Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
BobbyLayne

A fetus is part of a woman’s body?

A fetus is part of a woman’s body?  

68 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

At conception and throughout pregnancy, the fetus is part of a woman’s body. IOW, a fetus is not a human being, irrespective of viability outside the womb.

Saw this clip from CNN (sorry for the lack of context - IDK the woman who said it) on a friends InstaStory. He had a laughing emoji and LOL sticker plastered over it. The poll question is verbatim quote, and I think reflects how most Pro Choice folks feel. Curious if y’all agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

viability has always been the turning point for me. a woman has a right to choose whether or not to host a zygote as much as any other infestation. there is still great argument what viability is, but it is what i base personhood upon.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My answer with most of these questions is simple: I don't know. Since I don't know, I think that choice should be left up to the person who has the fetus inside of them. If they make a wrong decision and there is a creator who considers it murder then that woman will face whatever consequence the creator deems suitable. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Osaurus said:

Lady parts are already confusing 

Yes, which is why decisions involving them should be left to the ladies.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So can you terminate the life of 1/2 of a siamese twin just cause you want to?

Not cause one needs to die to save the second but cause its inconvenient 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

So can you terminate the life of 1/2 of a siamese twin just cause you want to?

Not cause one needs to die to save the second but cause its inconvenient 

Is this one of those “knives kill as many people as guns” type of arguments? Because I can’t get enough of those. 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thunderlips said:

When can a fetus survive without being in a womans body?

With or without NNICU? I’m not a physician but I presume every preemie goes into irrespective of socio-economic / insurance status? So, 4-1/2 months (my guesstimate, please correct If wrong)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wikkidpissah said:

viability has always been the turning point for me. a woman has a right to choose whether or not to host a zygote as much as any other infestation. there is still great argument what viability is, but it is what i base personhood upon.

So if the fetus is medically “viable” the woman loses the right to determine how to deal with the infestation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, zoonation said:

So if the fetus is medically “viable” the woman loses the right to determine how to deal with the infestation?

viability=personhood. absent challenge of the implicit choice entailed in viability, yes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, timschochet said:

Is this one of those “knives kill as many people as guns” type of arguments? Because I can’t get enough of those. 

Just saying.  The logic to that argument makes absolutely zero sense 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Just saying.  The logic to that argument makes absolutely zero sense 

Your logic is off 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tonydead said:

It is until it isn't. 

It isn’t until it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems the 'pro-science' crowd doesn't embracing basic genetics when it does not suit their agenda.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Seems the 'pro-science' crowd doesn't embracing basic genetics when it does not suit their agenda.  

Genetics?

eta - also, how can someone be "pro-science"

Edited by matuski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, matuski said:

Genetics?

eta - also, how can someone be "pro-science"

Maybe they start by understanding what genetics means and go from there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, matuski said:

Genetics?

eta - also, how can someone be "pro-science"

Yes, the different set of genetic make-up and separate neurological system shows the fetus is a different biological entity with its own self-awareness.   'pro-science' would be the opposite of 'anti-science' (also flat-earthers) which is an accusation often thrown out against the right, even on this very forum.  

Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jon_mx said:

Yes, the different set of genetic make-up and separate neurological system shows the fetus is a different biological entity with its own self-awareness.   'pro-science' would be the opposite of 'anti-science' (also flat-earthers) which is an accusation often thrown out against the right, even on this very forum.  

You think a 4-celled embryo has self-awareness?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, -fish- said:

You think a 4-celled embryo has self-awareness?   

At some point well prior to birth it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

At some point well prior to birth it does.

No, a 4-celled embryo does not have self awareness, Linnaeus. At some point after developing a brain stem, perhaps.   But that’s biology, not genetics.  Genetics has nothing to do with it.  Most will simply stop dividing and be flushed out of the body of by their host.  

backtracking and claims of persecution to come.

Edited by -fish-
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, -fish- said:

No, a 4-celled embryo does not have self awareness, Linnaeus. At some point after developing a brain stem, perhaps.   But that’s biology, not genetics.  Genetics has nothing to do with it.

backtracking and claims of persecution to come.

Backtracking?  :lmao:...what a trollish approach.   Defining and limiting a fetus to being four cells is just stupid....goodnight.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Yes, the different set of genetic make-up and separate neurological system shows the fetus is a different biological entity with its own self-awareness.   'pro-science' would be the opposite of 'anti-science' (also flat-earthers) which is an accusation often thrown out against the right, even on this very forum.  

Of all the fields of science to choose, I think you whiffed on genetics.  Nobody is arguing that a fetus doesn't inherit genes.  

Still no idea what you are talking about again with the anti/pro science stuff.  Like saying you are pro or anti economics.  I don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, matuski said:

Of all the fields of science to choose, I think you whiffed on genetics.  Nobody is arguing that a fetus doesn't inherit genes.  

Still no idea what you are talking about again with the anti/pro science stuff.  Like saying you are pro or anti economics.  I don't get it.

:lmao:...goodnight.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon_mx said:

:lmao:...goodnight.  

I mean I use "basic genetics" regularly in my work (does that make me PRO science?).  

I don't claim to be an expert though, so please enlighten me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Backtracking?  :lmao:...what a trollish approach.   Defining and limiting a fetus to being four cells is just stupid....goodnight.  

"Basic genetics" is happening at the 4 cell level good buddy.

But again.. I think this isn't what you meant to mean.

Edited by matuski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, matuski said:

"Basic genetics" is happening at the 4 cell level good buddy.

But again.. I think this isn't what you meant to mean.

I meant exactly what I said, and you very well understand that the mother's genes are different than the fetuses.  And you want to ignore 99 percent of time the fetus is in the womb.  If you want to play ignorant while making the debate personal, forget it.  I am sick of this #### here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I meant exactly what I said, and you very well understand that the mother's genes are different than the fetuses.  And you want to ignore 99 percent of time the fetus is in the womb.  If you want to play ignorant while making the debate personal, forget it.  I am sick of this #### here. 

Yes - I know full well what you are trying to say.  Unfortunately, I think you are saying it wrong.  Which is why I asked about the use of "basic genetics".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, -fish- said:

No, a 4-celled embryo does not have self awareness, Linnaeus. At some point after developing a brain stem, perhaps.   But that’s biology, not genetics.  Genetics has nothing to do with it.  Most will simply stop dividing and be flushed out of the body of by their host.  

backtracking and claims of persecution to come.

You were off on the backtracking part

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dickies said:

You were off on the backtracking part

Was I?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

Backtracking?  :lmao:...what a trollish approach.   Defining and limiting a fetus to being four cells is just stupid....goodnight.  

He didn't backtrack.  He specifically asked about a 4 celled embryo, and you dodged the question, then accused him of backtracking.  Sad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Future Champs said:

 

He didn't backtrack.  He specifically asked about a 4 celled embryo, and you dodged the question, then accused him of backtracking.  Sad!

I did not accuse anyone of backtracking.  HTH.  Really really sad.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon_mx said:

I did not accuse anyone of backtracking.  HTH.  Really really sad.  

Sorry, you're correct, that was fish.  You did dodge the question though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Future Champs said:

Sorry, you're correct, that was fish.  You did dodge the question though.

He did not ask a question.  He made a point that a 4 cell embryo does not have a neurological system.  Ok fine, whatever.   But a 4-week old fetus does have one which is well into development.   We are discussing the whole pregnancy, not just the first few days.  

Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

1 minute ago, jon_mx said:

He did not ask a question.  He made a point that a 4 cell embryo does not have a neurological system.  Ok fine, whatever.   But a 4-week out fetus does have one which is well into development.   We are discussing the whole pregnancy, not just the first few days.  

 

1 hour ago, -fish- said:

You think a 4-celled embryo has self-awareness?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Future Champs said:

That looks like a question to me.

A rhetorical one.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

A rhetorical one.  

You claimed that due to “genetics” (meaning the combination of the parents DNA) there was a separate entity with a separate neurological system and self awareness.   If your statement was accurate, then a 4-cell embryo has self awareness.  Asking you to close the loop on your argument isn’t rhetorical at all.  Turns out, you didn’t actually mean what you said and there is a different line (probably closer to viability).  

Backtracking and claims of persecution are just a bonus of watching you flail at yet another argument.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dickies said:

You were off on the backtracking part

:bye:

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, -fish- said:

You claimed that due to “genetics” (meaning the combination of the parents DNA) there was a separate entity with a separate neurological system and self awareness.   If your statement was accurate, then a 4-cell embryo has self awareness.  Asking you to close the loop on your argument isn’t rhetorical at all.  Turns out, you didn’t actually mean what you said and there is a different line (probably closer to viability).  

Backtracking and claims of persecution are just a bonus of watching you flail at yet another argument.

You are talking about an embryo.  A fetus, which was the term I used, is generally considered to be after 8 weeks.  So while you are trying to find some way to attack my intelligence you have to change what I said.  Kind of ironic in a way.  Why can't you guys have an intelligent conversation instead of trying to play all these bull #### games?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're continuing to dodge the question.  You kinda somewhat acknowledged that yes maybe the four celled embryo doesn't have self awareness, but for some reason you haven't outright stated it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The Future Champs said:

You're continuing to dodge the question.  You kinda somewhat acknowledged that yes maybe the four celled embryo doesn't have self awareness, but for some reason you haven't outright stated it.

I absolutely acknowledged his point twice now.  And I also politely pointed out he completely misrepresented what I said in his silly ad hoc comments.   This forum can be really pathetic.   There are very little intelligent discussions and countless ad hoc attacks and no acknowledgement of what absolute jerks people are.  It is mostly partisan non-sense.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the fetus is genetically different than the mom. It is also attached to the mom and is breathing, feeding from the mom. So it is more complicated than just being genetically unique.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.