Date:   11/21/2004 9:16:05 PM ( 21 y ago)
Hits:   1,727
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=706141

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

Why don't you dispense with defining "Person" for your own personal use or agenda. Why should I follow your definition as you presented it? It doesn't make sense.

I imagine you are quoting a study that shows most embryos are aborted at 2 1/2 inches so where is the reference or better post it here so I can read it. It's well known that data from the results of a study are open to study by anyone to insure against subjective interpretation made to favor your version of things.
You wouldn't accept my version of things if I said "No it's not that way." You would want proof. It's only fair to provide supportive evidence for statements in contention.

About the pain felt by the ripping and tearing of flesh (lol) in an abortion, by I guess a thumb-sized-embryo is unknown. Are you drawing a parallel between your adult-sized brain and some nuerons perched on something the size of a thumb? Pain felt is proportional to the size of the pain area represented in the brain. Large brain sized area covered, you get great pain. Small brain area covered, little pain. No pain area in the brain for that part of the body, no pain felt. Are you getting the picture? How big is that area in the thumb sized embryo as compared to the size in the adult brain or brain of a newborn? How can the thumb-sized-embryo feel pain when the nervous system isn't working, hooked up, developed. It would be interesting to know what study was done that deduced this falsehood.

It takes 2 years after the birth before there is any meaninful nervous system connection between the brain and the muscles of the anal spincter. This is why toilet training is delayed until around 2 years of age. The baby has no control before this and to toilet train before 2 years of age is cruel. As soon as the digested food is finished passing to the end of the colon it is automatically dumped out. There is nothing the baby can do about it. Your talk about the alleged pain felt by these thum-sized-embryos or smaller is what is specious.

You said the "child is in charge of the pregancy." Was this part of the case law for some purpose or something you just made up to help your argument along? Who is enabling the embryo or fetus or baby be in charge of the pregnancy? If it's so independent why doesn't it write a check for all the expense it's causing? I'll bet a lot of parents would love that. Particularly those who toilet train early a baby who is completely dependent on them and doesn't really know where his bowels are. Reread my posts and others under the subject: Is potential enough. And that written by Aspargus.

You seem to think there is an "irrefutable law" you are referring to that found it's way into the Canadian Criminal Code (or any code of law). Was it pertaining specifically to a case and part of case law? If that law was formulated specifically for that particular case then you are applying it out of context if you don't provide information on that case. How do I know it applies equally to the discussion here? Would you list the post if you explained the case at length on some other post? Why was the case brought to court for the purpose of defining a person in the womb? They can't sue anybody, or own. Have you lost sight of what your own common sense tells you is the real purpose nature intended for pregnancy? Was it to sue? Why do you need a definition of a person-in-the-womb?

I don't think anyone who is in favor of abortion if mother and fetus can benefit, would say that an embryo or the more developed fetus is a puppy. You made that comparison.

What proof do you have that I would feel cognitive dissonance at the abortion of a small embryo? Just knowing the dictionary definition shows you do not know how to apply it.

If you are a finished human being at the start of pregancy and a finished human being at the birth or end of pregnancy then what is the pregnancy for? This is your cognitive dissonance that cannot be resolved by lying about what constitutes a baby or a human being. Do you think that a small group of embryonic cells has empathy? Isn't this a main element that people look for that constitutes a human being?

Take the extreme of a pathological liar who would not feel cognitive dissonance about contradictions between his definitions of what a zygote, an embryo, a fetus or a baby or a child is. He would not feel any regret for the damage done by his misrepresentations. Pathological liars and psychopaths are hated and shunned by people because one of their main characteristics is that they don't have any feelings of empathy or regret when they hurt others. Movement is not the only function people look for in those they call human.
 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=706141