Roe Vs. Wade Roe is jumping ship

[thraashman]

Oh people are gonna hate me for this.

Tumor - An abnormal growth of tissue resulting from uncontrolled, progressive multiplication of cells and serving no physiological function.

Well a fetus serves no physiological function for most of it's time as a fetus. The multiplication of cells is uncontrolled. And like a tumor if it's unwanted, there should be no reason why you cannot have it removed.

An unwanted pregnancy and a tumor are very similar and should be treated as such. Remove before it does more harm than good.

 

[josphII]

Wow, a fetus develops into a person after birth?
How exactly does that work?

well it all starts with a man and woman having intercourse. a mans sperm fertalizes a womans egg and life is created. this fertalized egg spends approx. the next 9 months in the womans uterus and is eventually deliveryed through the vagina, or c section. when the fetus passes through the birth canal or is otherwise delievered it is known from that point forward as a person. this person can now be counted as part of the census, claimed on tax returns, and even be given a name! wow!

Is it the exposure to air that causes that rapid developmental change?
If so, how long does that development take?

Im no physician so i dont really know the differences, if any, from a baby right before birth and right after. but once the baby leaves the uterus its a person, independent of all other things including exposure to air. for example if a baby is born in a vacuum it would still be a person.

Could you kill it right after birth but before it becomes a person?
I don't get it. Could you please explain the process to me?

no, there is no time delay. the instant you are born you are considered a person.

What if a doctor does a C-section at 8 months?
Is it a person then? Or should you still be able to kill it for another month?
What if it's at 6 months gestation?
Does that give you 3 months to decide if you want to keep the baby or kill it?

no, if you are born premature you have still been born, thus you considered a person.

 

[jaydee]

I know this is old, but I'd like to throw my voice out there. I'm Pro-choice. Women have every right to choose whether or not to have reckless sex which may result in a pregnancy. [French accent] It's called cause and effect [/French accent]. Once a pregnancy has occurred though, the choice has been made. With this choice comes with responsibilty to have the child and in most cases raise the kid. People who call themselves pro-choice, should consider themselves pro-irresponsibility. That's what an abortion is, an irresponsible action on the part of the mother.

Three of the finest people I know were adopted. The notion that unwanted babies end up a burden to society is an ignorant one at best, and a blantant often-wrong stereotype at worst.

 

[josphII]

Originally posted by: jaydee
I know this is old, but I'd like to throw my voice out there. I'm Pro-choice. Women have every right to choose whether or not to have reckless sex which may result in a pregnancy. [French accent] It's called cause and effect [/French accent]. Once a pregnancy has occurred though, the choice has been made. With this choice comes with responsibilty to have the child and in most cases raise the kid. People who call themselves pro-choice, should consider themselves pro-irresponsibility. That's what an abortion is, an irresponsible action on the part of the mother.

Three of the finest people I know were adopted. The notion that unwanted babies end up a burden to society is an ignorant one at best, and a blantant often-wrong stereotype at worst.

1) why do you care if somebody is irresponsible or not?
2) "The notion that unwanted babies end up a burden to society is an ignorant one at best" <-- this has GOT to be a joke

 

[DT4K]

Thraashman,
you are so ridiculous that I debated whether to even respond. But,
The growth and development of a fetus is not uncontrolled. Maybe you've heard about a little thing called DNA. Or maybe not. You see, DNA carries a blueprint that defines how that fetus will develop into a full-term baby.
A tumor does not develop arms, legs, heart, lungs, brain, eyes, ears, etc.


JosphII,
I don't give a fu(k when the law considers you to be a person. Under the law, blacks weren't considered to be complete people with rights either. The Germans didn't consider the Jews to be people. At least not people deserving of life or any other rights. The law and the government do not define what is right and wrong. Only what is allowed or not allowed.

Even so, why then is Scott Peterson being charged with 2 counts of murder. Could it be that under some state laws babies are defined as people even before birth? If that's the case, then how could killing a baby at 8 months gestation not be considered murder?

And yes, it is a baby. It is nice and convenient to be able to call it whatever you want. Referring to it as a fetus instead of a baby does not change the fact that at 8 months gestation, it is completely developed. It is a person. It has a beating heart, fully developed brain with active brainwaves including sleep patterns. It can taste, think, hear, see, and feel. How is that not a person? I'd like to know your definition of a person and why you define it that way. Not just the definition the pro-abortion crowd fed to you which you happily repeat without thinking intelligently for yourself.

And clearly you are not a physician. Or you would know that the only change that occurs after birth is that the baby is now breathing air instead of getting oxygen through the mother's blood supply. And the baby gets nutrition through the mouth and stomach rather than through the umbilical cord. These are not even developmental changes. They are behavioral changes brought about by a change in environment.

So the fact remains that there is no difference between this human from the time just before birth to the time just after birth.

The question I am asking is not how things are perceived by some people. I already know that. (It's not a person until birth, blah blah blah.)

The question which you will not and cannot answer is WHY.

Why do you believe that killing a baby(you can call it a fetus to ease your conscience if you want) the day before birth is fine, but killing it the day after birth is not?

 

[jaydee]

Originally posted by: josphII

Originally posted by: jaydee
I know this is old, but I'd like to throw my voice out there. I'm Pro-choice. Women have every right to choose whether or not to have reckless sex which may result in a pregnancy. [French accent] It's called cause and effect [/French accent]. Once a pregnancy has occurred though, the choice has been made. With this choice comes with responsibilty to have the child and in most cases raise the kid. People who call themselves pro-choice, should consider themselves pro-irresponsibility. That's what an abortion is, an irresponsible action on the part of the mother.

Three of the finest people I know were adopted. The notion that unwanted babies end up a burden to society is an ignorant one at best, and a blantant often-wrong stereotype at worst.

1) why do you care if somebody is irresponsible or not?
2) "The notion that unwanted babies end up a burden to society is an ignorant one at best" <-- this has GOT to be a joke

First I'd state that I really don't take you, nor anything you say on these forums seriously. Ever since the Patriots/Raiders playoff game thread where you threatened the life of Tom Brady and a football official as well as proudly stating favorably of your age, wealth and gential size in comparison to Patriots fans, I've wondered if you're an A.I. experiment gone bad, a monkey typing random letters on a keyboard, or just a real live idiot who's life revolves around sports to the extreme of which I've never met in real life. Nonetheless, I will respond to you this one time:

1.) I care because taking an innocent human life for a matter of convenience is wrong. If someone's irresponsibility ruins their own life, than I can't really say anything against that. When it starts affecting others, that's where society/laws should step in. It's the same reason I care if someone goes drunk-driving. It's not just their life that's endangered through their irresponsibility.

2.) Not all unwanted babies turn out to be welfare collecting bums. What's so hard to understand about that? I just got finished explaining that three friends of mine were adopted, and they are all fine citizens and pay taxes just like normal people.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: josphII

Originally posted by: ILikeStuff
<-- Die hard anti-abortion, because no matter what life brings you, there is no excuse for intentionally killing an innocent child

since when is a fetus a child? why do some people so insistently try to push their beliefs onto others? personlly i think a womans right to control what goes on in her body supercedes any rights a fetus may or may not have.

i'd like to point out that ALL of law is nothing more than people pushing their beliefs onto others.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Shanti

And clearly you are not a physician. Or you would know that the only change that occurs after birth is that the baby is now breathing air instead of getting oxygen through the mother's blood supply. And the baby gets nutrition through the mouth and stomach rather than through the umbilical cord. These are not even developmental changes. They are behavioral changes brought about by a change in environment.

So the fact remains that there is no difference between this human from the time just before birth to the time just after birth.

I am not trying to split hairs (which is really the whole argument if external support is allowed for fertilized egg, embryo, fetus, premature baby as they all have potential to become more or less a full term baby).

However, the change to the lungs is not just behavioral, it's definitely a physical one....if you read my post above many critical things do not happen until month 7 (again this is just a loose sort of timeline)...physical differences can be caused by changes in environment / physical stimuli also. It's more complicated of course and in these generalities I am sure someone can tear apart things with exceptions and rarities, but this is a generalization and as such the way it normally happens. Some babies are under developed at birth and some over developed. Some have 6 fingers, some have none....

Also the lungs continue 'development' (not only growth) after birth. Almost any birth prior to the 9th month will result in a slightly undeveloped (8th month) to a majorly undeveloped heart (prior to the 7th month). I believe 'the human' starts around the 7th month and prior to that the fetus is only a potential human and has no more thought process than reflex / normal life support automation. Again though I do not think it is right to kill the fetus prior to month 7, but I don't think it is a person at that point either other than in looks.

I am not pro-abortion, I don't believe in it, however, I don't think my belief should be imposed on others and to me and especially since I have studied biology for over 7 years realize a fetus is not really even close to human esp. prior to month 7 other than in 'appearance', but if you take that further...in prior months of development the human fetus almost matches other mammals such as the pig, but that does not make us pigs in the species sense (well some of us anyway ).

 

[tart666]

Originally posted by: josphII

Originally posted by: ILikeStuff
<-- Die hard anti-abortion, because no matter what life brings you, there is no excuse for intentionally killing an innocent child

since when is a fetus a child? why do some people so insistently try to push their beliefs onto others? personlly i think a womans right to control what goes on in her body supercedes any rights a fetus may or may not have.

Personally, I feel that people should take responsibility for being loose and not using proper methods. Abortion is not a method of birth control. It is a murder.

Are YOU going to adopt to that child?

Just drop the child anonymously at any hospital or fire / police station. Jebus, what century do YOU live in?

 

[alkemyst]

Not all unwanted pregnancies are caused by irresponsibilities. Absolutely any time one has sex, no matter if tubes are tied, condoms, pill, etc are used there is always a very very rare chance of pregnancy. Even those deemed infertile sometimes end up pregnant at the wrong time for them, and for some going full term is not an option for various reasons.

A body model with no other skills that cannot risk stretchmarks would be an obvious one.

 

[DT4K]

Alkemyst,
Unlike some here, you have a reasonable viewpoint. At least there is a certain point in development before birth which you feel the baby is a person. But I have to take issue with a couple of things you said.

Obviously, the lungs are continually developing before and after birth. So is every other organ.
But there is no developmental change that takes place at the time of birth.
Yes, there is a physical difference between 7 month lungs and full-term lungs. But the only difference between the day before birth and the day after birth is that the lungs now breathe air.

I also disagree with your view that before 7 months, it is not a person.

What is your definition of person that makes it true after 7 months but not before?

18 days - heart begins to beat.
21 days - pumps own blood through separate closed circulatory system with own blood type.
28 days - eye, ear and respiratory system begin to form.
42 days - brain waves recorded, skeleton complete, reflexes present.
7 weeks - photo of thumbsucking.
8 weeks - all body systems present. Can hear outside sounds.
9 weeks - squints, swallows, moves tongue, makes fist.
11 weeks - spontaneous breathing movements, has fingernails, all body systems working.
12 weeks - the baby has nerves, spinal cord, and thalamus. (these are the required systems for feelin pain)
16 weeks - genital organs clearly differentiated, grasps with hands, swims, kicks, turns, somersaults
17 weeks - has REM sleep (dreams)
18 weeks - vocal cords work ? can cry.
20 weeks - has hair on head, can distinguish mothers voice from others
23 weeks - 30-50% survival rate for premature birth.
25 weeks - 60-90% survival rate for premature birth.

 

[alkemyst]

Thanks, I am trying to be civil in this as no matter when it's discussed anywhere it always devolves into heretic/fanatic/fighting speech based on beliefs and not facts and the sad thing is most of the advocates of either circle really know nothing of biology and are simply going on opinion, religion, or other none scientific sources.

I base fetus = baby as free thinking and capable of living on it's own provided food and shelter are provided. I don't expect the infant to be able to find food or keep itself warm or fend off the neighbor's dog...but I would expect it to be able to survive without medical support and live a completely normal life. I don't always agree that live's saved are wise when a lot of suffering is happening, nature has a reason sometimes of allowing one to die and even in the wild, intelligent species will kill quickly members of their group which will suffer longterm permanently...I believe there is something to that.

The above is true based on some timelines, but sort of not totally complete either. Nerves/spinal cord/thalamus are required to feel pain, but that doesn't mean it's more than a reflex...feeling and percieving are very different. When one is sedated pain is felt but not perceived. A skeletal system may be complete, but incapable of bearing weight. Etc....

The survival rates don't take into account future problems and many will say prior to the 23rd week 0% and only 10% in week 25...things are coming a long way though, however, those babies still experience ongoing lifetime problems most of the time, some ending up dying later on in childhood due to very poorly developed systems.

It's a very hard science as not much experimentation can really be done and how do we know if thought processes are happening or not. I am also just well-read and not an expert as I have no actual clinical experience in the lab on embryos/babies and I am simply trying to make the most of other credible sources work. Most of the experiments I have seen involve indirect methods of testing which as anyone who is a scientist knows is not even close to the best of methods, but sometimes all you can do.

The pro-abortion groups (which hate being called pro-abortion, but that's basically it) will be pessimistic on survival and development and the anti-abortion groups will be optimistic.

 

[DT4K]

You make some good points.
But some of your comments could be used as arguments to justify killing children and adults with mental and physical abnormalities that may cause them suffering.
This idea is very dangerous. But it really is just an extension of the mindset that it's ok to kill babies before they are born simply because they are unwanted and therefore will endure pain and suffering in abusive homes. Many pro-abortionists argue that these babies are better off dead. I dont' think we have the right to make that kind of decision. It is not up to us to decide who is deserving of life and who is better off dead.

I have a cousin who was born at 23 weeks and the only long-term problem he had was asthma due to the underdeveloped lungs. In fact, as a young child, he was very intellectually advanced. Reading by age 3 and having a near photographic memory. He is now 21 years old.

But the survivability is really irrelevant to me. I don't use it as a measure of whether or not someone is deserving of the right to life. Yes, a 16 week fetus may not be able to survive outside the womb, but if it is not intentionally killed, there is a very very high likelihood that it will continue to develop and be born at full term in perfect health.

And let's be honest here. I do want to impose my views on others. We make decisions all the time about what is right and wrong and often we have to force people to do the right thing and punish them for doing the wrong thing. We impose our view that murder is wrong on murderers and punish them for their crimes. Is that unfair? We are imposing our beliefs on them.

The only difference with abortion is that there is not an overwhelming majority that believe it is wrong. But I do not judge whether or not something is right or wrong on what the majority believes. Slavery was wrong but the majority didn't think so.

 

[alkemyst]

That's pretty amazing that a 23 week baby survived 21 years ago. That was really pushing the odds even now at 23 weeks viability is not common.