Forums Register login What's New?
Gallup: More Americans “Pro-Life” Than “Pro-Choice”
Page 4 of 5
  1. No. You have presented arguements that it is philospically not a human being. You have presented no scientific arguement.


    A lame personal attack is usually the indicator of someone who just lost an arguement.

    I'll let what I have said speak for itself. It is you trying to insert philosophy into the discussion.
  2. I really don't mean to sidetrack the discussion, but why throw in the Euthanasia debate into this?

    Everyone in this discussion is acknowledging that people have individual rights, yet the entire euthanasia debate is about taking an individual's right away from that individual.
  3. by definition, pro-lifers dont think women have the right to abort a baby.

    an euthanasia is about terminating life, similar to abortion and capital punishment
  4. True, but they also assert that the baby has individual rights.

    Euthanasia ,at least in most cases, gives an individual the right to choose when he wants to die.
  5. But there are questions.

    1) Should doctors be able to assist in suicide?
    2) Should doctor's be able to decide the fate of patients through mercy killings?
  6. It's a philosophical issue, obviously. The "science" you present settles nothing about what people consider to be a "being" who is due legal rights over the wishes of its host. The skin cells you shed every minute are "human", but they damn sure ain't a "being."

    What attack? I said that you couldn't be that naive. You are the one that came up with the nonsense statement--"Saying something is more worthy of rights based on the environment it is capable of living doesn't seems pretty science fictiony to me".

    What is wrong with that? We have philosophical discussions all of the time. Most of the discussions here are philosophical and very, very few are scientific.

    Science isn't the answer to social and religious issues.

  7. ​
    Yes, but only when the patient or his legal guardian request it and only in specific circumstances, namely:
    1. the patient is terminally ill (with two concurring diagnoses), and
    2. the patient is in unbearable pain​

    2) Should doctor's be able to decide the fate of patients through mercy killings?[/QUOTE]Never. Only the legal guardian should be able to make this decision and again only under specific circumstances:
    1. the patient is terminally ill and in pain and wishes it, while mentally sound, or
    2. the patient is terminally ill, in pain, and mentally unable to make a decision, or
    3. the patient is in a permanent vegetative state with no hope of recovery (with two concurring diagnoses).​
  8. The fetus's DNA makes it a homo sapien sapien, and a different one from the mother carrying it. It's a fact look it up. No one is arguing that is deserves rights above that of its mother. It is being argued that is owed the same rights.

    Also my skin cells are mine. They are all coded up with my DNA.


    You are the one spouting the non-sense about independent viability making the human fetus not a person. Being a cat or a dog makes something not a human. Being a human fetus makes something just that. A human fetus.

    It is also you who said the human fetus that is not independently viable is just part of another person. This is clearly wrong. If they were part of another person they would have that person's DNA, but they have their own DNA. How many parts of your body have DNA that is not your own?


    This isn't a religious issue. All people are afforded equal rights under the law. Until you can demonstrate that a human fetus is in fact not human then we should consider it to be one. Only at that point should the philosophical come into play.

    If you can show me how at say 11 weeks there is a chance that the fetus can turn into an orca or a condor then we can play ball. That might be able to happen. I don't know biology all that well. If it can't human zygote must equal human being.
  9. Yes, and no. I dont think a doctor should just be able to pull the plug on his own. Now if a patient is terminal and in a lot of pain, then if he or she wants to die, thats their business. This all goes back to religion. I know you have stated that your opinion has nothing to do with religion, and i respect that, but, would this even be an issue if not for religion? Same thing with abortion, while you may not base your opinion on religion, i would venture to say that most of the people who are against abortion, gay marriage, assisted suicide, stem cell research, etc. are that way because of religion.

  10. im not knocking your opinion or anything, but wouldnt the same beliefs make you come to the conclusion that every woman who goes through her natural monthly cycle and flushes out her eggs is a murderer as well?
(You have insufficient privileges to reply here.)
Page 4 of 5