Abortion Up Until Birth Act Fails In Senate.

stiggy wiggy said:
Wrong. Obstetricians, aka "BABY doctors" disagree with you. When my wife was pregnant with both of my sons, the doctor and nurses pointed to the sonograms and said, "Look at your BABY," not, "Look at that inchoate mass of cellular tissue." Where did you get YOUR medical degree? K-Mart?
Click to expand...
This tired argument is so stupid. Doctors say lots of things to patients:
"Let's look at your tummy"
"That bruise looks really angry"
"There's a nasty, sinister shadow on your lung"

This does not render the words abdomen, haematoma or tumour obsolete or wrong. In common parlance "baby" can be used to refer to both the born and the unborn, but when discussing abortion, using the term can lead to confusion. You seem to be accusing pro-choice advocates of using "foetus" in an attempt to dehumanise the unborn child. I would accuse you of doing the opposite, trying to equate the unborn with the born as if what happens to the one is the same as what happens to the other. "Foetus" is a neutral term. If you don't like it, choose another. It doesn't affect the reality of the entity in question.
 
stiggy wiggy said:
Too obvious to be stated. Man's opinion once decided that slavery was legal. What's your point?
Click to expand...
Legality, which is objective, mutable and enforceable is not the same thing as morality, which is subjective, mutable and unenforceable. Legality is man-made. Morality is allegedly a product of God, or at least it is for believers. God has no place in legal arguments, only moral ones. Murder is a legal term, not a moral one. More succinctly, the notion that Man's opinion of what is legal doesn't mean SPIT, is clearly nonsense.
 
BMS said:
Point taken but it perhaps should have said what shouldnt be legal. By definition, logic and observable reality, pro-choice abortion is murder, it just isnt recognised like that in laws. It was also explained to you using analogies such as the slave trade which was legal but immoral to some and not to others.
Click to expand...
You need to be clear that there is a difference between what, in your personal opinion should be the case, and what actually 8s the case. For example, in your personal opinion it should be the case that abortion be classified as murder. In reality abortion is not classified as murder. Your opinion is not just different from my opinion, it is also different from reality.
 
BMS said:
I read it and you seemed to be contradicting yourself as I explained,
Click to expand...
In what universe does "We disagree on the moral status of abortion" mean "We agree on the moral status of abortion"?
In your universe apparently. When you rejoin us in the real world, do let us know.
 
Temujin said:
This tired argument is so stupid. Doctors say lots of things to patients:
"Let's look at your tummy"
"That bruise looks really angry"
"There's a nasty, sinister shadow on your lung"

This does not render the words abdomen, haematoma or tumour obsolete or wrong. In common parlance "baby" can be used to refer to both the born and the unborn, but when discussing abortion, using the term can lead to confusion. You seem to be accusing pro-choice advocates of using "foetus" in an attempt to dehumanise the unborn child. I would accuse you of doing the opposite, trying to equate the unborn with the born as if what happens to the one is the same as what happens to the other. "Foetus" is a neutral term. If you don't like it, choose another. It doesn't affect the reality of the entity in question.
Click to expand...
Absolute rubbish, the medical profession almost always refer to the baby in the womb unless abortion might be likely. Since gender ideology tries to renders the words of biological sex obsolete, you arent in a position to lecture people like that. And the human being in the womb has words for more than the foetal stage that you always refer to as though its some sort of creature
 
Temujin said:
This tired argument is so stupid. Doctors say lots of things to patients:
"Let's look at your tummy"
Click to expand...

HILARIOUS. So in addition to stupidly not thinking unborn babies are babies, you also think tummies are not stomachs.

Temujin said:
"That bruise looks really angry"
Click to expand...

Stupid analogy. That comment does not call a bruise something other than a bruise.

Temujin said:
"There's a nasty, sinister shadow on your lung"
Click to expand...

Stupid analogy. That comment does not call a lung something other than a lung.


Temujin said:
This does not render the words abdomen, haematoma or tumour obsolete or wrong. In common parlance "baby" can be used to refer to both the born and the unborn, but when discussing abortion, using the term can lead to confusion. You seem to be accusing pro-choice advocates of using "foetus" in an attempt to dehumanise the unborn child. I would accuse you of doing the opposite, trying to equate the unborn with the born as if what happens to the one is the same as what happens to the other. "Foetus" is a neutral term. If you don't like it, choose another. It doesn't affect the reality of the entity in question.
Click to expand...

Blah, blah, blah. So tell us all at what point in gestation does a fetus become a baby. Is he or she NOT a baby five minutes before birth? Does the cutting of an umbilical cord automatically (PRESTO!) endow babyhood?
 
BMS said:
Absolute rubbish, the medical profession almost always refer to the baby in the womb unless abortion might be likely. Since gender ideology tries to renders the words of biological sex obsolete, you arent in a position to lecture people like that. And the human being in the womb has words for more than the foetal stage that you always refer to as though its some sort of creature
Click to expand...
Word salad
 
stiggy wiggy said:
HILARIOUS. So in addition to stupidly not thinking unborn babies are babies, you also think tummies are not stomachs.
Click to expand...
You prove my point, thank you. Tummy refers not just to stomach but anything in the abdominal area. To be precise, we say stomach, or in the case of the unborn, foetus.
Blah, blah, blah. So tell us all at what point in gestation does a fetus become a baby. Is he or she NOT a baby five minutes before birth? Does the cutting of an umbilical cord automatically (PRESTO!) endow babyhood?
Click to expand...
Shrug, been there, done that. As an aside, a nineteenth century Court case against a young female servant hinged on whether her dead offspring had taken a single breath before dying. At stake was the gallows or a short period of imprisonment. The law has to make clear divisions between one state and the next. Biology doesn't do that.

So, the short answer to your question is that it is the taking of a breath that legally defines a person from a non-person. In my personal opinion, a foetus should be treated as a person once it is capable of sustaining itself through breathing, so 20 weeks gestation.
 
Temujin said:
You need to be clear that there is a difference between what, in your personal opinion should be the case, and what actually 8s the case. For example, in your personal opinion it should be the case that abortion be classified as murder. In reality abortion is not classified as murder. Your opinion is not just different from my opinion, it is also different from reality.
Click to expand...
You need to be clear that it is a historical recorded fact that there were many who disagreed over the slave trade, so not my opinion. nor does your opinion change the dictionary definition or the logic
 
BMS said:
You need to be clear that it is a historical recorded fact that there were many who disagreed over the slave trade, so not my opinion. nor does your opinion change the dictionary definition or the logic
Click to expand...
The slave trade has absolutely nothing to do with my post, or the topic. Focus.
 
Temujin said:
You prove my point, thank you. Tummy refers not just to stomach ..
Click to expand...

Heh, you just shot yourself in the foot. "NOT JUST!" So it DOES refer to the stomach. Likewise "baby" does NOT JUST refer to a born infant, but ALSO to an unborn one. You screwed up. People with medical degrees, which excludes you, know that unborn babies are babies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS
stiggy wiggy said:
Heh, you just shot yourself in the foot. "NOT JUST!" So it DOES refer to the stomach. Likewise "baby" does NOT JUST refer to a born infant, but ALSO to an unborn one. You screwed up. People with medical degrees, which excludes you, know that unborn babies are babies.
Click to expand...
Please refer to what I actually posted, rather than what you think, or rather hope I did. I have acknowledged the fact that when doctors speak to expectant mothers they will speak about "baby", when referring to the foetus, just as they may say "tummy" when referring to the abdomen. Neither "baby" nor "foetus" are precise terms. Both are biologically incorrect when used as above. People with medical degrees, which excludes you, refer to the unborn as "foetus", or "embryo" as appropriate. They may also use "baby" or "tummy" when talking to lay people, when appropriate. This argument by label is ludicrous.
 
Temujin said:
You prove my point, thank you. Tummy refers not just to stomach but anything in the abdominal area. To be precise, we say stomach, or in the case of the unborn, foetus.
Click to expand...
We can say unborn baby instead of foetus.

Shrug, been there, done that.
As an aside, a nineteenth century Court case against a young female servant hinged on whether her dead offspring had taken a single breath before dying. At stake was the gallows or a short period of imprisonment. The law has to make clear divisions between one state and the next. Biology doesn't do that.
Click to expand...
Its a very good question which you still havent addressed. You are correct that biology doesnt make a distinction since the human being is the same entity from conception to adult, it is humans that attribute various stages such as embryo or adult. The question to you was not about the biology but whether the first breath or cutting the umbilical chord endow babyhood?

So, the short answer to your question is that it is the taking of a breath that legally defines a person from a non-person.
Click to expand...
In your opinion but not in terms of biology or necessarily in the opinion of the human being whose personhood you are denying.
In my personal opinion, a foetus should be treated as a person once it is capable of sustaining itself through breathing, so 20 weeks gestation.
Click to expand...
there is no such thing a foetus in biology, its a human being at foetal stage.
 
Temujin said:
In what universe does """ mean "We agree on the moral status of abortion"?
In your universe apparently. When you rejoin us in the real world, do let us know.
Click to expand...
I think you said " Does the cutting of an umbilical cord automatically (PRESTO!) endow babyhood?"
 
Temujin said:
Please refer to what I actually posted, rather than what you think, or rather hope I did. I have acknowledged the fact that when doctors speak to expectant mothers they will speak about "baby", when referring to the foetus, just as they may say "tummy" when referring to the abdomen. Neither "baby" nor "foetus" are precise terms. Both are biologically incorrect when used as above. People with medical degrees, which excludes you, refer to the unborn as "foetus", or "embryo" as appropriate. They may also use "baby" or "tummy" when talking to lay people, when appropriate. This argument by label is ludicrous.
Click to expand...
What complete garbage. Why put 'baby' in quotes? Why do you assume the doctors are referring to what you mistakenly think? They arent.
You now say 'foetus' isnt a precise term when for months you have insisted on using it instead of the foetal stage, and had it pointed out to you the human being in the womb has several stages, zygote, embryo and foetus whilst you just use foetus
The biology is that it is the same human being at different stages of development and not for you to dehumanise people to suit your convenience.
Your post is confused and ignorant.
 
Temujin said:
I have acknowledged the fact that when doctors speak to expectant mothers they will speak about "baby", when referring to the foetus,
Click to expand...

That means you're either acknowledging the fact that doctors disagree with your ignorant statement that a human fetus is not a baby, OR you think you know more about physiology than doctors. Which is it?

Temujin said:
just as they may say "tummy" when referring to the abdomen.
Click to expand...

Correct. Because tummy DOES refer to the abdomen. You're digging yourself deeper and don't seem to be aware of it.

Temujin said:
People with medical degrees, which excludes you, refer to the unborn as "foetus", or "embryo" as appropriate.
Click to expand...

Correct, if so, because unborn BABIES are embryos and fetuses. But I never heard my wife's doctor refer to them as anything other than baby.

You need to give this one up. You're botching your own argument to smithereens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top