abortion

[waheed]

ok first i wanna emphasize what im about to say is completely off topic and not related to abortion at all and dont quote anything i say

raki i can see where u r coming from, but its still very hard for someone to draw a clear line and say "this is when life begin". i know technically when sperm meets egg that thing will grow to become human, but u see, after the sperm enters the egg, it just start duplicating itself like any other cell. u do not have a mini version of a human and slowly grow big, u have a big ball of identical cells. and i mean IDENTICAL, from DNA to organs. these we can understand, because its the same as how any other cell grows. but then suddenly at some point, it receives a signal, and instead of duplicating to something thats identical to itself, they duplicate into DIFFERENT cells to form body parts/organs. we do not understand HOW the cells know what they should duplicate into and when they should begin. i dunno how much biology background u have to fully appreciate this but this is definitely something that will take decades or maybe even hundreds of years before we can understand. and i think if we should define where life begins, that moment should be, because its when the cells go from mindlessly duplicating into forming an actual human. its like suddenly injecting "life" into the ball of cells and they "come alive" to form all these body parts

and yes i purposely wrote a wall of text so only the cool ppl will take the time to read!

[Ishandra]

RAKI, do you know the actual, scientific definition for something being live?

If you look at the out-dated, simplified for school children, MRS GREN:
Movement, respiration, sensitivity, growth, reproduction, excretion, nutrition, then a fertilised Egg doesn't fulfill these, although it has the potential too. Viruses also dont fulfil these, which is another problem.


If you use the more up to date definition, taught in universities and accepted by most biologists, life is any system whereby <something> is able to replicate itself and both the rate and fidelity of replication are dependent on the structure of the <thing> in question.

This covers organic cells, viruses, AI (technically) and also Clay Minerals (the predecessors of organic life upon which the first proto cells formed).

So you could actually argue that the fertilised egg is only alive as part of the continuaton of the parents life, in which case killing it is still murder.



And waheed, the 'signal' you refer to is actually just the size of the ball of cells. It is written into is own DNA to start specialising once the number reaches a certain amount, which is measured presumably by the levels of hormones produced by the cells themselves, such as gonadothophin. Check out the link I posted it has most of it on there :)





I know my post might seem off topic but I only came in at page 5 so I'm not even sure what was being discussed at the time ;)

Is it wether abortion is right, wether certain people should be allowed to abort only, or is it 'what IS abortion'?

[RAKIdaRHINO]

well.. tons of definitions are retarded.. if it isnt dead, and it isnt alive then what is it? its not like its a rock until week x.

[waheed]

o rly its the size?

ive only taken a few bio courses as electives i dont major in it lol. i suppose u major in bio? just out of curiousity, if u cut the ball in half and let them live in seperate containers will it replicate itself and then grow to 2 ppl? i mean technically they are identical cells right?

[Ishandra]

RAKI, is stomach acid alive? Is bile alive? Is blood alive? Plenty of things arent alive but are still part of the living human system.


I'm british so things are a bit different here, but I have a degree in a biological science (animal behaviour :P ). As far as I know, if you remove some cells, more will be produced to bring the number back up to the same amount. They use the method to test for genetic abnormalities in IVF babies before implanting them into the Uterus. I'm not sure if the new group would also try to divide, but I'm guessing there is a limit so you would need a lot more than half the number for it to survive to the next stage of development.

Worth looking up though :) The uses of doing so would have a lot of ethical implications, like keeping frozen clones for when you think you might need a new kidney later in life ;)

[zim312]

This isnt really an "Abortion" centric thing at all.. Its just been labeled that, because everyone knows the end result of most abortions..

Its really the morality police (pro life) trying to legislate their values onto you where there is no option, all pregnancies even (rape/incest/retard) come to term unless god intervenes

vs

Pro choice.. which basically is just a womans body and what she does with it is her choice, and that includes terminating an accidental/unwanted pregnancy if she's not currently able to provide and nurture the baby herself..

Not really much different than some animals eating their young because food is scare so rather than let the babies endure the pain of starvation they end it before there is any pain..

[RAKIdaRHINO]

ishandra
stomach acid is an acid (duh).. i see what youre trying to say, but you still miss the target.. your blood your acids and your whatever are all part of you where as the fertilized egg represent something alien and unique. Once the egg is fertilized something a unique being is created separated from the parts that created it and (new) life begins.

zim312
it isnt just a womans body though, thats the "problem".

[Ishandra]

I didnt say the embryo wasnt alive RAKI, I was just showing there are things other than rocks that arent hehe ;) You can claim it isnt but its only semantics, because by the time your able to test for the pregnancy the embryo has developed enough to be considered as alive because it has properties which increase its chance of surviving to reproductive age.

I think its important to remember as multicellular diploid organisms, we are all a product of parts of our predecessors and also a product of the collective work of multiple unique cells (as well as some foreign species which live in our digestive system). This is no different to how the embryo is the product of the collective work of the sex cells involved in its production.





Also the thing I find ironic, its always stated as 'womans body, womans choice', but as soon as the baby is born its the FATHERS baby and the father has to fork out financial support, even though he has no say whatsoever on the choice of abortion.


RAKI do you believe abortion is always wrong or only in most cases?

TBH I think the facts have all been discovered and the only questions should be wether its right to kill in certain cases and what are those cases.

[RAKIdaRHINO]

ofc were product of our ancestors, and indeed our parents.. my point was that once fertilized those cells stop being their parents and start being something new, separate from what was there before. new life, not old life in new form :)

and yeah, its very funny that man has no say as far as the decision goes and then still has to take full responsibility for that decision. Part of me thinks that men should be able to wave their rights (and responsibility) to the kid. But i guess thats a bit retarded when i think of it. After all its not about what makes sense for the father or the mother, but what makes sense for the kid.

I believe that abortion is principally "wrong", but im still "pro-choice" and i have no desire to ban abortions at all, if anything im for legal abortions everywhere. I think there are plenty of "legit" situations for abortions and that most abortions happen for "legit" reasons. And i dont think that very many women that has an abortion takes it lightly.

[Ishandra]

Then the thread is concluded, in the words of Senator Kang: "Abortions for some, miniature american flags for others!"

[RAKIdaRHINO]

indeed : D

[zim312]

Raki : but without the mothers body, there is no place for the fertilized egg to grow into blastocyst -> embryo -> fetus -> baby

and no politician, or legislation, or forced morality should make that once "IT" happens, you have no choice but baby.. Fathers already lose the choice to decided by default since its not their body.. A baby wanted, or not is basically a parasite on the mother, and puts her health at risk.. As I said, whether the pregnancy is accidental, or intentional..
Within the 1st Trimester I believe the preganancy is also "Optional"

I'm also against any of the stupid lets call it murder/homicide if something happens that causes an undelivered pregancy to terminate.. ie.. you're in a car accident with a mother who probably shouldn't of been driving anyways, air bag, steering wheel, seatbelt, or whatever compresses mother's midsection, unborn child is lost..
you cant really say it dies if it was never born.. but I dont agree w/ putting someone in jail for life for this because some stupid right-wing politicians decided anything that causes an unborn child to become unviable is murder, and you're going to jail for life..

[Ishandra]

Is that law anywhere? It certainy isn't here in the UK.

Yeah mothers with unborn children get a LOT more press coverage and sympathy but the punishment for the person responsible is still the same.

[RAKIdaRHINO]

zim32
indeed, but without the womans body releasing hormones and **** into her system she would also push away the baby since its alien to her.. i think its quite irrelevant for the discussion where life grows tbh. is the new life dependent of its mom? sure as hell, but its still living and separate.

(ok realized i was discussin the wrong thing lol, disregard if you like =D)

Sure is, im not saying the mother doesnt have a say, im just saying its retarded to pretend like theres nothing there to remove in first place when youre going to remove it.

and if the father dont have a choice then why should he be forced to finance the parasite? And tbh, abortions also subject women to risk.. in some cases probably more risk than having the baby in first place. I think that argument is retarded as well.

I dont think we should look for excuses to have abortions, and especially not ones based on the assumption that theres no real life to remove in first place.

and ofc you can say it dies if it was never born.. i suggest you go to a farm, take an egg that is bout to hatch and then crush it in your hand and look at whats left.. if thats not "dead life" in your hand i dont know what is.

laws like that are a bit retarded though since youre allowed to expose the kid to increased risk by drinking smoking etc which by that logic should be classified as at least physical abuse.

[zim312]

http://www.nrlc.org/Unborn_Victims/S...aws092302.html

Unborn Victims law.. says 25 states so far have it..
there's a case here in texas where a teenage girl barely 1month pregnant doesnt want the baby, no money for abortion, so she and the accidental father try to terminate the pregnancy by hitting her in the stomach w/ random stuff, dropping heavy stuff on her stomach, etc..

parents find out girl is pregnant, alert authorities about whats going on..
boy is charged and is currently severing in prison for attempted homicide.. girl has the right to terminate pregnancy, so isnt charged with anything, eventually she does lose the baby.. boy still stuck in jail..

Texas: Under a law signed June 20, 2003, and effective September 1, 2003, the protections of the entire criminal code extend to "an unborn child at every stage of gestation from fertilization until birth." The law does not apply to "conduct committed by the mother of the unborn child" or to "a lawful medical procedure performed by a physican or other licensed health care provider with the requisite consent." (SB 319, Prenatal Protection Act)