by Quincy 123 Replies latest social relationships
to kill part of a person
You are completely ignoring his question.
We say 'fetus isn't human because it is not a soul'.
You reply 'fetus IS human because it has human DNA'
We counter 'so a skin tissue must deserve the same protection'
You then say 'skin is not human, though'
IOW: Make up your mind! Does having human DNA alone make you human or not? Is not something else needed? I say yes. You say no and then yes and then no.
Willy, you seem to be choosing your definitions and criteria in order to support your belief that abortion at any stage is wrong. Your main criterion seems to be that unique human DNA has human rights, but it doesn't necessarily have to be unique, and sometimes even if it is it doesn't count. It only seems to apply when referring to foetal tissue. Why is that?
I'm really over the use of the word "convenience" in regards to pregnancy and child-rearing.
It's flippant and trivialises the suffering that humans go through in life when they are not cared for properly. If someone is inconvenienced by a stuck light signal, one gets over it, moves on. If one is inconvenienced by a child that they have none of the resources (financial, emotional, intellectual) to care for, an entire cycle of abuse and often criminality is continued. The earth and humanity is burdened greatly.
I think the only "inconveniece" related to the subject of abortion is the horrible inconvenience of having to change ones thought process (perish the thought!) to actually look at all the myriad angles of view of an important issue. Not easy, and it requires the humility of admiting others' circumstances and thoughts have as much or more merit than ones own.
Being a parent is far too big of a job to trivialize with a word like inconvenient. Please stop.
Willy, you seem to be choosing your definitions and criteria in order to support your belief that abortion at any stage is wrong. Your main criterion seems to be that unique human DNA has human rights, but it doesn't necessarily have to be unique, and sometimes even if it is it doesn't count. It only seems to apply when referring to foetal tissue. Why is that?
Can you tell me which words definitions you have in mind?
Humans have human rights in some countries of the world. DNA has no rights, only an animal with human DNA has human rights. What I am saying over and over is you can DNA test an animal to find the species.
you can also test two samples to determine if they came form the same animal.
Do you disagree?
DNA test the mother and the fetus and you will find they are the same species but not the same animal.
Do you disagree?
It seems you might have gotten cot up in this "unique human DNA"
what I meant by "unique DNA" is DNA unlike the mothers.
DNA has no rights, only an animal with human DNA has human rights
OK, so now we're getting somewhere. So this depends on how you define animal. It seems to be from the moment of conception, based on the fact that there is then a collection of cells different from the mother's. Why do you take this definition above any of the other possible ones?
If you believe humans have more rights than animals, then why use this definition? What is it about the DNA being different from that of the mother that is so important that for you it defines the beginning of personhood?
Edited by - funkyderek on 13 August 2002 17:7:30
DNA has no rights, only an animal with human DNA has human rights
OK, so now we're getting somewhere. So this depends on how you define animal
Better phrased: WHEN do you define something as an 'animal'. I still maintain a fetus is no animal, human or otherwise.
Perhaps it would help if you ACTUALLY ANSWERED MY QUESTION.
Let me rephrase it to make it easier to understand:
What criteria other than having human DNA (which we have already established, I think, as not enough criteria on its own) --- what other criteria is needed for something to be 'human' enough that we should be concerned about its rights, in your opinion?
I'm trying to understand where you're coming from.
I know you weren't asking me, but since my last post was never responded to, I thought I would jump in...
What criteria other than having human DNA (which we have already established, I think, as not enough criteria on its own) --- what other criteria is needed for something to be 'human' enough that we should be concerned about its rights, in your opinion?
In my opinion, the criteria would be, whether it is an adult on life support or a fetus in a womb, the main criteria is will this life form progress into a fully functioning person? If the chances are more than minimal, then they deserve human rights.
Edited by - amac on 15 August 2002 11:26:28
If the chances are more than minimal, then they deserve human rights
Well, that's an interesting argument. "More than minimal"? You realize 80% of conceptions fail right out of the gate, as it were? That means you're already dealing with only a 20% chance of said 'group of cells' developing into a human. Factor in other birth defects, incompatibilities with the mother, accidents, etc. - it's a small wonder we can reproduce at all (I think persistence in attempting makes up for a lot ).
I think there ARE other criteria - but I don't think 'more than minimal chance of progressing into a fully functioning person' is it.
You realize 80% of conceptions fail right out of the gate, as it were?
First off, I was referring to post conception. I am not against birth control.
only a 20% chance of said 'group of cells' developing into a human.
This does not apply since we are discussing the human rights of a fetus which is post conception.
it's a small wonder we can reproduce at allWell, I don't know if you noticed, but it seems to happen quite a bit. I think it is safe to say that most fetus are expected to make it. I don't know the percentage on miscarriages, but from what I have heard, although it is a lot, it is still a minority. The other scenarios I can't comment on.
First off, I was referring to post conception. I am not against birth control.
That IS post conception.
80% of conceptions fail within the first 6 weeks.
we are discussing the human rights of a fetus which is post conception
See above.
