Welcome to Cutting Edge. Guests can see and read the contents of most of the boards on this forum but need to become members to read all of them. Currently membership is instant, but new accounts may be deleted if not activated within fourteen days.

If you decide to join the forum, please open your welcome message for further details. New members are requested to introduce themselves on the appropriate thread on our welcome board.

Members may post messages and start threads, but it is essential that they read our posting rules and advice before doing so. If you have any immediate questions or queries, please post them on the suggestions board.

After posting at least ten messages, members are able to contact each other and the staff through our personal messaging system.

This forum is administrated by Ivan and moonbeam and moderated by boatlady and astradt1.

Thank you for visiting Cutting Edge.

Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by GreatNPowerfulOz on Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:54 pm

First topic message reminder :

Is a fertilized egg a "person"...? Mississippi is voting on just that...an initiative to define personhood for the unborn.

Opinions? If the premise that a fetus doesn't have "the right to life" because it's not legally a person, then wouldn't changing the legal definition of a person to include a fertilized egg be a legitimate argument. After all, the legal right to an abortion in the U.S. is predicated upon the supposition that an unborn fetus is not a person...however, a huge contradiction exists because the law allows for the death of a fetus at the hands of a person OTHER than the mother as "fetal homocide" and "fetacide", a criminal offense.

My opinion, for those who don't know, is that abortion and the trivializing of the unborn erodes our humanity. As an atheist, I don't base this belief in religion but the unwavering stance that when we look at the unborn as mere "tissue" to be excised at will, we all lose some of our humanity.
avatar
GreatNPowerfulOz
Deactivated

Posts : 176
Join date : 2011-10-10
Age : 48
Location : Michigan, U.S.A.

Back to top Go down


Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by timeout on Sun Oct 27, 2013 9:53 pm

Shirina wrote:
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD wrote:but isn't the whole point of the internet to indulge puerile squabbles with strangers?
But ... but ... I thought it was for porn.   confused 
is the porn where we start off or end up?

timeout

Posts : 43
Join date : 2013-10-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Tosh on Sun Oct 27, 2013 9:57 pm

but isn't the whole point of the internet to indulge puerile squabbles with strangers?
But ... but ... I thought it was for porn.
I believe there is a genre of internet porn that indulges in puerile squabbles with strangers, but don't quote me.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by snowyflake on Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:13 pm

What???!!! There's more to the internet?

By golly, I learn me something new every day.......
avatar
snowyflake

Posts : 1217
Join date : 2011-10-07
Age : 59
Location : England

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Tosh on Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:34 pm

" but the unwavering stance that when we look at the unborn as mere "tissue" to be excised at will, we all lose some of our humanity."
Oz,

I agree to a degree, but using the term " mere " is perhaps an unnecessary adjective, I am sure few consider terminating a living foetus as an insignificant act.
avatar
Tosh

Posts : 2270
Join date : 2012-08-15

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Bellatori on Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:49 pm

stu wrote:Bellatori, you have yourself a bit of a problem in the end do you not?, as you have to allow your head to rule over your heart don't you. You are probably more religious than you think my friend judging by your posts, as they do not always seem the posts of an atheist (no offence meant). Now myself and I will probably get some flak for it? go basically by what the law states, so if an abortion is allowed up until a certain point so be it. Although I would prefer it not to be, one cannot do anything about it as such unless your mp votes to bring the age down of when the child can be aborted.
Your post made me smile. I am the least religiously inclined person I know. I took no offence, stu. Why would I? I know your posts are well meant. However do not confuse my concerns over abortion for concerns relating to religion. The law sets certain parameters regarding abortion and that is where my problem lies. Not with the parameters themselves but with the problems enforcing/interpreting them. Because there is this problem we do effectively have abortion on demand and that is not what the original abortion act was intended for.

In the end the woman concerned must make a rational and mature decision... this last is, IMHO, almost impossible to ensure given the nature of the circumstances that surround abortion.

Bellatori
Banned

Posts : 446
Join date : 2013-10-11
Age : 66
Location : Newcastle

http://www.bellatori.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by stuart torr on Mon Oct 28, 2013 1:05 pm

Tosh, unfortunately I was not on my old machine last night I was watching a film. You put forth some very good points, especially your early post well done.
avatar
stuart torr
Deceased

Posts : 3187
Join date : 2013-10-10
Age : 57
Location : Nottingham. England. UK.

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:37 pm

I don't know if it's been posted here already but a new study into foetal development produced some very interesting findings that are very salient when determining when a foetus develops the very attributes we might say define being human.

"Human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, study says
Finding in major review of scientific evidence strikes blow to those seeking to reduce upper time limit for abortion"

Link - http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/25/human-foetus-no-pain-24-weeks

More.... The human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, according to a major review of scientific evidence published today.

The connections in the foetal brain are not fully formed in that time, nor is the foetus conscious, according to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

The findings of two reports commissioned by the Department of Health strike a blow to those seeking to reduce the upper time limit for having an abortion, currently at 24 weeks.

The studies suggest that late abortions, permitted for serious abnormalities or risks to a woman's health, do not result in foetal suffering because of increasing evidence that the chemical environment in the uterus induces "a continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation".

The review of existing evidence, as well as guidance to health professionals and information for mothers, was instigated on the recommendation of the Commons health select committee two years ago. Efforts in the Commons to reduce abortion limits to 22 or 20 weeks were defeated in 2008. The reports will hamper campaigners' efforts for an early return to the topic, despite David Cameron having suggested before the election that that might happen.

The report on pain perception says: "It was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Even after 24 weeks, "it is difficult to say that the foetus experiences pain because this, like all other experiences, develops post-natally along with memory and other learned behaviours".

The second report, into conditions where a pregnancy might be terminated for foetal abnormality, says: "... it is unrealistic to produce a definitive list of conditions that constitute 'serious' handicap since accurate diagnostic techniques are as yet unavailable".

Now most "pro-life" polemic as well as using perfidious hyperbole often cites the fact that a foetus develops physical attributes fairly early on, heart beat, fully formed hands feet even facial features etc, but as can be seen from this research this belies the fact that the evidence shows that a foetus is not sentient in the way we would reasonably associate with human life, and are certainly incapable of feeling pain prior to 24 weeks.

There will of course still be many who will claim that a developing foetus is a 'human' life from the moment of conception, but it's clear this is based on subjective belief or emotion and not on the evidence.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3167
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:22 pm

True Blue wrote:One of the things the intelligentsia is discussing of late is the demise of civilizations which we are witnessing now... apparently. Essentially they are blaming secularization as it lacks the depth of meaning, place and continuity in a persons life, which the religious orders have established for their faithful... who are dwindling in numbers as they become 'enlightened' by secularism.

How anyone can type such fatuous empty rhetoric, and then talk of other ideas lacking depth of meaning, and not have a terminal irony overload is beyond me.

True Blue wrote:A significant argument which they put forward is that of the ever decreasing birth rate

A decreasing birth rate doesn't mean the population is shrinking, just that it isn't growing at previous rates, and given that the exponentially increasing human population is the largest and most immediate threat to the planet we face perhaps that's not a bad thing?

True Blue wrote: which brings with it a cultural demise... It is inflicting Western Civilizations now who seek to make up the numbers 'needed' for their civilizations though immigration...

Ah, I see where he was going with this risible nonsense, we have another right wing fascist spouting xenophobia. Cultures don't survive based on numbers, that's axiomatic, or the Welsh, and Scots would be long gone.

True Blue wrote:It will inflict the Eastern Civilizations more significantly because their shift from large to small families has been less gradual.

Ah, do tell? The fall of eastern civilisation because they're allowing other civilisations to "infiltrate" theirs. Damn Johnny foreigner again, coming over here, I mean there, etc etc.. Rolling Eyes  sarcasm

True Blue wrote:Too loose vast numbers of a population to old age and death in a couple of generations is significant. Not only is there the issue of caring for the elderly by a population not large enough to do so, there is the loss of cultural knowledge that those people hold and the loss of economic viability.

Too loose, is that in that in the South of France? You do realise the population is increasing don't you, just not as fast it once was, and for a variety of reasons. The increase in the average age of the population is again because of better health care, and better standards of living, and because people are having children later in life. None of which is necessarily a bad thing. How exactly does having people around for significantly longer so we can learn from them, and they can learn more, represent a loss of vast numbers and knowledge? Good grief this is idiotic rubbish that only right wing rhetoric can espouse .. scratch

True Blue wrote:Seems rather odd, when civilization as we know it is dying through a lack of social depth, connectedness and sheer loss of numbers, should see its women kill their off spring in state sanctioned abortions.  

I'm not sure about civilisation but that loss of knowledge you mentioned is certainly evident, in a post that thinks offspring is two separate words, or that connectedness is a word. What is it about abortion that causes people to lobotomise themselves before speaking? Our western societies lack neither depth nor CONNECTION, nor is it shrinking  significantly in numbers, and immigration actually adds depth to any society or culture, as long as that society is fair and just and treats everyone equally. I'm guessing this was not the case in Nazi Germany for instance.
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3167
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by polyglide on Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:08 pm

Dr, Sheldon,
I thought the popic was, is a fertilied egg a "person".

The answer is obviously no, it is a firtilzed egg.

Wether it is right or wrong to in any way harm the egg is a different matter.

Abortion in this day and age should not be a problem, it is only by being careless or stupid for a woman to become pregnant with an unwanted child.
avatar
polyglide

Posts : 3118
Join date : 2012-02-13

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD on Fri Aug 21, 2015 9:25 pm

polyglide wrote:Dr, Sheldon, I thought the popic was, is a fertilied egg a "person".

Popic? Fertillied?

I was responding directly to a post in this thread.

Polyglide wrote:The answer is obviously no, it is a firtilzed egg.

Fertilised egg, and it is demonstrably not a person, as you say, and more importantly as science has shown, and as I linked earlier here:

"Human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, study says
Finding in major review of scientific evidence strikes blow to those seeking to reduce upper time limit for abortion"

Link - http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/25/human-foetus-no-pain-24-weeks

More.... The human foetus feels no pain before 24 weeks, according to a major review of scientific evidence published today.

The connections in the foetal brain are not fully formed in that time, nor is the foetus conscious, according to the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

The findings of two reports commissioned by the Department of Health strike a blow to those seeking to reduce the upper time limit for having an abortion, currently at 24 weeks.

The studies suggest that late abortions, permitted for serious abnormalities or risks to a woman's health, do not result in foetal suffering because of increasing evidence that the chemical environment in the uterus induces "a continuous sleep-like unconsciousness or sedation".

The review of existing evidence, as well as guidance to health professionals and information for mothers, was instigated on the recommendation of the Commons health select committee two years ago. Efforts in the Commons to reduce abortion limits to 22 or 20 weeks were defeated in 2008. The reports will hamper campaigners' efforts for an early return to the topic, despite David Cameron having suggested before the election that that might happen.

The report on pain perception says: "It was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation."

Even after 24 weeks, "it is difficult to say that the foetus experiences pain because this, like all other experiences, develops post-natally along with memory and other learned behaviours".

Polyglide wrote:Wether it is right or wrong to in any way harm the egg is a different matter.

Indeed it is, but the distinction is therefore vital if we are to base our decision on informed and well evidenced facts, it behoves us to understand exactly how a foetus develops, and what it experiences, if anything, in the womb, if we are to make the most morally informed decisions.

Polyglide wrote:Abortion in this day and age should not be a problem, it is only by being careless or stupid for a woman to become pregnant with an unwanted child.


That is perhaps a bit of a crass generalisation, and though there are undoubtedly women who repeatedly misuse abortion as a form of birth control, this is problem is best tackled by proper honest sex education at as early an age as is prudent.



               

               

               
avatar
Dr Sheldon Cooper PhD

Posts : 3167
Join date : 2013-10-11
Location : Wales

Back to top Go down

Re: Is a fertilized egg a "person"...?

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 8 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum