Abortion: Mind vs Body

[PK1]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Look we all know Liberals are monsters, because they not only shoot Republican Congressmen practicing baseball, but innocent kids at a country western event. So we all know that liberals love to kill future democrat voters, so stop trying to talk them out of it. They are preventing future rapist and racist monsters from being born in the US, soon only God's people will be left, and it will be a better place...

A typical liberal baby that survives an abortion...

Grows up to lead the Democrat Congress.

 

[PK1]

So, no intelligent replies?

 

[Meister]

Moved to General Discussion.

 

[PK1]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

 

[Meister]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

 

[Chuz Life]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

The answer is In the vast majority of cases is NO.

There is no distinction to be made.

The legal definition for what a natural person is, is simply "a human being" or "the body of a human being."

If the ability to think was a requirement for personhood . . . We could just decide that leftardz are not persons and then. . . .


Wait. . .

 

[ABikerSailor]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

You know, National Geographic did a documentary about what it means to be a human, and this was one of the points they brought up. They talked about how it is our brains and our ability to think that a lot of people consider to make us "human".

They then showed various phases of development in the human brain. One of the more interesting things they talked about was long term memory storage. It seems that long term memory storage doesn't develop in the brain until between 1 1/2 and 2, which is why nobody ever remembers being born. They then asked if part of what makes us human is our remembered experiences, and said that if that was one of the criteria, then a baby isn't human until it develops long term memory.

They even took it a bit further and talked about how the brain isn't fully developed until around 18 to 20 years old. What I took from that is if teachers and parents don't want kids to do drugs, instead of just simply telling them "just say no", why not explain in health class from a young age how using certain substances can slow down the development of your brain and cripple your intelligence? I know that if someone can actually show me how something is harmful, I more than likely won't do it anymore. I quit smoking because it was hurting my teeth.

 

[PK1]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

Not much of a “life” when a zygote.

 

[PK1]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

The answer is In the vast majority of cases is NO.

There is no distinction to be made.

The legal definition for what a natural person is, is simply "a human being" or "the body of a human being."

If the ability to think was a requirement for personhood . . . We could just decide that leftardz are not persons and then. . . .
.

So, cons can’t think beyond black/white perceptions?
Did your mental development stop when you were born & became a “person”?

 

[Meister]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

Not much of a “life” when a zygote.

You asked, and I answered.
Now go pound sand

 

[Meister]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

The answer is In the vast majority of cases is NO.

There is no distinction to be made.

The legal definition for what a natural person is, is simply "a human being" or "the body of a human being."

If the ability to think was a requirement for personhood . . . We could just decide that leftardz are not persons and then. . . .
.

So, cons can’t think beyond black/white perceptions?
Did your mental development stop when you were born & became a “person”?

You have a preconceived answer to this....Why don't you just put it out there
for all of us to see.

 

[gallantwarrior]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Apparently, the liberal's MIND is still not able to function with significant comprehension beyond basic hunger, comfort, and snowflake triggers well after birth. So, triggered reflexes do seem to count.

 

[PK1]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

Not much of a “life” when a zygote.

You asked, and I answered.
Now go pound sand

You did not answer my Q on whether you differentiate ...

 

[Meister]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

Not much of a “life” when a zygote.

You asked, and I answered.
Now go pound sand

You did not answer my Q on whether you differentiate ...

Yes, yes I did, go back to my first post in your thread and slowly read it.

 

[PK1]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Apparently, the liberal's MIND is still not able to function with significant comprehension beyond basic hunger, comfort, and snowflake triggers well after birth. So, triggered reflexes do seem to count.

I hate to break it to you, but the MIND at birth is neither Liberal or Conservative. It is Libertarian.

 

[ABikerSailor]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Apparently, the liberal's MIND is still not able to function with significant comprehension beyond basic hunger, comfort, and snowflake triggers well after birth. So, triggered reflexes do seem to count.

I hate to break it to you, but the MIND at birth is neither Liberal or Conservative. It is Libertarian.

Actually, it is none of those three, because the mind at birth has no capacity for long term memory storage, and in order to be able to make the determination of which you would rather follow, you would require some way of storing information over a long period of time (long term memory), which a person doesn't develop until 1 1/2 to 2 years old.

 

[PK1]

Ok, let’s have a general discussion...

Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), and
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Life begins at conception, IMO....so no

Not much of a “life” when a zygote.

You asked, and I answered.
Now go pound sand

You did not answer my Q on whether you differentiate ...

Yes, yes I did, go back to my first post in your thread and slowly read it.

I stand corrected; forgot the “no” after your followup post.

 

[PK1]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Apparently, the liberal's MIND is still not able to function with significant comprehension beyond basic hunger, comfort, and snowflake triggers well after birth. So, triggered reflexes do seem to count.

I hate to break it to you, but the MIND at birth is neither Liberal or Conservative. It is Libertarian.

Actually, it is none of those three, because the mind at birth has no capacity for long term memory storage, and in order to be able to make the determination of which you would rather follow, you would require some way of storing information over a long period of time (long term memory), which a person doesn't develop until 1 1/2 to 2 years old.

Without LTM (long-term memory), infants behave in an adaptive way that reflects their Libertarian desires to be happy.

 

[PK1]

A “human” (aka human being) is defined as:
“A member of the primate genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens”.

Yes, a zygote at conception can be considered a “human”, but at the earliest stage of DEVELOPMENT.
Do “pro-life” (sic) conservatives differentiate between:
1) stages of physical development (BODY), or
2) maturity of the prenatal brain (MIND)?

Given that a fetus at 5 months after conception already has all/most of its neurons, and the females have all their eggs, one can argue the fetus BODY is too mature for ethical abortion.
However, the status of the fetus MIND is another story!

Even at birth, the baby’s MIND is still not able to function with any cognition (comprehension) beyond basic hunger & comfort. Reflexes don’t count.

Apparently, the liberal's MIND is still not able to function with significant comprehension beyond basic hunger, comfort, and snowflake triggers well after birth. So, triggered reflexes do seem to count.

I hate to break it to you, but the MIND at birth is neither Liberal or Conservative. It is Libertarian.

Actually, it is none of those three, because the mind at birth has no capacity for long term memory storage, and in order to be able to make the determination of which you would rather follow, you would require some way of storing information over a long period of time (long term memory), which a person doesn't develop until 1 1/2 to 2 years old.

Without LTM (long-term memory), infants behave in an adaptive way that reflects their Libertarian desires to be happy.

Although old folks with extreme dementia have lots of LTM stored in their brain, they act like babies because they cannot retrieve their memories. Sad.