DVDizzy Forum

Posted: **Wed Jan 04, 2012 2:52 am**

Disney Geek wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:It technically is another body, a body that is not the woman's own. A body with a heart, that beats, and is a human body.

No

Before it is viable outside the womb, a fetus is NOT another body, as all it's sustenance must come through the Mother.

I must also add that the "human body" arguement doesn't fly, as the sperm and ova that this fetus was formed from were human cells. It's a slippery slope.

Don't bother. Duster doesn't know fucking shit about biology. Just look at his recent post in the religion thread.

Posted: **Wed Jan 04, 2012 4:17 am**

Disney Duster wrote:
Dr Frankenollie wrote: But it's not entirely another body; for at least a few months during the pregnancy, the fetus relies on its mother and isn't an independent life.
It technically is another body, a body that is not the woman's own.

That's where your argument falls flat. It becomes a body later that is separate but what everyone else is saying here is true. It's a separate life but not a separate body. That's why the woman has the full natural right to terminate it. And if it's a natural right, it must be kept a legal right.

Posted: **Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:12 pm**

I'm going to forgive you for using words like 'dummy".

Anyway you are the ones who don't know biology now. Yes it is a human body and yes it does have a heart at two months. It is a body that is attached to another body but it is still a whole new body and life that you shouldn't kill. Pictures of a two month old fetus show it is a body, with arms, legs, BRAIN, and yes, a beating heart. Sperms and ovums are not bodies so your comparison don't count. Like I said conjoined twins have two individual brains but one doesn't get to choose to kill the other because it depends on it.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 1:30 am**

Disney Duster wrote:I'm going to forgive you for using words like 'dummy".

Anyway you are the ones who don't know biology now. Yes it is a human body and yes it does have a heart at two months. It is a body that is attached to another body but it is still a whole new body and life that you shouldn't kill. Pictures of a two month old fetus show it is a body, with arms, legs, BRAIN, and yes, a beating heart. Sperms and ovums are not bodies so your comparison don't count. Like I said conjoined twins have two individual brains but one doesn't get to choose to kill the other because it depends on it.

I'll say it before and i'll say it again, you know nothing about biology.

see this image image?

When people perform abortions they are doing it at the stage in the picture label anywhere between #1 to #18

What you're are describing which is #23 is rarely ever done when abortion is being done.

At 9 weeks is when usually when the fetus develop a brain heart etc however, they are barely at mere low minimum for function and operation. You can hardly even call that a "human".

The so call "fetus pain" people talk about is really debatable but many source have indicate that sensory pains and emotions wouldn't occur in a baby fetus until after 3rd trimester which at least after 24 weeks. That's basically #23 in the picture which I have already stated is very rare that abortion takes place at that stage.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:18 am**

Super Aurora wrote: I'll say it before and i'll say it again, you know nothing about biology.

see this image image?

When people perform abortions they are doing it at the stage in the picture label anywhere between #1 to #18

What you're are describing which is #23 is rarely ever done when abortion is being done.

At 9 weeks is when usually when the fetus develop a brain heart etc however, they are barely at mere low minimum for function and operation. You can hardly even call that a "human".

The so call "fetus pain" people talk about is really debatable but many source have indicate that sensory pains and emotions wouldn't occur in a baby fetus until after 3rd trimester which at least after 24 weeks. That's basically #23 in the picture which I have already stated is very rare that abortion takes place at that stage.

Super Aurora, you seem to be mistaken with the image you've posted; this chart of development only covers the embryonic stage, not the fetal. The numbers you're referring to are stages, and I think you're assuming they're actually weeks. Look underneath and you'll see the developmental age listed by the number of days. According to the chart you've posted, the stages of #1 to #18 that you're initially referring to is only 44-48 days, or about 6 weeks into development; most women don't even realize they're pregnant until they're 6 to 8 weeks along. Stage #23 is 56-60 days, or only about 8 and a half weeks, which is a long ways off from the 24 weeks you mentioned being pictured here.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 4:21 am**

That chart is freaky as hell and it's gonna haunt me in my nightmares.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 5:36 am**

enigmawing wrote:most women don't even realize they're pregnant until they're 6 to 8 weeks along.

That seems shocking to me. So, I have to ask: at what point after becoming pregnant do they stop having periods / menstruating?

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 6:47 am**

Since you seem so disgusted by the thought of "killing" something with "arms, legs, BRAIN, and yes, a beating heart" I assume that you've never swatted a fly or squashed a spider? They have everything you describe above and although I can't find any scientific evidence for it, I wouldn't be surprised if they had more consciousness than a foetus.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:10 am**

enigmawing wrote: Super Aurora, you seem to be mistaken with the image you've posted; this chart of development only covers the embryonic stage, not the fetal. The numbers you're referring to are stages, and I think you're assuming they're actually weeks. Look underneath and you'll see the developmental age listed by the number of days. According to the chart you've posted, the stages of #1 to #18 that you're initially referring to is only 44-48 days, or about 6 weeks into development;most women don't even realize they're pregnant until they're 6 to 8 weeks along. Stage #23 is 56-60 days, or only about 8 and a half weeks, which is a long ways off from the 24 weeks you mentioned being pictured here.

I didn't refer the #'s in the chart as weeks. I was able to read the captions below that.

either way, even if i made slight mistake on that, my point still stands in that the abortion usually takes place within before 24 weeks and that the fetus does not develop sensory pain at least some time after 23 weeks. Duster arguing of sake that by "killing" fetus, we are 'giving it pain and suffering" because it developed a heart and brain etc.

Also Yamiiguy brought up a good point too.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 11:50 am**

Lazario wrote:That seems shocking to me. So, I have to ask: at what point after becoming pregnant do they stop having periods / menstruating?

There are no menstruation cycles after fertilization. However, it's common for a woman to bleed some upon implantation; this can give the impression that a cycle occurred when there hasn't been one. It's also common for women with irregular cycles to not realize that they're "late."

It does get confusing though, since on top of this, gestational age (which is what the doctors will refer to throughout the pregnancy) and fetal age are vastly different. The beginning of the counted gestation takes place weeks before the actual conception and eventual implantation due to the way doctors calculate the estimated delivery date.

Super Aurora wrote:I didn't refer the #'s in the chart as weeks. I was able to read the captions below that.

Wasn't trying to nitpick or anything, but since you'd said abortions took place up to stage #18 and especially because you equated stage #23 with approximately 24 weeks, it appeared that you were counting each stage as a week of development (plus the captions were pretty hard for me to read, but I admittedly have bad eyes). Abortions are performed throughout all the stages pictured and well beyond, as the average gestational age of an abortion is 9 and half weeks; this chart only reaches 8 and a half.

Super Aurora wrote:either way, even if i made slight mistake on that, my point still stands in that the abortion usually takes place within before 24 weeks and that the fetus does not develop sensory pain at least some time after 23 weeks. Duster arguing of sake that by "killing" fetus, we are 'giving it pain and suffering" because it developed a heart and brain etc.

Yes, you're right in that abortions are rarely done after 24 weeks (it's illegal after 20 weeks in some states, 24 in others); only about 1.4% of all abortions happen after 21 weeks.

I won't argue the sensory pain, I'm admittedly no scientist and even the scientific community cannot fully agree on that. And personally, to me it's not a matter of "pain and suffering" anyway, it's a matter of humanity. And that's something I'm not entirely comfortable getting into here, especially since everyone's got a different opinion of when the fetus is only a part of the mother's body and when it's a being of its own. As most of you know, I'm currently pregnant, and since it's a wanted pregnancy I'm bound to biased anyway. But the thing is this: while I do have my own beliefs, I won't force those beliefs upon others.

Posted: **Fri Jan 06, 2012 8:50 pm**

Super Aurora, no, I was not saying that it's wrong because it causes the fetus pain and suffering. I am talking about living human humanity similar to what enigmawing said. The heart beats at two months which is the very end of your chart. It is a human heart that is beating. When the heart stops it is death. Stopping a human heart on purpose is murder. So it is technically murder. Abortions are allowed until after four months. I'm saying it shouldn't be allowed after two months. Though perhaps scientists clearing up when a fetus feels emotions or pain or thinks would be better. If you say that is at four months, that's not so bad, but you said so far they don't know and it's debatable? And stopping a human heart is still killing human life.

yamiiguy wrote:Since you seem so disgusted by the thought of "killing" something with "arms, legs, BRAIN, and yes, a beating heart" I assume that you've never swatted a fly or squashed a spider? They have everything you describe above and although I can't find any scientific evidence for it, I wouldn't be surprised if they had more consciousness than a foetus.

Except the fetus has human arms, human legs, a human brain and human heart because it has only human DNA.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:35 am**

Why does its species affect the morality of the action?

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:32 pm**

Disney Duster wrote:Sperms and ovums are not bodies so your comparison don't count.

Sperm and ova do have bodies. Just look at these Wikipedia articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ovum

The human body argument harps right back to the "mensturation is murder" fallacy. You could say that a woman who has her period is a murderer because her ova are human cells. You could say that a man who masturbates is a murderer because his sperm are human cells.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:19 pm**

yamiiguy wrote:Why does its species affect the morality of the action?

In a human society--where the majority are meat-eaters--human life is often held on a different pedestal than animal life.

Posted: **Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:41 pm**

Disney's Divinity wrote:
yamiiguy wrote:Why does its species affect the morality of the action?
In a human society--where the majority are meat-eaters--human life is often held on a different pedestal than animal life.

And that's quite understandable but I would argue that a embryo or foetus isn't human at the time where abortion is permissible. I think the abortion argument comes primarily from your own beliefs though as it comes down to questions of faith such as your definition of 'life' and 'human'.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:00 am**

People were giving out "Roses For Life" at our church today after services asking for a donation to defray the cost of the bus taking members to the "March for Life" in DC later this month.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:23 pm**

yamiiguy wrote:Why does its species affect the morality of the action?

Because a human killing a human is murder and is illegal.

Disney Geek wrote:Sperm and ova do have bodies.

The human body argument harps right back to the "mensturation is murder" fallacy. You could say that a woman who has her period is a murderer because her ova are human cells. You could say that a man who masturbates is a murderer because his sperm are human cells.

Do the sperm and ova have bodies in the sense of arms, legs, brain and heart? No. A body of arms, legs, brain and heart and human DNA is a human body.

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:49 pm**

Well I guess it comes down to your definition of life. If an animal cannot live independently then surely it cannot be classified as living? Excluding parasites of course. At what stage would you consider abortion murder? Even in the early zygote stage?

Posted: **Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:16 pm**

Disney Duster wrote:Because a human killing a human is murder and is illegal.

One could argue that killing other animals is just as much of 'murder' as killing human beings. And also, just because something is illegal (as deemed by the government), it is automatically immoral? I wholeheartedly disagree. Personally, morality isn't something that can be universally determined anyways.

Killing a human is apparently 'morally wrong' to the majority of the world, while killing other living beings - plants, insects, cows, fish, etc... - isn't a big deal at all. That's what I find so astonishing about this. We put ourselves in front of every other living being in the world for our own selfish gain, and thats ok with everyone. You kill a bug (who is atleast more alive than a fetus in the first months) and don't even think about it. You remove a sack of cells and it's deemed murder simply because they hold human DNA..

I saw a nice comparison a couple days ago on this subject. A fetus cannot live on its own - the source referred to it as a 'parasite.' Of course the child is alive, but before the actual birth of the child, there is only one living being there (the mother's). To quote: "Saying a fetus is a distinct living being is like saying my arm is a distinct living being. My arm is alive, yes, but you can’t murder my arm."

I thought that was interesting. :shrugs:

Posted: **Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:02 am**

Heartless wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:Because a human killing a human is murder and is illegal.
One could argue that killing other animals is just as much of 'murder' as killing human beings. And also, just because something is illegal (as deemed by the government), it is automatically immoral? I wholeheartedly disagree. Personally, morality isn't something that can be universally determined anyways.

Killing a human is apparently 'morally wrong' to the majority of the world, while killing other living beings - plants, insects, cows, fish, etc... - isn't a big deal at all. That's what I find so astonishing about this. We put ourselves in front of every other living being in the world for our own selfish gain, and thats ok with everyone. You kill a bug (who is atleast more alive than a fetus in the first months) and don't even think about it. You remove a sack of cells and it's deemed murder simply because they hold human DNA..

I saw a nice comparison a couple days ago on this subject. A fetus cannot live on its own - the source referred to it as a 'parasite.' Of course the child is alive, but before the actual birth of the child, there is only one living being there (the mother's). To quote: "Saying a fetus is a distinct living being is like saying my arm is a distinct living being. My arm is alive, yes, but you can’t murder my arm."

I thought that was interesting. :shrugs:

I agree. Humans are arrogant and selfish creatures.

DVDizzy Forum

Abortion: Good or Bad?