A War of Definition: Life In Context

There is a really one major barrier to the discussion surrounding abortion, and to put it simply that barrier is definition. How you define life in the context of the abortion debate shapes your position at large; does life begin at conception, or at a fixed point in embryonic development?

Where you land on those questions reveals your definition. Yet I would argue that the only rational answer one can give is life begins at conception, the reason for this is that to suggest that life is fixed to a set point of embryonic development, is to establish an arbitrary point of division, where before x--no life, after x--life!

Considering the consequences of an abortion, the termination of the natural development of a human life-form, an arbitrary point of division seems like very shoddy grounds to end a 'potential' human life. Sorry for the writing, trying to keep it short and to the point.

Lore said:

There is a really one major barrier to the discussion surrounding abortion, and to put it simply that barrier is definition. How you define life in the context of the abortion debate shapes your position at large; does life begin at conception, or at a fixed point in embryonic development?

Where you land on those questions reveals your definition. Yet I would argue that the only rational answer one can give is life begins at conception, the reason for this is that to suggest that life is fixed to a set point of embryonic development, is to establish an arbitrary point of division, where before x--no life, after x--life!

Considering the consequences of an abortion, the termination of the natural development of a human life-form, an arbitrary point of division seems like very shoddy grounds to end a 'potential' human life. Sorry for the writing, trying to keep it short and to the point.

Click to expand...

Disagree. The legal and biological definitions are well-known and disagreeing with them makes no difference, doesnt change the definitions.

The issue is the value of the unborn. And the lengths to which people believe the law should allow its protection to over-ride the Constitutional rights of women.

Lore said:

There is a really one major barrier to the discussion surrounding abortion, and to put it simply that barrier is definition. How you define life

Click to expand...

False. At what point the embryo becomes a life is irrelevant. The relevant question is what right does it have to be there in the first place? Since when is someone allowed to invade your property against your will and reside there for months at a time even though you don't want them there? How much pain is a person allowed to cause another person against their will before that person is legally allowed to retaliate, violently if necessary?

Furthermore, how exactly would the government know that a woman had been pregnant in the first place? Who is required to tell them that, and when? Are all women required to report themselves pregnant or just the ones who intend to have an abortion in the future?

If abortion is murder then every miscarriage in the United States of America must be considered a homicide investigation in which the woman's body is a crime scene, and she is the number one suspect. 1/3 of all pregnancies in the United States of America end in a miscarriage. Who exactly is going to approve all those search warrants?

I agree that a new life begins at fertilisation. I do not think that gives or should give it a right to live over and above the woman's right to have it removed from her body if she so chooses.

Lore said:

There is a really one major barrier to the discussion surrounding abortion, and to put it simply that barrier is definition. How you define life in the context of the abortion debate shapes your position at large; does life begin at conception, or at a fixed point in embryonic development?

Where you land on those questions reveals your definition. Yet I would argue that the only rational answer one can give is life begins at conception, the reason for this is that to suggest that life is fixed to a set point of embryonic development, is to establish an arbitrary point of division, where before x--no life, after x--life!

Considering the consequences of an abortion, the termination of the natural development of a human life-form, an arbitrary point of division seems like very shoddy grounds to end a 'potential' human life. Sorry for the writing, trying to keep it short and to the point.

Click to expand...

It is irrelevant when it begins. What is relevant is at what point is that life significant enough to pass laws to protect it and deny self determination to the woman making that life possible.