Abortion

haha abortion is murder in the eyes of god XD

anyways, that little chuckle aside, YOUR not the one having the baby, and you have no right to decide for someone else. Great that you dont like it, dont FORCE people to not be able to do it.

 

I can argue that with a philosophy: Can you prove a fetus is not self-aware?

How do you know? Maybe we have a vivid recollection of the womb somewhere deep in our subconscious. Perhaps it gets pushed there sometime after birth, perhaps right at birth.

Until you can prove this wrong (which in order to do so, you must figure out and explain the 'black box' that is our brain, and check every single person's subconscious)...then yeah, I can argue about self-awareness because it becomes your word against mine. And to the contrary, I've provided a possible reason as to why a fetus may not be a mindless being (ie. the primitive nervous system).

Wouldn't by definition a woman who 'gets laid and does so without protection' generally be one of either two things?

The first being either someone in a committed relationship who WANTS a child (ie. no abortion)
The second being not the sharpest knife in the drawer?

I give credit where credit is due: Casual (and careless unprotected) sex is not something to be awarded a Pullitzer Prize for.

Besides....not even a doctor could tell a woman she's pregnant until several weeks after conception. Hormone (including estrogen and progesterone among others (fluctuations in these govern the menstrual cycle)) levels are changed, but to such a small degree that you couldn't tell. Not with a blood test, not with a home pregnancy test, nothing.

(I refer you to 'state of the art' pregnancy tests (I forget which brand) which claim "There is such a thing as being a little bit pregnant..." and boast about being able to detect pregnancy up to a whole day before a woman's expected cycle...this still falls into the 4 week old range.)

EDIT: I remember, it was "First Response" pregnancy tests...and I refer you to an article I just found, which says it was 'misleading':

Home pregnancy test branded 'misleading' - Health and beauty - Lifestyle - Manchester Evening News

So yeah...pretty much no way to know you're pregnant before your next menstrual cycle.

 

Actually it's been proven that the fetus only has enough brain activity to sustain itself inside the mother's womb. So it is a vegetable.

 

^^Such a thing can't be proven.

Again I stress that we know nothing about what the mind, and consciousness, actually are.
How can we prove anything about something we have no clue about?

Not to mention, the issues I've posed in my previous post haven't been addressed: figuring out exactly what happens in our 'black box' of a brain, and asking every single person who's ever lived or ever will lived's subconscious if they remember anything (That's what's required to 'prove' or 'disprove' something: Demonstrate that it has never happened, or never will happen).

However, if that's not enough, here's another 'your word vs. mine' argument to add to the list:

What if for smaller beings (ie. a fetus), only a fraction of the 'brain activity' is required for conscious thought? I could go out right now, conjure up an unprovable hypothesis about this fact, and quite sadly, we aren't psychic and don't know if it's thinking anything given these new rules. All we can determine is that it doesn't have as much brain activity as an adult human would need to think (but again, do we even know this much?).

This certainly makes sense in a biochemical way: A fetus doesn't have 'smaller atoms' so its primary 'brain energy' molecule, glucose, is the same size as for an adult. But it would require less of it, wouldn't it? Being smaller. If it only generates little 'tiny' ripples of brain activity, maybe our equipment is not sophisticated enough to detect it?

So you have to prove a few things, including the idea that no matter how advanced our technology is, we will never be able to detect brain activity in a fetus that lets us believe it can think in its own way.

Anyone who's taken an ethics & research design course will tell you, 'proof' is a very difficult thing to achieve...and it in fact, impossible to 'prove' any event occurred...so your research can, at best, show a cause and effect relationship. (I can go into 'proof' a little more if anyone actually cares (This is different from a 'mathematical' proof...but similar in ways)).

It's not like we can ask the fetus if it's thinking or anything...they're pretty hard up for testemonials.

Here's another tidbit I came across:

(Source: Fetal Psychology)

 

Yes it can be proven. The brain is not fully developed. There for it can not think, comment, or do anything except keep its heart beating. Unless it appears with the brain full developed it is, in short, a vegetable. No amount of energy going through it can make up for it. All the stuff for self sustainability are developed first. Then the thinking centers are made. Besides, generally it is aborted before it is anything more than a sac of cells.

Besides you left one out. Rape. It happens in our society, a guy who is to lazy or to stupid to try and build a relationship with someone. How much you want to bet that the rapist didn't use protection?

And the body goes tells you that you are pregnant asap. The signs are all there and a doctor can find out by more than just hormones. The way the body is behaving for one thing. Once an egg is fertalized it will trigger chemical reactions to remove the other sperm cells. You just have to run a few tests to see that. Still, our technology is able to pick up on the small amounts of hormones going through are bodies. Sorry to shoot several opinions down.

 

Actually, it's not the brightest rapist in the world who doesn't use protection. It's a guaranteed way to get caught.

Also, you assume that the brain is only capable of thought once it is fully developed. If it is capable of any of it's other functions, I see no reason why it couldn't be capable of that one as well. The brain is a very complex organ. One that scientists still do not completely understand. Until you can say you understand everything about the brain, you can not prove what it is and is not capable of, no matter what stage of development it's in.

 

I've given you references and you simply adopt the 'yes you can, I said so' attitude. That's not a debate; in fact if this were a formal debate, I would have been awarded some points there.

Everything you've given me in that last post has not only been 'heresay' (ie. not backed up by evidence other than your words), but it doesn't even challenge what I was saying. Infact, if I copy and pasted my previous post, it would be a sufficient response.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

First and foremost (again): Scientific research is never proof. Depending on how you set up your study, you can either show a correlation (or lack thereof), or at best, make a causal statement (ie. 'eating ____ can cause cancer in susceptible populations'). This is the first example I had learned in my research design course:

Consider the statement "All crows are black." Is this statement true? Well, I've never seen a crow that wasn't black...so maybe it is true.

But suppose there was one crow, somewhere, in the history and future of the world, that was grey. The statement (in this case it would be a 'hypothesis') then becomes false, and we seek a new guess.

But the point is, can I ever PROVE the statement is true? I would have to look at every single crow there ever was, or ever will be...since I have not lived in the past, this is impossible. I can't conclude that the statement is true. No one could.

But what is science to do? We need to 'prove' things don't we? Well we do...but unfortunately we have to settle for less. If I went out, got a random sample of some number of crows, did some stats tests and whatnot (I'll forego the details), I could eventually make a statement like the following:

"I am confident to within a 95% confidence interval (ie. I'm right 19 / 20 times) that all crows are black." (for instance)

Note that this is very different from saying "All crows are black."

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

As for this one...this isn't typically my style, but the anatomist (/amateur neuroscientist) in me finds this naive, and for lack of a better word, 'gullible' view of the brain a little silly. You're saying a brain must be fully developed for it to function...and yet you gave a counter example to that statement in the same sentence. How can you conclude (without a degree in neuroscience at least) that your heart can beat, but you can't do anything else at that age? I guarantee you can't...because I posted a reference, an excerpt from a Psychology Today magazine, that is to the contrary.

EDIT: Here is the link again if you'd like to read it now:

Fetal Psychology

I haven't 'left one out' because I have never once in this topic mentioned a situation in which it is, or is not, reasonable to have an abortion (Infact, you don't even know for certain that I'm for or against abortion: I've never said so). I've merely been presenting facts about fetal development. You've connected the dots in your mind.

Besides...ever hear of DNA evidence? Any rapist who didn't use protection is going to prison. I'd take the bet that the rapist did (Within a 95% confidence interval...that's a little joke).

Besides, you're saying guys in our society are too driven for sex that they won't build a relationship with someone and will instead just take what they want. You've responded to your own statement:

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Mmm....not quite.

Any first year anatomy class will tell you that the female genitalia are ALWAYS triggering chemical reactions to destroy sperm cells. (ie. cervical mucous among other things). The vaginal environment is designed to prevent sperm from entering (this seems counter-intuitive...but it is how the female body copes with millions of sperm cells).

Here's the real story: Intercourse. Sperm travel toward the uterus, nearly all are killed off. About a day later, the egg is fertilized (and is now called a zygote) in the Fallopian tube... It then sits there for a bit....travels down to the uterus...'hovers around a little more' ... then burrows into the placenta (uterine lining).

Prior to burrowing into the placenta, not even a female's own body knows she is pregnant. As far as it knows, she's just on her period. It isn't until a little while later even, when nutrients of the placenta are starting to be used by the zygote that the female body determines she is pregnant, and illicits an increase in either progesterone or estrogen (I forget which one at the moment), which stimulates swelling and nourishment of the placenta. (This is the first point at which pregnancy differs from the menstrual cycle, from a physiology standpoint).

This hardly seems A.S.A.P. This isn't even considering the fact that these are miniscule changes in hormone levels.

 

Wow, don't yell at me. I was just stating a point. I was trying to prove my point and you snapped at me. Really those last few posts of mine were speculation. I don't know weather or not a fetus can think. For all we know they can draw to. But what I am saying is that it can not survive outside of the body. And when it is removed it has no brain set up. Doing so would be dangerous but I digress. The main point is that we are a free nation. A person should be able to choose weather they want an abortion or not. We have no right at all to constrict them by saying, "You are having a baby weather you like it or not!" And a rapist is not all that bright to begin with. Lets consider something else while we are at it. Watch this video and just think about how this person feels. This is something that does happen in real life.

 

I don't consider that snapping...? I apologize anyway though, if you felt like I did. I think the problem was moreso being blunt; but I was only responding in kind to the very bluntness you presented in your argument (Ie. "Yes it can be proven. The brain is not fully developed. There for it can not think, comment, or do anything except keep its heart beating." is rather blunt).

@Toph: Actually, I am pro-life...haha...but not for any reasons I've mentioned. I tend to adopt simpler philosophies for my own beliefs (ie. nothing about hormones, or anything too sciency). The way I see it, I'm not confident enough in my own intelligence to declare I've 'found the right answers' using complicated ideas. That's why I tend to stick to simple ideas...paradoxical arguments, 'what if' statements, and personal judgement.

I would have argued either side, depending on what was fitting.

 

You didn't comment to my video. And now I am happy that I know were you stand. Basically the video is showing how a girl having it hard allows herself to be smooth talked by some guy. She finds herself pregnant and soon it is apparent. Now everyone has shunned her and she becomes not only pessimistic but aetheist. She leaves home and trys to find hope but no one will listen. Now all that pain and hurt could have been resolved through an abortion but in a world the pro life people are fighting for she has no choice in the matter. In the end she will probably kill herself. It is a nice vid and is well worth the wait. Also apologies excepted.

 

Unfortunately, I couldn't watch the video due to sound issues (Well, I could 'watch' but it's kind of bland without sound).

But it sounds to me more like her life was 'wrecked' by other factors anyway;

1) She was having it hard before any of this ever happened.
2) She allowed herself to be smooth-talked due to low self-esteem (or other issues)
3) Other people shunned her for being pregnant / "a whore" (ie. this is what people commonly insult)
4) She took it harshly, and abandoned the one thing she could turn to in a time where no one else was there for her (her faith).

It seems more like 'not having an abortion' is just the scapegoat...I mean if she aborted the baby, is she any less of "a whore" ? Bad luck, followed by bad decisions...I'm not claiming life is fair.

I would like to point out though, that this is not the world pro-life people are fighting for...In the world pro-lifer's fight for, #3 would never occur.

EDIT: Also, should she kill herself...she's paying the price for her own mistakes. (I don't think this is the right thing to do, and I'm not saying she deserves it). Why is this any worse than killing 'the potential child' (if you refuse to call it a child) who has made no mistake besides existing?

 

All I am saying is that an abortion can be done almost right away before the signs of a pregnant person show. Besides, who are we to infringe on rights to other people. We can't force someone to do something if the don't want to do it. We always find a way around the law.

 

I can't watch the vid because I'm sharing one sattelite connection with three other people, and we're skirting the bandwisth limit as it is. If we cross it, our speed drops to dial up.

It seems you are always lauding the worst case, and if I had to guess, least common scenario. Fisrt of all, abortion is currently legal as far as I'm aware, so if she'd wanted to have an abortion, she could have. Having the child was her choice. If she even lived long enough to have it. You never said.

Secondly, I've known many people who were pregnent at young ages, and none of them were ever shunned. First of all, it would be a hypocritical thing to do. Thjose of us who went through high school without having sex can count ourselves in the minority. So I'd say that the chances of that part of the story being true are quite slim.

In order for someone to have reacted that dramatically to this situation, they were pretty low on self esteem anyway. The end result would be the same whether they had an abortion or not. And in truth, it could have been any bad situation, not neccessarily that one, that triggered those reactions from her.

Lastly, in the unlikely situation that she would have been labeled and shunned like that, whether she had the abortion or not wouldn't have mattered. Whatever guy tricked her into sleeping with him is bound to talk. He'll want to brag about his conquest. If the label of "whore" is to be given, it comes from this, not from people seeing she's pregnant. It's word of mouth and gossip that labels you a whore.

Personally, I don't think there is a good reason for people to have an abortion with the exception of when the pregnancy endagers the mother's life. However, I realize that people are gonna do it anyway, so I'd rather they did it in proper environments wiht proper equipment and with proper, medical care, rather than have it done in some dingy hidden clinic that's fare from suitable and will most likely harm the mother.

 

So in other words you disagree with my points and still agree on the out come. Odd that. I may be lauding the worst case but they are still possibility. You never commented on my last and you guys won't know what I am talking about unless you watch the video. The library generally has computers. Sorry that the audio won't work. I am fresh out of ideas at the moment.

 

I agree that it should be legal. I simply agree for different reasons. As far as I am aware, the legal reasoning behind the legality of abortion is right to privacy. I have never understood how it is right to privacy at all. The other logic behind the argument is a woman's right to do what she wishes with her own body. However, by that argument, every drug that can be taken should be legal, because it represents a person's right to do what they wish with their own body as well.

And I don't even know where our library is, and I'm not going there just to watch a single video. You've described it. I've seen enough video's like it in my life on a variety of subjects to know what I'd be watching. You take all of the worst possible outcomes of any given action and show them all at the same time to prove a point, ignoring the fact that the chances of it are astronomical.

I could get in a car wreck everytime I drive. I could become horribly injured. The time spent out of work could make me lose my job. The injuries could result in a permanant disability. I could become a burden on my family and friends, all my hopes and dreams I have could be rendered unachievable. And therefore, by your logic, I shouldn't drive because of the risk.

 

I speculated. I am sorry to say this but life might have been a little easier. For instance when she leaves home the man that drives by would have been mre sympathetic. Anyone she might try to make friends and didn't know about the abortion might actually like her. And Al, persecution happens all the time. You can't say that everyone is nice to each other. At heart a lot people are evil. We all want to do bad things deep down that we know we shouldn't. Just recently a teen pregnancy occurred at my school. Everyone made fun of her or avoided her like the pleg. Can you say that that is not a reality? Can you honestly say that you have never seen someone laugh at some one less fortunate? We all need help but a lot of the time no one really listens.

 

I never said that no one did. I said that I have never seen a situation when everyone shunned someone that they liked over something like that. If she was already unpopular, possibly. But if she was, then it would hardly be much different than before. As I say, I knew many people in school that got pregnant. None of them were shunned like that. None.

 

I didn't say that did I? I said any one shetriedto make friends with. And I am sorry but my school is like that. So are the many I have visited for competions. I always figure out the news some how. Persecution in my eyes is not letting any one have peace over something. As for depression I suffered from that once. Not for the same reasons obviously but I still wanted to off myself anyways. I can easily see why that poor girl would allow such a man to actually have sex with her. She would feel empowered and that is all that we pessimists want. You can obviously see were I am heading with this.
p.s. I am not pessimistic anymore. Lady luck has given me some good hands so far.