quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

Somebody dying of a genetic disorder probably managed to implant into their mother's womb lining and develop from a foetus to something that could survive (at least for a while), after birth, so that comparison might be a little specious?

So somebody lasts thirty years instead of thirty minutes, it is still an arbitrary decision on where to draw the line.

quote:

I have a simple definition, a member of H sapiens who is born. Simple and covers all the bases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

I have a simple definition, a member of H sapiens who is born. Simple and covers all the bases.

So, ten seconds before they're born (after a normal nine month gestation), it is still okay to off them? I think you'd find that even people who are pro choice would be largely against that. And what constitutes born? The head outside? The whole body ("His feet are still inside you ma'am, so you can still take care of the 'little problem' if you want to.")? What about the placenta?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

I have a simple definition, a member of H sapiens who is born. Simple and covers all the bases.

So, ten seconds before they're born (after a normal nine month gestation), it is still okay to off them? I think you'd find that even people who are pro choice would be largely against that. And what constitutes born? The head outside? The whole body ("His feet are still inside you ma'am, so you can still take care of the 'little problem' if you want to.")? What about the placenta?

quote:

I'm fine with it.

quote:

Women have ended their pregnancies all through history and absolutely nothing will stop them from doing so now.

quote:

I see absolutely no reason to kowtow to religious nuts who would kill me if they got a chance.

quote:

What about the placenta?
It doesn't get voting rights, it can't marry, it can't drive a car or hold down a job. It's a pizza topping, rather than a viable part of the kid.
I think the legal definition most places is "something that's either been born, or can be kept alive outside of the mother's body".
That this isn't good enough to keep the sort of baptist who thinks that a woman's place is chained to the kitchen sink happy doesn't really bother me any. Why does it bother you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I see absolutely no reason to kowtow to religious nuts who would kill me if they got a chance.

Who are these religious nuts who'd kill you if they got the chance? And why do they want to? Are you that important in some way? Is anyone providing you with protection? Do you need donations?

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

Did you not bother to read the thread before posting or did you read one and decide that was all the wisdom to be gleaned from the entire series?

I read it. Would you stake your life or someone else's life on a study if you had a choice not to and if you don't, then all will be well, but if you do and it is wrong then you have inflicted an amazing wrong on fellow humans?

Ever go into a hospital? You stake your life on a study
Ever drive a car? You stake your life on a study
Ever get into an airplane? you stake your life on a study
Ever take medicine? You stake your life on a study
Getting the idea?


You can choose not to take medicine or fly on the airlines or seek medical care or drive a car etc, etc, etc..


Go live freely in the woods.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

Humans cannot set lines like this.

If humans don't, who does?

Do the Priest Kings decide?
Does some imaginary invisible thing in the sky decide?
Does a 5th century semi literate monk decide?

I prefer humans

This presupposes a decision must be made and in that vein why was a decision needed on the Jewish question in Nazi Germany when they decided to abort fully adult Jews? I suggest it is the same reason a decision is needed on when to slice babies up in their mothers womb. Self interest.

So, if I understand you correctly, you would leave it up to other humans to decide when to slice you up or take you off life support?

I am amazed you trust your fellow humans to make that decision and you'll forgive me if I don't.

A decision must be made be someone.
Should it be the me or the government?
I don't trust the government.

I say the government should butt out and that medical decisions be between patient and doctor.
If you want an all powerful government and a "nanny state" go for it.

quote:

A decision must be made be someone.

quote:

You know, at one time the latest scientific study said the earth was flat and everyone agreed with it because it was a scientific study.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

I cannot relate.

quote:

You know, if the decision must be made about when to optionally slice a baby up and vacuum it out of the mother's womb then perhaps the best person to make that decision should be the person this baby is and at the risk of sounding flippant you then must wait till that person can voice that opinion, to your (figuratively speaking) face, facing the person who wants him or her dead in order to avoid raising them instead of pretending the person does not exist based on the latest scientific study. You know, at one time the latest scientific study said the earth was flat and everyone agreed with it because it was a scientific study.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Would you say the same if you yourself were one day before that point, which moves as technology gets better at keeping premature babies alive?

So, the point where we can take a baby out of the womb without special reason is the point where they cannot survive outside the womb, pre-viability. This suggests "viability" outside a support system determines if you live or you die in our fair Republic, the land of the free and the home of the brave.

How much better can the age of viability get when surfactant, which is required for the ability to exchange gases in the body (the essential part of breathing) cannot be produced any sooner?

quote:

So, should your lungs develop surfactant issues then you are no longer viable and therefore no longer a person. If we use viability as the determinant for who has protection under the law then should you develop pneumonia and are no longer viable you now lose any legal protection and we can have you sliced up and thrown in the dumpster in back of the clinic your children took you to for this "choice".

quote:

Thats what RvW took out... the morality of this issue. Its a medical one, period.

quote:

There is a massive difference between the inability to produce something you could once produce and the inability to produce it at all.