I'm not disagreeing completely. Its just the anthropocentric viewpoint can become bothersome. We are not more highly evolved or a higher animal. Stick us out in Africa and if a lion decided to eat us we'd be toast. And you are really missing the point that I was trying to make with the sea urchin zygote. I probably made my point better with this post:
A zygote and a 7 week old human fetus are not really comparable, but what about a sea urchin zygote and a human zygote?
Olevet Posse - Dirty LibOriginally Posted by yermom
Gawd damn...I wouldn't want to get in a death match with Frag...that sob never gives up...takes on all comers and always a top contender...
So you are saying a 7 week human fetus should have some consideration and protection against having its existence ended? If so then our views aren't so different.
if that's not what you are saying then you are in effect saying a 7 week human fetus with a beating heart=a human zygote= a sea urchin zygote. A=B. B= C. Thus A=C.
To sum up your view: Human life holds no dominion or value over other forms of life. Am I understanding your premise right? I don't want to misrepresent your view.
Last edited by FaninAma; 1/27/2013 at 03:19 PM.
To some extent I agree with this. Or at least agree that to me it is more valuable than a sea urchin zygote. or for that matter a human zygote. A 7 week old fetus/embryo/whatever the you want to call it is different than a zygote. Is it alive? I'm not sure... There are lots of reasons I am not sure. I definitely think there should be some consideration before terminating it or for that matter any pregnancy. But I still think there are reasons for termination beyond just rape, incest, etc... Do I wish those reasons didnt exist? Yes. Do I wish people didnt need/want/whatever abortions? Yes. Do I still think it is ultimately the woman's (or the couple's) choice? Yes.
Definitely not saying this.
Holds no dominion would be correct. Gotta remember I am sorta a hippie. I think there is more value, but that is only because I am a human. But there is a lot of value in other life and biodiversity as well. And the way humans **** all over the environment and treat every other form of life as if it hasnt been evolving up to this point without really properly weighing the cost, benefits, and balances of what other organisms provide annoys the hell out of me.
Olevet Posse - Dirty LibOriginally Posted by yermom
Gotcha. Then I think that what youare saying is a human fetus' value is less than that of any other form of life that exists outside of a womb. And when I say "its value is less"I mean equal or less consideration or regard should be given to a human fetus as opposed to a dog, cat or even a lion in the wild. Do you draw the line at vertebrates or is invertebrate life included?
i think it has been established that you have respect for life but you feel there is a diiference in the relative worth of different forms of life.. I am just trying to find out where your break point is on being able to arbitrarily end the existence of different forms of life without repurcussions.
Last edited by FaninAma; 1/27/2013 at 03:54 PM.
To me, a human fetuses value in the womb is less than one outside. And it gains more value as it comes to term.
I think more consideration should ultimately be given to humans over other animals. But that's just it, I wish humans were better at actually going through the proper consideration before they made a decision. And thus were more considerate of the environment and other forms of life, because in my opinion although we have more value to ourselves we arent in any way a higher organism. We are just evolutionarily derived in a different direction.
Invertebrates, bacteria, etc... would all be included. Some organisms are more valuable than others. The "keystone species" or "ecosystem engineer" if you will. For example, without the salmon in the pacific northwest there would be no temperate rainforest. As raw elements from the salmon eventually end up in the trees along with the bears that eat them first. Without bacteria or algae there would almost certainly be no humans as the earth would soon become inhospitable. But for the most part each organism occupies an important role. Most of which we dont even have a good understanding of their ecology.
Olevet Posse - Dirty LibOriginally Posted by yermom
Thanks. I tend to agree that all life deserves respect. Ending any form of life should be done for survival, ie. in defense of one's own life, for food, or clothing(if no other means are available and it is not done for fashion decoration)
Ending the existence of a human fetus fits none of those categories in the vast majority of cases. Most abortions are usually performed for reasons of convenience.
Olevet Posse - Dirty LibOriginally Posted by yermom
Don't dodge the question.
Do you not see that rejecting the legitimacy of questioning your position is precisely the technique used by totalitarians and religious bigots the world over? Do you reject the concept of acceptable difference of opinion and a preserved sphere of private morality in our society? Is it correct to impose your conception of right and wrong on the other 300 million citizens of this country?
Apparently.
"I don't know karate, but I know ka-razor!" - James Brown
he likes the fight in this post. he likes the resolve.
he'll take this post around and post it on any sucker's message board that's beat him 5 years in a row.
he learned stuff today.
For the record, this thread is both awesome and revealing
he likes the fight in this post. he likes the resolve.
he'll take this post around and post it on any sucker's message board that's beat him 5 years in a row.
he learned stuff today.
You call it dodging I call it not understanding WTF you are asking. Are you trying to imply that because I hold a firm opinion on something based on life experiences and am convinced it is the correct opinion that somehow I am like the Taliban? That is just ignorant and typical of the left's style of debate. When you run out of support for your argument start name-calling. I thought you were better than that. Guess not.
i dont owe him an apology - i think he's a doosh
or as somebody else said so eloquently - personally repugnant
It's reasonable because considering your background with the sciences, you have no excuse not to understand that your opinion is a personal opinion and is extremely fallible and that there is no scientific test to determine exactly when life begins or ends. One side admits to a myriad of possibilities. You say, despite a lack of evidence and based on faith alone that your view is the only view and that because of your view, you think it best to restrain others from exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights. Yes. Very Taliban-like indeed.
You want to survey the thread real quick to see which side is doing more of the name-calling? And for that matter, go check the names of the threads currently on page 1. We have two liberals being called idiots because of their political stances. You may disagree with them, but that doesn't make them unintelligent.That is just ignorant and typical of the left's style of debate. When you run out of support for your argument start name-calling. I thought you were better than that. Guess not.
Last edited by Midtowner; 1/28/2013 at 11:39 AM.