embryo.  (Although your information is misinformation.)

(10-02-2015, 06:12 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Week 6 The fetus has both brain activity and a beating heart.

Quote:no, it's if we can keep it alive. if it was about if it can keep itself alive then abortions would be legal way past 24 weeks

Your information is misinformation again.  At 25 weeks pregnant the odds of survival are 50/50 with NICU support.  At 24 weeks the odds are less than 40%.