What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

A fetus is part of a woman’s body? (1 Viewer)

At conception and throughout pregnancy, the fetus is part of a woman’s body. IOW, a fetus is not a h

  • I agree

    Votes: 19 31.1%

  • I don’t agree

    Votes: 32 52.5%

  • It depends (please explain)

    Votes: 10 16.4%
  • Total voters
    61
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.  
Click to expand...
A fetus has self-awareness? Even before the brain forms?

 
jon_mx said:
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.  
Click to expand...
No, you really didn’t acknowledge the point at all. You doubled down on your wildly inaccurate statement about a fetus having self awareness and when you got called out for it, you attack the the forum ad hominem style, throwing around words like “jerks” and “non-sense.”

Time to look in the mirror and maybe post less.

 
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.  
Click to expand...
Are you claiming a fetus (at any stage of development) has self-awareness?  Humans do not develop self-awareness until well after birth, usually around 18 months.

 
timschochet said:
I would like to follow him. But do I have to play pinball? 
Click to expand...
To follow him I believe you do.  To travel the same path as he did, no.  Ultimately the vehicle is a near irrelevancy as one travels.  The important things is to just get moving.

If you want to follow him stand like a statue, become part of the machine and then play by intuition, and forget not to use your sense of smell.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders said:
To follow him I believe you do.  To travel the same path as he did, no.  Ultimately the vehicle is a near irrelevancy as one travels.  The important things is to just get moving.

If you want to follow him stand like a statue, become part of the machine and then play by intuition, and forget not to use your sense of smell.
Click to expand...
I’m old, hung up, and normal. Can I try to gain his trust? 

 
jon_mx said:
Cesspool.  You wonder why posters of 15 years call the owner a bootlicker to get permabanned.   The lefties here are complete jerks and nothing gets done to reign them in.  
Click to expand...
Maybe you should stop the name-calling. Just a bit of advice.

 
timschochet said:
So now you’re comparing me to a pederast. Gee thanks. 

(I’m more the Cousin Kevin type. No fiddling about for me, just sadism.) 
Click to expand...
I made no such comparison.  I postulated that he would have global trust issues stemming from a particular incident, but not that you would be in any manner associated with that incident's particulars.  As for Cousin Kevin, I had forgotten about him, its been a long time since I visited that source material, has to be 40 years at least. 

I just googled Cousin Kevin.  I had forgotten how disturbed was that song/scene.  Wow, the release on the movie was 44 years ago.  It has been some time since I was exposed to that material.  I saw it in release but have not visited it since.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders said:
I made no such comparison.  I postulated that he would have global trust issues stemming from a particular incident, but not that you would be in any manner associated with that incident's particulars.  As for Cousin Kevin, I had forgotten about him, its been a long time since I visited that source material, has to be 40 years at least. 

I just googled Cousin Kevin.  I had forgotten how disturbed was that song/scene.  Wow, the release on the movie was 44 years ago.  It has been some time since I was exposed to that material.  I saw it in release but have not visited it since.
Click to expand...
Really? Several of the songs are on continual playlists for me. The original soundtrack is probably one of my top ten favorite albums of all time. My favorite songs are “1921”, “Sally Simpson”, and “Sensation”. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Please don't generalize like that. 
Click to expand...


Joe Bryant said:
Please don't generalize like that. 
Click to expand...
As usual you call me out.  Never the jerk who make the ad hoc attacks.   I did not start it.  It is the usual mob in here.  I am not the one who is always making it personal.   You have a bunch of posters on the left who personalize it with snarky comments then the mob that piles on and then they all report as soon as I respond. 

 
jon_mx said:
As usual you call me out.  Never the jerk who make the ad hoc attacks.   I did not start it.  It is the usual mob in here.  I am not the one who is always making it personal.   You have a bunch of posters on the left who personalize it with snarky comments then the mob that piles on and then they all report as soon as I respond. 
Click to expand...
I said please. 

 
jon_mx said:
As usual you call me out.  Never the jerk who make the ad hoc attacks.   I did not start it.  It is the usual mob in here.  I am not the one who is always making it personal.   You have a bunch of posters on the left who personalize it with snarky comments then the mob that piles on and then they all report as soon as I respond. 
Click to expand...
Did you mean ad hominem? 

 
The sophistry of trying to define a stage of human life as not human so that folks can self-rationalize their behavior has fascinated me.  Abortion is killing a living thing, a human thing.  Is it murder?  Is it a responsible choice?  Is it society's business?  Well murder is a legal construct, so no, not currently.  Should it be considered murder?  That is a societal question.  To answer the question for myself I ask why society wants to interject itself into a woman's reproduction.  Does society have such an interest in the subject that they ought to be able to dictate to a woman how she addresses the matter?  I have heard the arguments about respecting life, all life, and yet I do not have such respect personally and I don't think society can reasonably make that case for itself, not given how we treat or mistreat others.   I am of the school of thought that we, society, should not be our brothers keepers.  We can offer aid, but we should not dictate behavior absent absolute necessity.  Others are very much interested in having dominion over the choices of others.   To those folks I ask whether they have mastered life and its myriad choices, and if not what makes them think they are qualified to run the lives of others.

Me, I would stand aside in this choice.  I would allow a woman her privacy to do what is best for herself.  I would say that she is in the best position to understand the greater good for herself and for the developing human inside of her. I think that choice would be better informed without the sophistry since, if that breaks down for the chooser after the choice is made, it may lead to lasting emotional damage and regret.  The choice, if clearly and cogently made in the face of reality, probably not so much. 

To those that have an abiding respect for life and a concern for our collective humanity I can respect that.  I hope the principles which animate that belief also animate assisting others after the child is born.

My best to you all as you hash through this discussion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ditkaless Wonders said:
The sophistry of trying to define a stage of human life as not human so that folks can self-rationalize their behavior has fascinated me.  Abortion is killing a living thing, a human thing.  Is it murder?  Is it a responsible choice?  Is it society's business?  Well murder is a legal construct, so no, not currently.  Should it be considered murder?  That is a societal question.  To answer the question for myself I ask why society wants to interject itself into a woman's reproduction.  Does society have such an interest in the subject that they ought to be able to dictate to a woman how she addresses the matter?  I have heard the arguments about respecting life, all life, and yet I do not have such respect personally and I don't think society can reasonably make that case for itself, not given how we treat or mistreat others.   I am of the school of thought that we, society, should not be our brothers keepers.  We can offer aid, but we should not dictate behavior absent absolute necessity.  Others are very much interested in having dominion over the choices of others.   To those folks I ask whether they have mastered life and its myriad choices, and if not what makes them think they are qualified to run the lives of others.

Me, I would stand aside in this choice.  I would allow a woman her privacy to do what is best for herself.  I would say that she is in the best position to understand the greater good for herself and for the developing human inside of her. I think that choice would be better informed without the sophistry since, if that breaks down for the chooser after the choice is made, it may lead to lasting emotional damage and regret.  The choice, if clearly and cogently made in the face of reality, probably not so much. 

To those that have an abiding respect for life and a concern for our collective humanity I can respect that.  I hope the principles which animate that belief also animate assisting others after the child is born.

My best to you all as you hash through this discussion.
Click to expand...
The debate at hand is (and always will be) when the embryo/fetus/baby has rights that afford it the protection of the state.  What we call this being (sorry, I know even that word has a connotation) matters.  What we believe it to be matters and is the very basis for the conversation.

To be 100% honest, the mother is not a consideration in this point.  If it is a being worthy of state protection, she cannot do anything deliberate to kill it.  If it is not, then the debate can be had to whether or not she can abort.  Religiously, it is argued to be wrong at any point.  But we are not a religious state, so when discussing the law, religious discussion is irrelevant.

So how do we asses the personhood/citizenship/etc. of the being?  Viability of self-sufficiency (ala wikkid's comments earlier)?  Consciousness?  Brain waves?  A heartbeat?

So messy and such a broken, awful issue.  I wish I could do something to take them all and raise them in a home where they are loved, but I can't.  I wish I could spare the mothers from the mental/emotional/physical pain of the pregnancy that makes them consider an abortion.  I wish abortion wasn't even a consideration and every pregnancy was celebrated as a joyous occasion.  But this world is broken and we must deal with it.

 
Jayrod said:
The debate at hand is (and always will be) when the embryo/fetus/baby has rights that afford it the protection of the state.  What we call this being (sorry, I know even that word has a connotation) matters.  What we believe it to be matters and is the very basis for the conversation.

To be 100% honest, the mother is not a consideration in this point.  If it is a being worthy of state protection, she cannot do anything deliberate to kill it.  If it is not, then the debate can be had to whether or not she can abort.  Religiously, it is argued to be wrong at any point.  But we are not a religious state, so when discussing the law, religious discussion is irrelevant.

So how do we asses the personhood/citizenship/etc. of the being?  Viability of self-sufficiency (ala wikkid's comments earlier)?  Consciousness?  Brain waves?  A heartbeat?

So messy and such a broken, awful issue.  I wish I could do something to take them all and raise them in a home where they are loved, but I can't.  I wish I could spare the mothers from the mental/emotional/physical pain of the pregnancy that makes them consider an abortion.  I wish abortion wasn't even a consideration and every pregnancy was celebrated as a joyous occasion.  But this world is broken and we must deal with it.
Click to expand...
The mother absolutely must be a consideration in this point.  You cannot enslave women to raise a fetus she does not want, regardless of the fetus's status or protections. 

Let's say you grant the fetus protections as a citizen, this creates problems.  First, how do you handle abuse?  If the mother smokes or drinks alcohol does she go to jail for child abuse?  If she quits eating and the has a miscarriage due to malnutrition is that an abortion and now murder?  If a mother leaves the country and gets an abortion is that murder? At what point to you make the mother register with the state as pregnant so that the baby is properly protected.  What is the penalty for not informing the state that you are pregnant?  At what age do we mandate that women get pregnant so that they don't waste all those eggs that could be citizens.  If they don't get pregnant by a certain age do we force them to be surrogates for others who want children?

Bringing into the world a child that is not wanted by its parents is not a better proposition than destroying the fetus prior to birth in my opinion.  Life is abundant and not all life needs to be saved.  

 
Jayrod said:
The debate at hand is (and always will be) when the embryo/fetus/baby has rights that afford it the protection of the state.  What we call this being (sorry, I know even that word has a connotation) matters.  What we believe it to be matters and is the very basis for the conversation.

To be 100% honest, the mother is not a consideration in this point.  If it is a being worthy of state protection, she cannot do anything deliberate to kill it.  If it is not, then the debate can be had to whether or not she can abort.  Religiously, it is argued to be wrong at any point.  But we are not a religious state, so when discussing the law, religious discussion is irrelevant.

So how do we asses the personhood/citizenship/etc. of the being?  Viability of self-sufficiency (ala wikkid's comments earlier)?  Consciousness?  Brain waves?  A heartbeat?

So messy and such a broken, awful issue.  I wish I could do something to take them all and raise them in a home where they are loved, but I can't.  I wish I could spare the mothers from the mental/emotional/physical pain of the pregnancy that makes them consider an abortion.  I wish abortion wasn't even a consideration and every pregnancy was celebrated as a joyous occasion.  But this world is broken and we must deal with it.
Click to expand...
I would think the baby should not get protection by the State for the simple matter that it’s not a US citizen. The lawyers here might know it a court has set a precedent otherwise but the Constitution says the “born in the United States” and the fetus is not yet born.

Though we would protect an alien or someone on a VISA from murder. So I do suppose it’s slightly more complex than that. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How many pro life people adopt or fund programs to financially support mom and child until 18?

Or is it, let it live, then I don't need to care?

 
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 old fetus does have one which is well into development.   We are discussing the whole pregnancy, not just the first few days.  
Click to expand...
A developing nervous system doesn’t remotely equate to self-awareness, and 4 weeks is way too early to attribute sentience to the embryonic brain.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Terminalxylem said:
A developing nervous system doesn’t remotely equate to self-awareness, and 4 weeks is way too early to attribute sentience to the embryonic brain.
Click to expand...
My use of self-awareness was more just the ability to feel pain, not some conscience of existence.  Perhaps not an accurate usage, but to point out the fetus will have feelings which are separate from the mother who will be entirely unaware of the pain 

 
Terminalxylem said:
A developing nervous system doesn’t remotely equate to self-awareness, and 4 weeks is way too early to attribute sentience to the embryonic brain.
Click to expand...
My use of self-awareness was more just the ability to feel pain, not some conscience of existence.  Perhaps not an accurate usage, but to point out the fetus will have feelings which are separate from the mother who will be entirely unaware of the pain 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
  • Poll
Is Abortion After 21 Weeks Murder?
2
Replies
89
Views
2K
The Commish
The Commish
GordonGekko
Did Democrats Transition From Complacent 'Pro-Choice' To No Limit Pro Abortion Extremists? (6/28/22 21:38 PST)
Replies
11
Views
470
jon_mx
J
rockaction
We Need To Get Back To "Just Doing Things" Out Of Civic Duty, That We Might Realize We Are Part Of A Society
2
Replies
52
Views
1K
moleculo
moleculo

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top