When is an embryo/fetus a human life?

I’ll keep playing along…Don’t the neck tatted purple hair nose ringers keep telling us American fertility isn’t where it needs to be…don’t they tell us we need to import Mexico’s people to sustain ourselves?
Isn’t the core American kinda becoming extinct?
So in other words, you favor positive eugenics to sustain the white population (not factoring into account that the contemporary definition of "white" is more inclusive than it used to be, and in past times, groups like the KKK wouldn't have considered people such as Irish Catholics to be one of their own. Pure "Anglo Saxon Protestants" are likely a minority). I'm not sure why you conflate race with the idea of a "core American" either.

That's cool and all, but that fails to substantiate whether or not a human embryo is a human life.
 
actually---the determination of brain death provides a prognosis of inevitable progression to death---
nobody recovers which is why termination of life support becomes legal
I've actually had to deal with this in my family and one aspect that never gets discussed, is the too often conflated ideas of what a person's right to life means when they are only being kept alive by a machine or machines.

It all boils down to the fact that every human being has (should have) a right to their life. However, that does not place an onus or responsibility onto care givers to keep that person (patient) alive.

Nor does it give care givers the right to ignore calls for reasonable care in ways that would hasten the patient's death.

Which translates (as the hospital ethics rep explained to me) - No doctors would or should pull the plug in a "brain dead" patient that might have even a fraction of the prognosis that any typical child in the womb biologically HAS!
 
So in other words, you favor positive eugenics to sustain the white population (not factoring into account that the contemporary definition of "white" is more inclusive than it used to be, and in past times, groups like the KKK wouldn't have considered people such as Irish Catholics to be one of their own. Pure "Anglo Saxon Protestants" are likely a minority). I'm not sure why you conflate race with the idea of a "core American" either.

That's cool and all, but that fails to substantiate whether or not a human embryo is a human life.

So in other words, you favor positive eugenics to sustain the white population
Anybody even half sane and paying attention should push hard to get the Caucasian population back above 75%…look around the world…it’s not a secret.
IMG_5916.webp

not factoring into account that the contemporary definition of "white" is more inclusive than it used to be
That’s not true at all….you speak of leftist concocted social construct
That's cool and all, but that fails to substantiate whether or not a human embryo is a human life.
A human embryo is a soon to be human just like an eagles egg is a soon to be eagle.
This shit isn’t complicated…..Be careful, don’t make yourself look stupid.
 
Anybody even half sane and paying attention should push hard to get the Caucasian population back above 75%…look around the world…it’s not a secret.
View attachment 1141047
Rubbish:

1753510200226.webp



That’s not true at all….you speak of leftist concocted social construct
It's entirely true.


A human embryo is a soon to be human just like an eagles egg is a soon to be eagle.
This shit isn’t complicated…..Be careful, don’t make yourself look stupid.
"Soon to be" and "is" aren't the same thing. Pretty simple.

But if you're worried about the white population declining, then supporting legalized abortion, or even killing babies after birth, for racial minorities would be a logical solution.
 
I've actually had to deal with this in my family and one aspect that never gets discussed, is the too often conflated ideas of what a person's right to life means when they are only being kept alive by a machine or machines.

It all boils down to the fact that every human being has (should have) a right to their life. However, that does not place an onus or responsibility onto care givers to keep that person (patient) alive.

Nor does it give care givers the right to ignore calls for reasonable care in ways that would hasten the patient's death.

Which translates (as the hospital ethics rep explained to me) - No doctors would or should pull the plug in a "brain dead" patient that might have even a fraction of the prognosis that any typical child in the womb biologically HAS!
UHM---even in a brain dead person-----the decision to "pull the plug" is left to the
responsible relative----not the doc. I am not sure I understand the explanation "prognosis
of a typical child in utero" means. A child in utero does not meet ANY of the criteria for
"BRAIN DEAD"----they even have electroencephalogram activity. The prognosis for life
independent of the uterus is---IMO---an entirely different issue-----sorry---I cannot discuss
the ethics of abortion.
 
I'm not convinced that it is a human life from the moment of conception (given that it doesn't have a brain, for example), but at some point during pregnancy, I believe it qualifies as a human life.

If people are merely arguing that it is a "potential life" from the moment of conception, then preventing a potential life from coming into existence obviously isn't the same as taking a life from existence. (If that was true, then if a person only has 2 children when they have the ability to have 5 means they should be charged with 3 counts of murder, and we know that is absurd).
A human being's lifespan begins at conception. That's a scientific fact.
 
That definitely was the Margaret Sanger approach....
no it wasn't. You have a link to Margaret Sanger suggesting killing
nonwhite babies? It is not even clear to me that she suggested 'getting
non-white women to abort' by pressure upon them to do so. It seems
to me that she understood that legalized abortion might lead to more
abortions in non-white women than in white women because of the relative
poverty and difficult social positions of non-white women of her time----and,
incidentally, of impoverished Irish catholic who tended
by virtue of religious pressure has "too many kids". People seem to want to
vilify Margaret Sanger as much as they can
 
UHM---even in a brain dead person-----the decision to "pull the plug" is left to the responsible relative----not the doc.
True. The decision is the family. However, if there is a good prognosis for recovery, the doctors (who are the ones who have to actually pull the plug) will not even entertain the idea.
I am not sure I understand the explanation "prognosis of a typical child in utero" means.
Okay, some point to the fact that a child in the womb (earliest stages of development) has NO significant brain activity . But, if you let them live long enough. . . typically, THEY WILL!

That is their "prognosis."

A child in utero does not meet ANY of the criteria for "BRAIN DEAD"----they even have electroencephalogram activity. The prognosis for life independent of the uterus is---IMO---an entirely different issue-----sorry---I cannot discuss the ethics of abortion.

Not trying to debate abortion so much with that info. I was only trying to explain that no doctors would even recommend "Pulling the plug" on a patient that is on life support - if that patient even had a fraction of the prognosis that a child in the womb typically HAS.
 
True. The decision is the family. However, if there is a good prognosis for recovery, the doctors (who are the ones who have to actually pull the plug) will not even entertain the idea.

Okay, some point to the fact that a child in the womb (earliest stages of development) has NO significant brain activity . But, if you let them live long enough. . . typically, THEY WILL!

That is their "prognosis."



Not trying to debate abortion so much with that info. I was only trying to explain that no doctors would even recommend "Pulling the plug" on a patient that is on life support - if that patient even had a fraction of the prognosis that a child in the womb typically HAS.
thanks----but it seems to me that the discussion whoever it was who gave it is kinda awkward.
There is no way to devise a non-awkward discussion of the "pull the plug" issue
 
no it wasn't. You have a link to Margaret Sanger suggesting killing
nonwhite babies? It is not even clear to me that she suggested 'getting
non-white women to abort' by pressure upon them to do so. It seems
to me that she understood that legalized abortion might lead to more
abortions in non-white women than in white women because of the relative
poverty and difficult social positions of non-white women of her time----and,
incidentally, of impoverished Irish catholic who tended
by virtue of religious pressure has "too many kids". People seem to want to
vilify Margaret Sanger as much as they can
Sanger was a eugenicist and racially motivated.

 
thanks----but it seems to me that the discussion whoever it was who gave it is kinda awkward.
There is no way to devise a non-awkward discussion of the "pull the plug" issue
I experienced it in real life.

Just wanted to share what I learned from it - as I had a very in-depth discussion with the hospital's ethicist - about the decision and where my concerns were, as an anti-abortion pro basic human rights activist.
 
I experienced it in real life.

Just wanted to share what I learned from it - as I had a very in-depth discussion with the hospital's ethicist - about the decision and where my concerns were, as an anti-abortion pro basic human rights activist.
thanks I wonder how many hospitals get to have an "ethicist"----probably one of the docs with
some extra training ??
 
thanks I wonder how many hospitals get to have an "ethicist"----probably one of the docs with
some extra training ??
I don't know whether they were doctors, too. They were not directly involved in my family member's care. They came to speak to me because the doctors who were involved could not or did not want to answer my questions.
 
15th post
I don't know whether they were doctors, too. They were not directly involved in my family member's care. They came to speak to me because the doctors who were involved could not or did not want to answer my questions.
not the treating doc----seems like a good policy to me
 
Here, let me help you out:

The unborn is an organism that is 1. alive;
You haven't substantiated why. An organism could easily be dead and unborn.
and 2. has human DNA. An organism that satisfies both of these conditions is a human life.
See above. Your premises suck.
Murder is the deliberate killing of a human life.
Wrong. With all due respect, try consulting a dictionary once in a while.
Murder:
noun

  1. the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
    "the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
Killing may be deemed lawful or accidental depending upon circumstances. Courts exist to sort such details.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom