Slogan/motto:
“Theist and atheist: The fight between them is as to whether God shall be called God or shall have some other name” S.B.
Reputation:
June 12th, 2012, 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
What characteristics does this embryo and an infant share that justify you referring to it as a "baby"?
They are alive, human and each have unique DNA. Those are characteristics.
What characteristics do you use to decide whether a human can be legally killed?
God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. ~John Bertram Phillips
Slogan/motto:
“Theist and atheist: The fight between them is as to whether God shall be called God or shall have some other name” S.B.
Reputation:
June 12th, 2012, 10:09 PM
elisabeth e
Don't attempt to confuse the issue by asking whether I call an embryo a "baby" or an "infant". An embryo is an embryo. The issue is what defines when a human can no longer be legally killed.
Your thoughts?
God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. ~John Bertram Phillips
Don't attempt to confuse the issue by asking whether I call an embryo a "baby" or an "infant". An embryo is an embryo. The issue is what defines when a human can no longer be legally killed.
Your thoughts?
My thoughts are that you've already confused the issue by labeling people who support the right for people to make their own choices, even if the consequence is as undesirable as women having abortions, as people who support "killing babies" which is an emotional appeal which distorts the truth. When challenged on what justifies you labeling abortion at any stage as "baby-killing" you want to keep the waters muddied so you are avoiding answering.
You really can't identify one characteristic in the photo I've showed that justifies the emotional attachment you've put on your position when you try to convince others that a 5 or 6 week old embryo is an "infant."
You can think of abortion as ending life. That's fine.
You can even campaign on the negative implications of what that means. There's enough bad consequences that go along with abortion that there's a really good argument against abortions.
Except when people undermine those valid arguments by going for the cheap and unrealistic attack of calling it "baby-killing."
It skirts all those real consequences and actually gives a girl contemplating having an abortion a way to justify the abortion because once she has a consultation with a doctor and has everything explained to her in plain and neutral terms, she'll see the juxtaposition of your position with the doctor and convince herself that an abortion is not really that big of a deal when it actually is.
They are alive, human and each have unique DNA. Those are characteristics.
Those are not characteristics that identify a living thing as an infant..
If you are going to refer to abortion as "baby killing" you need to give a justified explanation for such a label.
Now, what characteristics does an embryo possess that justify you calling it an infant?
This shouldn't be so hard for you if you are actually justified. So far, you keep dodging the question and giving answers to questions I did not ask. Could it be that you are not justified in your assessment that the picture I showed is an infant?
Slogan/motto:
“Theist and atheist: The fight between them is as to whether God shall be called God or shall have some other name” S.B.
Reputation:
June 13th, 2012, 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
My thoughts are that you've already confused the issue by labeling people who support the right for people to make their own choices, even if the consequence is as undesirable as women having abortions, as people who support "killing babies" which is an emotional appeal which distorts the truth. When challenged on what justifies you labeling abortion at any stage as "baby-killing" you want to keep the waters muddied so you are avoiding answering.
Stop trying to devolve this into word games and semantics. I said "an embryo is an embryo". You seem to need a differentiation so that you may rationalize your defense of abortion remaining legal.
Do I care what you call what you're killing?
Not at all. This is confusing the issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
You really can't identify one characteristic in the photo I've showed that justifies the emotional attachment you've put on your position when you try to convince others that a 5 or 6 week old embryo is an "infant."
I am not trying to convince you of this. See above. However, what an embryo is, is not defined solely by sight. It is human. It is alive and it has unique DNA.
You paste that photo because you think that unless it looks "human" it can be legally killed. When else can an innocent human be legally killed?
It's time to put your cards on the table.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
You can think of abortion as ending life. That's fine.
It's also an indisputable scientific fact. So, there's that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
You can even campaign on the negative implications of what that means. There's enough bad consequences that go along with abortion that there's a really good argument against abortions.
Except when people undermine those valid arguments by going for the cheap and unrealistic attack of calling it "baby-killing."
It skirts all those real consequences and actually gives a girl contemplating having an abortion a way to justify the abortion because once she has a consultation with a doctor and has everything explained to her in plain and neutral terms, she'll see the juxtaposition of your position with the doctor and convince herself that an abortion is not really that big of a deal when it actually is.
Those are my thoughts.
My thoughts are that you are playing trivial word games over the semantics behind "infant" or "baby" so that you can rationalize supporting the legal ending innocent human life.
When is an innocent human life worthy of legal protection?
First it was cognizance then it was visible characteristics. What criteria or characteristics must a human possess before you no longer support laws saying it is legal to kill it indiscriminately?
God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. ~John Bertram Phillips
Stop trying to devolve this into word games and semantics. I said "an embryo is an embryo". You seem to need a differentiation so that you may rationalize your defense of abortion remaining legal.
Do I care what you call what you're killing?
Not at all. This is confusing the issue.
I am not trying to convince you of this. See above. However, what an embryo is, is not defined solely by sight. It is human. It is alive and it has unique DNA.
You paste that photo because you think that unless it looks "human" it can be legally killed. When else can an innocent human be legally killed?
It's time to put your cards on the table.
It's also an indisputable scientific fact. So, there's that.
My thoughts are that you are playing trivial word games over the semantics behind "infant" or "baby" so that you can rationalize supporting the legal ending innocent human life.
When is an innocent human life worthy of legal protection?
First it was cognizance then it was visible characteristics. What criteria or characteristics must a human possess before you no longer support laws saying it is legal to kill it indiscriminately?
So what you are saying is that you can't identify that human as an infant.
Slogan/motto:
“Theist and atheist: The fight between them is as to whether God shall be called God or shall have some other name” S.B.
Reputation:
June 13th, 2012, 01:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by elisabeth e
So what you are saying is that you can't identify that human as an infant.
Good. That's a start.
I am not arguing that an embryo is an infant. You are simply playing meaningless word games and knocking down strawmen.
A start would be you actually answering questions rather than cherry picking by only responding to that which you feel helps your argument.
When is an innocent human life worthy of legal protection? What characteristics must a human first possess before you will oppose being able to legally kill it?
Stop trying to debate meaningless semantics.
God is not discoverable or demonstrable by purely scientific means, unfortunately for the scientifically minded. But that really proves nothing. It simply means that the wrong instruments are being used for the job. ~John Bertram Phillips
I am not arguing that an embryo is an infant. You are simply playing meaningless word games and knocking down strawmen.
A start would be you actually answering questions rather than cherry picking by only responding to that which you feel helps your argument.
When is an innocent human life worthy of legal protection? What characteristics must a human first possess before you will oppose being able to legally kill it?
Stop trying to debate meaningless semantics.
Semantics aren't meaningless when they help get down to the nitty gritty that I don't support baby-killing even though I have been continuously accused of as much.
Whenever you are ready to concede that I don't support baby-killing, we can move on to your question.
I am not trying to convince you of this. See above. However, what an embryo is, is not defined solely by sight. It is human. It is alive and it has unique DNA.
Billions of cells in our bodies are human, are alive, and have unique DNA. This is not what defines them, however. What defines them is their purpose.
Embryonic cells have the purpose of becoming a human being, but that does not make them human beings, themselves. And at what exact point enough of them have developed and systematized themselves into a human being is unknown to us. Though we know that they will do this if they are able.
This is why we have the controversy that we do regarding abortion. Some people insist that a potential human being IS a human being. Others say it is not YET a human being and is still just a growing clump of cells attempting to become a human being. Neither side is "right" or "wrong" except by subjective opinion.
The two arguments are, then, that we should not allow people to abort developing embryos/fetuses because they are a developing human being, or, that we should let each woman decide for herself what is right or wrong regarding abortion because none of us knows for sure, and she is the one who has to live with the consequences of the decision. Both positions are reasonable, and that's why we are so divided about this as a society.
Billions of cells in our bodies are human, are alive, and have unique DNA. This is not what defines them, however. What defines them is their purpose.
Embryonic cells have the purpose of becoming a human being, but that does not make them human beings, themselves. And at what exact point enough of them have developed and systematized themselves into a human being is unknown to us. Though we know that they will do this if they are able.
This is why we have the controversy that we do regarding abortion. Some people insist that a potential human being IS a human being. Others say it is not YET a human being and is still just a growing clump of cells attempting to become a human being. Neither side is "right" or "wrong" except by subjective opinion.
The two arguments are, then, that we should not allow people to abort developing embryos/fetuses because they are a developing human being, or, that we should let each woman decide for herself what is right or wrong regarding abortion because none of us knows for sure, and she is the one who has to live with the consequences of the decision. Both positions are reasonable, and that's why we are so divided about this as a society.
Excellently-put.
Which is why I am pro-life in principal, but pro-choice in practice.
I am not arguing that an embryo is an infant. You are simply playing meaningless word games and knocking down strawmen.
Linear Mode
