Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
Send in the Clowns...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Montgomery: [QB] I want to counter some of what First said and try and explain my view logically, and free of any specific religion. I hope the reasoning provides some clarity. [QUOTE]Does a ball of cells that may one day be a human have more rights than a ball of cells that may one day be a gopher?..........[/QUOTE] Does a human adult have more rights than an adult gopher? Tradition says yes. This is a side argument. [QUOTE]Of COURSE life (basic as it may be) begins at conception. The question is where do we believe we get the moral obligation to keep that life alive? Nature does not recognize conceptions, or there wouldn't be such a thing as spontaneous miscarriages. There exists as yet no agreement of when a being achieves "personhood." [/QUOTE] In working out an opinion on this issue I concluded that it all hinged on whether the aborted fetus should be endowed with human rights (and therefore spared), or regarded as genetic material (and thus can be destroyed with no moral problems). As you say, we need to know at what point in a human's development it becomes due human rights. <u>At the stage where it can survive independently from the mother?</u> This is unacceptable, as the case of premature babies now demonstrates. Unaided, they would die, but with the aid of medical tech they can be given life support. Noone would advocate the termination of a premature baby in an incubator. Miscarriages demonstrate how a failure of the support system can end the life of the fetus. But also babies can die of heart defects after birth, or cot death, etc. Nature reserves the right to terminate the existance of ALL lifeforms regardless of age or physiological independence. Indeed, it will do so to all of us. "Keeping a life alive" is also a different thing to atively bringing about its end. <u>At some specific stage in its development during pregnancy?</u> eg. First sign of brain and/or activity therein; first heartbeat, etc. This is a very tricky line to draw. What level of development is enough to qualify for protection? Many would argue heatedly over varying definitions, each supplying valid arguments to support different positions. This makes this criterion highly contentious and open to later revisions as understanding of the fetal devlopment improves. <u>"4 weeks"?</u> An arbitrary deadline based on an integral number of days divisible by 7 is ludicrous. No scientific method is involved, and thus a more rigorous determination is necessary. <u>Conclusion</u> This is very serious matter. If you want to allow abortions you require a moral standpoint from which this is justifiable, as the default interpretation would be in the murder of a human life, albeit a very young one. You asked what the difference between a frog fetus and a human fetus is. The DNA is the answer. The best scientific transition I can think of between the unimportant biological material and the protection-deserving new life form is the step at which a new, unique human DNA code is created. Using this code, the cells require no further chemical information, merely replicating and dividing, taking in matter to fuel this process from the mother's support system. The process of growth & development inside the womb does not end with birth, as both the mental and physical growth continues until adult stage. This new DNA code is totally unique, and cannot be recreated by another chemical process. Since it is our DNA that defines our individuality as human beings, and our individuality is the central reason why we hold human life sacred, this seems a logical "transition point" to me. When does the new DNA appear? Conception. Ergo, the line is drawn there. Corrolaries being that embryos should be endowed with right-to-life, and there should be no moral implications to fiddling with sperms and eggs provided they never meet and are able to form new DNA. (This means no moral objection to contraceptive methods) Well, that's what I think. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3