Does life begin at conception? I think it does.

[Dirty Name]

And by the way, my reasoning isn't circular, stop calling it that. It just rests on a premise that you don't agree with.

The second point depends entirely on the first point being absolutely true, but which you have failed to establish as fact. When you make one assertion and fail to establish it as fact, then make a second assertion based on the presumptive truth of the first, that's circular reasoning. It doesn't make your position automatically false, it's just a logical fallacy and not a strong argument.

See the examples here: Fallacy: Begging the Question

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: Dirty Name View Post

Test your logic - if the child is a viable human being (with all the accompanying rights), should the choice still be hers to make?

Quote by: pikatore Of course not!

So you are opposed to post-viability abortions?

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: DirtyName Give me an example of a human life that doesn't qualify for basic human rights (i.e. life, liberty and the pursuit of hapiness).

An unborn child, two weeks from conception, does not, under current U.S. laws, qualify for basic human rights.

This is an opinion that prochoicers agree with.


Now...

Why should human rights be extended to such beings?

[Athena]

Life on earth began millions of years ago and it is all involved in the one consciousness. Honor all life.

[ZNFYRH]

Curious...

"an unborn child two weeks from conception"?

A child that hasn't even been conceived yet is the question now?

[Osborn F Enready]

Dirty Name said: Based on our founding documents, we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are life... I don't know how to make an argument any more simple or logical than that.

Thats the problem..... you take it simply, and stop when it suits YOUR subjective needs. You twist the meaning to make it seem as though a government of the people, BY the people, FOR the people, can use force against its own, for ideals only a portion of the people hold.

Like ending the SENTENCE when you did, which was not a complete sentence.

Who is our creator according to the forefathers, and the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution, the Bill of Rights?

"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals … It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789

In the Declaration of Independence, it says:

..and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them..

Natures God. Not the Christian God, not the Buddhist God, not the Muslim God.

Nature. What is the seperate and equal station of natures God? As you are born, THE INDIVIDUAL.

In the Constitution:
..and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..

What is "our posterity"?

descendants: all of the offspring of a given progenitor;

BORN citizens. In other words, to protect the liberty of they that lived, and those that come after them, born into the nation.

In the Bill of Rights:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

This isn't a nation based on Christian morals.

Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The MOTHER is a PERSON, in other words, A BORN, RIGHT HAVING ENTITY, with LEGAL STANDING. A fetus is a PART of the mother that is DEPENDENT on the mother, is not an individual, is not a legal entity, and is has NO RIGHTs except by application of the mother.


Don't know how to make it any clearer than that.

Nature allows abortion, and man is in no way in the power to TAKE rights they don't have themselves.

You can't take abortion from nature, and man can't come between a woman and her fetus, until it becomes a LEGAL entity.

A fetus is NOT a legal entity, a citizen, a named person, OR an individual.

Don't know how to make it clearer than that.......

Dirty Name said: I'm sorry - did I miss the part where you put forth a valid reason for making abortion legal?

You must have. Try re-reading.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: ZNFYRH Curious... "an unborn child two weeks from conception"? A child that hasn't even been conceived yet is the question now?

'from' implies distance, not direction. It could mean in either direction.

I mean after conception, not before.

[ZNFYRH]

I guess I have some kind of mental block...

Can someone logically explain to me why a newly conceived human child is any different from a near-complete gestated human child?

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: ZNFYRH I guess I have some kind of mental block... Can someone logically explain to me why a newly conceived human child is any different from a near-complete gestated human child?

The presence of a brain.

[ZNFYRH]

Other than development, I meant.

Why does a brain define anything?

What about lungs or a heart or a liver, or any other necessary organ?

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: ZNFYRH Other than development, I meant. Why does a brain define anything? What about lungs or a heart or a liver, or any other necessary organ?

Because the brain houses thoughts.

We are willing to allow the brain dead to die, because there is no capacity for personality.

For prochoicers, the same is true. They are willing to allow a child without a brain to be killed, because no personality has been formed.


In different terms...


They do not extend human rights to entities with no thoughts.

[Osborn F Enready]

The brain is the tool of volition, reason and perception.

[ZNFYRH]

Captain Chaos,

Then prove to me that a coma patient has thoughts.

You still aren't making it clear to me why the brain is any different than other organs.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: ZNFYRH Captain Chaos, Then prove to me that a coma patient has thoughts. You still aren't making it clear to me why the brain is any different than other organs.

Some coma patients do have thoughts. You can look that one up.

Others may recover thoughts. They have a personality, but it is on hold.

A newly conceived clump of cells has no personality.


The reason the brain is different from other organs is because it houses the personality. It is the personality that we value most.

If we valued a human body so highly, even without a personality, then we would not use brain dead folk as sources for organ transplants.

[Osborn F Enready]

Chaos said: The reason the brain is different from other organs is because it houses the personality. It is the personality that we value most.

What makes up the personality?

Volition, Reason and individual perception in application of the two, would you agree?

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready What makes up the personality? Volition, Reason and individual perception in application of the two, would you agree?

There are probably many characteristics that make up the personality. What you said sounds fine, but I imagine close analysis of the concept would lead to quite a few more components as well.

The personality could be defined in physical terms, analyzing the configuration of a developed brain - or it could be defined in terms of process, how we react things and the like.

[Osborn F Enready]

Chaos said: There are probably many characteristics that make up the personality. What you said sounds fine, but I imagine close analysis of the concept would lead to quite a few more components as well. The personality could be defined in physical terms, analyzing the configuration of a developed brain - or it could be defined in terms of process, how we react things and the like.

Good answer. As you may or may not know, I have no college education so I am truly interested if anyone knows the "legal tender" answer for what defines a personality, as taught.

I am sure someone from the well rounded Volconvo community will provide input if they see the thread, and specialize in an area that would know.

The volition, reason and application explanation is the best one, or most logical and realisticly applicable one to me, I have stumbled on.

[Captain Chaos]

Quote by: Osborn Good answer. As you may or may not know, I have no college education so I am truly interested if anyone knows the "legal tender" answer for what defines a personality, as taught.

College or not, you are obviously quite intelligent.

My secondary major was psychology, but I do not recall the definition of a personality. When I think of the word, I see in my mind a 3D image of a complex interchange of information occurring in the brain, interacting with the senses.

I think in pictures, though, so that might not help.

[Daedalus]

Women have about 700 eggs.

Each woman could easily have 15 to 20 children.

Any less than , Say - ten - and she is a de facto Abortionist.

[Dirty Name]

Quote by: Captain Chaos An unborn child, two weeks from conception, does not, under current U.S. laws, qualify for basic human rights. This is an opinion that prochoicers agree with. Now... Why should human rights be extended to such beings?

Because they are human beings.

Now...

Why should we deny them those rights? For what purpose? For what greater good?