• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

code1211 said:
Excuse my ignorance.

Are "zefs" little tiny people that are physically separated from any other human being with adults both making them comfortable and discussing whether or not to resuscitate them or not when needed?
Click to expand...

Zef = Zygote/embro/fetus.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

code1211 said:
If the mother is having a bad day, her mental condition is such that an abortion can be completed on those grounds whether the baby was already born or is not yet born.
Click to expand...

Give me one example of a woman actually aborting that late because she "is having a bad day." Good grief.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Scrabaholic said:
You have been schooled on this and it has been proven that zefs are not human beings.
Click to expand...
ZEFs are not persons, however they are live humans.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Lursa said:
Pregnancy is always life-threatening:

--Any pregnancy can end in death.

--That death cannot be predicted in all cases.

--Such deaths cannot be prevented.

Thus, abortion is always a moral option.

Solid biological and medical facts support this moral option.
Click to expand...
I answered this a hundred posts ago. Pay attention.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Scrabaholic said:
The complication rate is very low.

All pregnancies are potentially life threatening. There is also the issue of immense pain.

You have been schooled on this and it has been proven that zefs are not human beings.
Click to expand...
The complication rate is 100% for the unborn child.
Potentiality and actuality are two entirely different modalities.
"Proven"? The only thing proven by your posts is that you're all talking points and not a shred of critical thinking.
 
Last edited:
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Wan said:
ZEFs are not persons, however they are live humans.
Click to expand...

Human zefs, yes. Doesn't mean the woman can't remove them from her body, if she so chooses.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Angel said:
I answered this a hundred posts ago. Pay attention.
Click to expand...

I thought you considered dishonesty immoral?
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Scrabaholic said:
Human zefs, yes. Doesn't mean the woman can't remove them from her body, if she so chooses.
Click to expand...

And she would be choosing to murder her own young.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Angel said:
The complication rate is 100% for the unborn child.
Potentiality and actuality are two entirely different modalities.
"Proven"? The only thing proven by your posts is that you're all talking points and not a shred of critical thinking.
Click to expand...

Not my fault you don't accept FACTS when you are shown them.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

The problem isn't with the law, it's with American political tribalism.

The people who support reproductive rights can't acknowledge that the unborn child is a human being because their delicate moral sensibilities can't abide the thought of killing people, even in self-defense.

And the people who support self-defense as an absolute human right can't acknowledge that self-defense applies to abortion because their primitive, simian minds can't recognize that women are human beings.

But because of the way our electoral system has corrupted our political discourse, you are not allowed to be correct on both issues: you must choose one tribe or the other, and slavishly adhere to both their correct position and their incorrent position without question.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Korimyr the Rat said:
The problem isn't with the law, it's with American political tribalism.

The people who support reproductive rights can't acknowledge that the unborn child is a human being because their delicate moral sensibilities can't abide the thought of killing people, even in self-defense.

And the people who support self-defense as an absolute human right can't acknowledge that self-defense applies to abortion because their primitive, simian minds can't recognize that women are human beings.

But because of the way our electoral system has corrupted our political discourse, you are not allowed to be correct on both issues: you must choose one tribe or the other, and slavishly adhere to both their correct position and their incorrent position without question.
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no problem with killing people in self defence. But I do not believe the zef to be a person. And it isn't in my country.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Scrabaholic said:
I have absolutely no problem with killing people in self defence. But I do not believe the zef to be a person. And it isn't in my country.
Click to expand...

"human being" and "person" are not exact synonyms. I've given my definition of "person" before, and generally repeating it creates more heat than light.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Korimyr the Rat said:
"human being" and "person" are not exact synonyms. I've given my definition of "person" before, and generally repeating it creates more heat than light.
Click to expand...

In the US the words human being , child, individual and person are all used to describe a born
person.

Here is the full US code:

U.S. Code › Title 1 › Chapter 1 › § 8

(a) In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
(b) As used in this section, the term “born alive”, with respect to a member of the species homo sapiens, means the complete expulsion or extraction from his or her mother of that member, at any stage of development, who after such expulsion or extraction breathes or has a beating heart, pulsation of the umbilical cord, or definite movement of voluntary muscles, regardless of whether the umbilical cord has been cut, and regardless of whether the expulsion or extraction occurs as a result of natural or induced labor, cesarean section, or induced abortion.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand, or contract any legal status or legal right applicable to any member of the species homo sapiens at any point prior to being “born alive” as defined in this section.
Click to expand...
And just to be clear ...

Part C of US Code >title 1 refers to a born alive infant.

The requirements of this Section shall not be construed to prevent an infant’s parent(s) or guardian(s) from refusing to give consent to medical treatment or surgical care which is not medically necessary or reasonable, including care or treatment which either:

(1) Is not necessary to save the life of the infant;
(2) Has a potential risk to the infant’s life or health that outweighs the potential benefit to the infant of the treatment or care; or
(3) Is treatment that will do no more than temporarily prolong the act of dying when death is imminent.
 
Last edited:
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

minnie616 said:
In the US the words human being , child, individual and person are all used to describe a born person.
Click to expand...

You seem to be conveniently overlooking the tens of millions of people who habitually and insistently use those words in ways you don't like.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Korimyr the Rat said:
You seem to be conveniently overlooking the tens of millions of people who habitually and insistently use those words in ways you don't like.
Click to expand...

I use Human to describe the unborn but do add the word being since an embryo does fit the definition of being in so far as a “ potential being “ is defined as something capable of passing from this potential state to the state of being that thing in actuality and only thanks to internal factors.

From the following :

The embryo is not even a “potential” living being in so far as a “potential being” is defined as something capable of passing from this potential state to the state of being that thing in actuality, and only thanks to internal factors.
Click to expand...

Read more:

The Embryo Is Not a Potential Living Being - L'Humanite in English
 
Last edited:
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Angel said:
I answered this a hundred posts ago. Pay attention.
Click to expand...

And I'm refuting it. Feel free to do so....it's a debate, that means that if I show you're wrong, you need to show where "I'm" wrong about your position or statements.

You've posted that it's morally acceptable for a woman to have an abortion if her life is endangered by the pregnancy...I just posted that factually, every single pregnancy is exactly that...a threat to her life that cannot be predicted or prevented.

I just posted why your statements are wrong...feel free to refute them.
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

Wan said:
And she would be choosing to murder her own young.
Click to expand...

Post the legal statute to support this fallacious claim. ( you can't because it doesn't exist- ( fact )
 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

minnie616 said:
Oregon has no abortion laws and neither do several other states so presumably it reduces number of doctors to one in each of those states yet no elective abortions past 24 weeks have occurred in any of our United States.
Click to expand...

If you mean ever, you are simply wrong.

If you mean in a particular time period of any duration, I am not sure how you intend to prove the negative.

Please pardon this image. It was used to convict Gosnell. "Baby Boy A". This was an "aborted" baby that required additional "care" to assure that he did not survive.

 
re: [W:1027] Abortion Semantics: "Unborn Children"

minnie616 said:
False.

Virgina would still fall under the 2002 Born-Alive infant Protection Act and as such a Born Alive infant would recieve extraordinary medical treatment or palliative care.
Click to expand...

Not the way the bill is presented by the person who wrote it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom