When is an embryo/fetus a human life?

[Leo123]

Carlin was passionate, brilliant, and hilarious.

WAS for a short while but then, turned into a bitter old man.

 

[toobfreak]

Carlin was passionate, brilliant, and hilarious.

Except this one time where his political prejudice utterly blinded him to the truth.

Carlin usually cut through the bull to get at the hidden truth underneath--- this time he cut through the truth to promote all of the whackjob bull fed to him.

Either that or one time, a republican guy refused to book him for a gig and he never lived it down.

And I have several of Carlins first ever released comedy LPs, including the one about the 7 words you can't say on TV.

 

[Midnight FM]

I don't need to watch any pro-life propaganda bullshit. Does the facial expression of a fetus in the womb make a screaming facial gesture as it is being ripped apart by a suction device? If it does, big ******* deal!

Oh it is a big deal in regards to defining a human life.

Besides, it is FAR better to be ripped apart as a small embryo than it is to born into a world as a slave.

Not at all. It's far better to be born a slave than to have your life taken without your consent.

Also, George Carlin had some interesting things on the subject. I'll show you the video where it he does. Will you watch your hypocrisy being challenged? I doubt it. But at least I can say I tried.

I consider George Carlin a crank who is uneducated on the subject he talks about and merely relies on a bunch of strawmen. As far as complexity is concerned, humans are superior than chickens in that regard. The rest of that video is, likewise, nonsense which can be easily debunked, which is why I would consider not using dead comedians as sources. You can read below.

 

[Chuz Life]

Because RAPE applies to any forced or illegal sex.

INCEST can be between two consenting adults of the same haplogroup, and because they consented and are adults, cannot be rape.

Ok, now please let's continue the thought process to its logical conclusion. Are you claiming that abortions would be or should be justified in cases where a pregnancy is the result of CONSENSUAL incest? Or no?

 

[Midnight FM]

A zygote IS a developing human being and WILL BE a human being once fully developed.

So it isn't a human being yet, then.

Both are the same thing, human life.

You've failed to substantiate that.

 

[Midnight FM]

Carlin was passionate, brilliant, and hilarious.

He's completely uneducated on the subjects he talks about and serves only to entertain similarly uneducated people. Most of the points he tried to make in the video can be easily debunked:

*Being unconcerned about the welfare of people after they are born - This is a valid point, and if a person isn't concerned about people's welfare after birth, I would say they are not "pro-life".

*Compulsory military service - A pro-life person could be against compulsory military service, and I don't think that any rational person could believe that a country could exist without a military. Likewise, people could only support war in the case of self-defense.

*Supporting the death penalty - This relates to whether or not a person is presumed to be guilty of a capital crime. A baby is presumed to be incapable of being guilty of a crime.

*Killing abortion doctors - This is an issue of vigilante violence. If a person kills an abortion doctor, then, again, they are presuming the person to be guilty of something. Whereas, a baby is presumed to not be capable of guilt.

*Hating woman - That's akin to saying that a person who believes that men should pay child support for their children just "hate men"

*Age of reason - I'm sure that many people who are indoctrinated with secular or atheistic dogma when they are children question it, and potentially become religious or spiritual when they reach the age of reason. What a person is indoctrinated with and potentially questions is entirely irrespective of whether it is considered "religious, irreligious", or otherwise.

*People being more important than chickens - Humans are superior to chickens in terms of complexity and consciousness. Many animals do things which would be considered barbaric if humans did them, and most humans do not commit crimes such as spousal abuse.

*A woman having a period being guilty of murder - This is a valid point if a person believes that a zygote is the same as a human life. Regardless, not all stages of pregnancy are the same, and likewise not all "abortions" are the same, due to taking place during different stages of pregnancy and involving different processes.

*A fetus being more important than a woman - This is only relevant if a person believes that abortion should be illegal even when necessary to save the mother's life, and, to my knowledge, most people don't believe this.

 

[toobfreak]

Are you claiming that abortions would be or should be justified in cases where a pregnancy is the result of CONSENSUAL incest? Or no?

Not really my position to claim anything based solely on a hypothetical.

• Two adult cousins having incest: their call to abort the child or not.
• Two minor cousins having incest: depends on many things, age, circumstances, etc., but ultimately comes down to the parent's call.

Abortion is always the last resort, abortion was medically devised to save the mother's life in a medical emergency, secondarily, in the case of say, an adult raping a child, etc., then enter the modern era, where abortion becomes just that third option and human life is reduced in value: have the kid, not have the kid, get an abortion, or just go out, get a Hershey Bar then go get knocked up again.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Ok, now please let's continue the thought process to its logical conclusion. Are you claiming that abortions would be or should be justified in cases where a pregnancy is the result of CONSENSUAL incest? Or no?

Good question. I'm still stuck wondering why he mentioned "same haplogroup"?

 

[Leo123]

So it isn't a human being yet, then.


You've failed to substantiate that.

It is a developing human being for sure. Abortion kills all that. Using the excuse that it is not yet fully developed ignores the fact that it has life. It actually is a 'being,' the kind you discount so you can kill with a 'clean' conscience.

 

[Leo123]

Not really my position to claim anything based solely on a hypothetical.

• Two adult cousins having incest: their call to abort the child or not.
• Two minor cousins having incest: depends on many things, age, circumstances, etc., but ultimately comes down to the parent's call.

Abortion is always the last resort, abortion was medically devised to save the mother's life in a medical emergency, secondarily, in the case of say, an adult raping a child, etc., then enter the modern era, where abortion becomes just that third option and human life is reduced in value: have the kid, not have the kid, get an abortion, or just go out, get a Hershey Bar then go get knocked up again.

Yep, exactly.

 

[Grumblenuts]

He's completely uneducated on the subjects he talks about and serves only to entertain similarly uneducated people. Most of the points he tried to make in the video can be easily debunked:

*Being unconcerned about the welfare of people after they are born - This is a valid point, and if a person isn't concerned about people's welfare after birth, I would say they are not "pro-life".

*Compulsory military service - A pro-life person could be against compulsory military service, and I don't think that any rational person could believe that a country could exist without a military.

*Supporting the death penalty - This relates to whether or not a person is presumed to be guilty of a capital crime. A baby is presumed to be incapable of being guilty of a crime.

*Killing abortion doctors - This is an issue of vigilante violence. If a person kills an abortion doctor, then, again, they are presuming the person to be guilty of something. Whereas, a baby is presumed to not be capable of guilt.

*Hating woman - That's akin to saying that a person who believes that men should pay child support for their children just "hate men"

*Age of reason - I'm sure that many people who are indoctrinated with secular or atheistic dogma when they are children question it, and potentially become religious or spiritual when they reach the age of reason. What a person is indoctrinated with and potentially questions is entirely irrespective of whether it is considered "religious, irreligious", or otherwise.

*People being more important than chickens - Humans are superior to chickens in terms of complexity and consciousness. Many animals do things which would be considered barbaric if humans did them, and most humans do not commit crimes such as spousal abuse.

*A woman having a period being guilty of murder - This is a valid point if a person believes that a zygote is the same as a human life. Regardless, not all stages of pregnancy are the same, and likewise not all "abortions" are the same, due to taking place during different stages of pregnancy and involving different processes.

*A fetus being more important than a woman - This is only relevant if a person believes that abortion should be illegal even when necessary to save the mother's life, and, to my knowledge, most people don't believe this.

Thanks for elaborating and good topic. Obviously, I disagree regarding Carlin.

He's completely uneducated on the subjects he talks about

He's been dead for 17 years now. I attended one of his last shows. I may respond further if time allows.

 

[Midnight FM]

It is a developing human being for sure. Abortion kills all that. Using the excuse that it is not yet fully developed ignores the fact that it has life. It actually is a 'being,' the kind you discount so you can kill with a 'clean' conscience.

A being and a human being aren't the same thing. One could say that a sperm cell is a being, and while it may be "human", it is not a "human being".

You've failed to substantiate that "developing into a human being" and "being a human being" are the same thing.

 

[buttercup]

A zygote IS a developing human being and WILL BE a human being once fully developed. Both are the same thing, human life.

I respectfully disagree. A zygote IS a human being, just in the very earliest stages of life.

But I've spent too much time here today so at the moment I don't want to get into this debate again. For the most part we agree.

 

[Leo123]

I respectfully disagree. A zygote IS a human being, just in the very earliest stages of life.

But I've spent too much time here today so at the moment I don't want to get into this debate again. For the most part we agree.

I hear ya. No problem, I'm not calcified in my definition of 'being.' It's all human life despite what the pro aborts spout. They think they own the definition of life. IMO, The fact is, no one knows anything about what life is except that it exists and is the reason we are consciously aware.

 

[BULLDOG]

.

Watch the film "Silent Scream" and then come back and say something so stupid.





.

That film means nothing. The fetus has never breathed air, and would have no reason to try to scream. They move their arms and legs, and yes, their facial expressions change, but it is much too early for them to have learned to express themselves through facial movement. The movement are more of a reflex or practice in using their muscles. It is unrelated to emotion. has nothing to do with pain or grief.
The brain regions responsible for processing and expressing emotions — like the limbic system — are still developing in utero.

 

[Grumblenuts]

He's completely uneducated on the subj

My further response, read all of this:

George Carlin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

That film means nothing. The fetus has never breathed air, and would have no reason to try to scream. They move their arms and legs, and yes, their facial expressions change, but it is much too early for them to have learned to express themselves through facial movement. The movement are more of a reflex or practice in using their muscles. It is unrelated to emotion. has nothing to do with pain or grief.
The brain regions responsible for processing and expressing emotions — like the limbic system — are still developing in utero.

.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Completely out of touch with reality.





.

 

[SweetSue92]

That film means nothing. The fetus has never breathed air, and would have no reason to try to scream. They move their arms and legs, and yes, their facial expressions change, but it is much too early for them to have learned to express themselves through facial movement. The movement are more of a reflex or practice in using their muscles. It is unrelated to emotion. has nothing to do with pain or grief.
The brain regions responsible for processing and expressing emotions — like the limbic system — are still developing in utero.

This is moronic.

Babies have ALL KINDS of reflexes when born and long after birth. As just one: rooting. As another, the grasp of both hands and feet. The stepping reflex. Does this mean they can be offed because they're "developing"?

Brains are developing until age 25. I guess in some people though, they devolve pretty quickly too.

 

[Midnight FM]

My further response, read all of this:

George Carlin - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I did a good job explaining why he's uneducated on it.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I don't need to watch any pro-life propaganda bullshit. Does the facial expression of a fetus in the womb make a screaming facial gesture as it is being ripped apart by a suction device? If it does, big ******* deal! Besides, it is FAR better to be ripped apart as a small embryo than it is to born into a world as a slave. Also, George Carlin had some interesting things on the subject. I'll show you the video where it he does. Will you watch your hypocrisy being challenged? I doubt it. But at least I can say I tried.

.


Cute post. Almost worth reading.





.