Frownland

Given that he is responsible for the insemination that created said baby, yes he does.

Rape cases for abortion are more about the mother than the father anyway. Not at all surprised that women having rights was breezed over in this discussion though.

A little off topic, but I would like you all to stop killing trees when you sweep acorns off of your driveway. Deforestation isn't something to play around with.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

The Batlord

Not complicated. If killing a "baby" at the moment of conception is murder then anyone who performs an abortion is guilty of murder and should be legally charged with such. Anything less requires acknowledging that there is at least some difference between a zygote/fetus and a fully-fledged human being.

Human consciousness is likewise nebulous, but we can monitor fetal brain functions and compare them to other lifeforms considered to have at least some form of consciousness, and if the fetus doesn't "measure up", then we can reasonably conclude that it does not have a level of consciousness that is worth protecting by law.

__________________

chopinisawesome

Yup. I suppose so. Killing people is wrong, except in slightly less clear-cut things like a just war.

How do you know? When there are only a few cells in a life form, all cells perform all life functions. If you're looking for brain waves, you're looking the wrong way. There is no separate brain. You're looking for an organ that isn't distinct yet.

Frownland

Where would be the right place to look for...I'm not sure exactly what you think we're looking for actually. I thought we were talking about cognitive functions, but apparently the brain is not the correct place to look for that? Or are you suggesting that we just do all of the mental gymnastics that we can to support our predetermined opinion?

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Chula Vista

Let's all agree that this is a ridiculously difficult argument from both sides of the fence. No personal malice meant on my part.

*slinks away*

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

Frownland

Abortion is one of those things where debating it for hours on end will always end with one side changing their opinion.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Chula Vista

Same goes for Captain Beefheart.

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

The Batlord

Then what about life makes it worth protecting? A flat worm is basically just a primitive nerve system with muscles (so far as I know). Should a flat worm be protected in the same way as a human being? Is it just human DNA that should be protected? If so then I refer you to my previous post and human skin cells, sperm, eggs, etc.

You have to have a criteria for what does and does not bear legal protection, unless you want to admit that a human soul is what you're really talking about.

__________________

Frownland

I'm glad you've finally come around.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

grindy

criterion

__________________
A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.