• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Ongoing gun violence/injury thread

TenaciousKory said:
"unborn baby" is like "boneless wing"

they're both rhetorical constructions designed to get you to imagine one more recognizable whole when really you're talking about a completely different incomplete thing

"telling it like it is" would mean using fetus or nugget, please
Click to expand...

That might be one of the stupidest things I have ever read. An unborn baby, fetus if you will, is just that, a baby that hasn't been born yet. You all know this already but pretend like you don't. I don't know how you can be a father and go to that first pre-natal appointment and hear the heartbeat and see those images on the screen and think of that as less than an unborn baby.

Look, everyone pretty much falls on one side or the other of this issue and no one is going to be moved to change their mind because of a thread on a message board - so why bother? This is not a logical issue - it is an emotional issue - and no amount of argument is going to change how someone feels.

So, peace out.
 
Seems like it’s an emotional issue to those that assign a clump of cells a baby while there’s not much emotion in well a clump of differentiating cells.
 
scooter84 said:
That might be one of the stupidest things I have ever read. An unborn baby, fetus if you will, is just that, a baby that hasn't been born yet. You all know this already but pretend like you don't. I don't know how you can be a father and go to that first pre-natal appointment and hear the heartbeat and see those images on the screen and think of that as less than an unborn baby.
Click to expand...

What if you go to that first pre-natal appointment, and the heartbeat is there but kind of weak and the fetus is measuring a few days behind where they should be, so they tell you to come back a week later so they can check the growth, and when you come back a week later there has been no growth and the heartbeat is gone? Is that still an unborn baby?
 
Respect to Kory’s rhetorical skill, but I prefer the acorn/fetus analogy. A fetus is not a baby, but it’s dishonest to compare it to something inert, regardless - this is 1 of a million topics where I feel that liberals refuse to reckon with hard truths. Fetus/Baby/Chicken Nugget, whatever you want to call it, an abortion is the termination of human life. That’s not worth arguing about, unless the discussion is viability.

An honest, general discussion of abortion isn’t quibbling over terms, but a discussion of a woman’s right to bodily autonomy. Should pregnant women be legally compelled to give birth? How can a pre-term fetus be given legal recognition without violating the freedom of the pregnant mother? What are the terms or limits of a mother’s legal obligation to their fetus?
 
Last edited:
Republicans aren’t trying to get the voting age changed to 18 years from conception.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
What if you go to that first pre-natal appointment, and the heartbeat is there but kind of weak and the fetus is measuring a few days behind where they should be, so they tell you to come back a week later so they can check the growth, and when you come back a week later there has been no growth and the heartbeat is gone? Is that still an unborn baby?
Click to expand...

Is this a serious question? That is a terribly sad situation that many people experience and one that should not be made light of.
 
I used the phrase "blood and tissue" specifically because Wakebored said I have the "blood of 850000 fetuses" on my hands. Of course aborting a fetus is more than simply evacuating some blood and tissue, even though a pre-20 week fetus is not recognizable as human without significant contextual clues or some molecular/DNA analysis (I mean they have gills until about 18 weeks (I think)), it is still a very hard decision to make. I know this from personal experience.

Anyway, If we are going to make a chicken analogy, lets go with an egg. Crack an egg open before it's ready, even a fertilized egg that's been incubated for a couple weeks, and what you find inside is definitely not at all a chicken. Nobody calls a scrambled eggs "chicken" because it is not.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
An honest, general discussion of abortion isn’t quibbling over terms, but a discussion of a woman’s right to bodily autonomy. Should pregnant women be legally compelled to give birth? How can a pre-term fetus be given legal recognition without violating the freedom of the pregnant mother? What are the terms or limits of a mother’s legal obligation to their fetus?
Click to expand...

Eh. The terms/definitions are central to many (perhaps most?) people. You can argue it should not be that way, but that's not reality (and it's pretty hard to argue the definitions are not important). I have seen the following lines drawn in abortion discussion:

Sperm/ovum - some people think all cells that potentially lead to life need to be protected
Conception - drawing the line here is the argument against IUDs
Implantation
6 weeks - heartbeat
20 weeks - potential viability
No line
 
Y'all, something about fetuses really gets my brain cranking. I think I just came up with a solution to a fairly complicated optimization coding problem my post-doc and I have been having all week. We need to create multi-dimensional inequality arrays first then feed those into the optimization function rather then try to do with in the function itself. This is great, thank you!
 
Rafi said:
Eh. The terms/definitions are central to many (perhaps most?) people. You can argue it should not be that way, but that's not reality
Click to expand...

The terms can be as important or unimportant to people as they choose, the debate is still a mother’s bodily autonomy vs the state legally compelling them to give birth to an it - You could call it an adult, an elephant, a jar of nuts, whatever.

Even beyond the point of viability the baby/chicken nugget still has to be physically expelled from the mother at significant physical risk - that’s why the debate *can not* be centered on the fetus, but a mother’s legal obligation to give birth. The debate is about the process of birth. Can the state legally compel a person to give birth against their own free will?
 
scooter84 said:
Is this a serious question? That is a terribly sad situation that many people experience and one that should not be made light of.
Click to expand...

yeah, he's not making light he's asking a question - i did that four times; three in one year.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
The terms can be as important or unimportant to people as they choose, the debate is still a mother’s bodily autonomy vs the state legally compelling them to give birth to an it - You could call it an adult, an elephant, a jar of nuts, whatever.

Even beyond the point of viability the baby/chicken nugget still has to be physically expelled from the mother at significant physical risk - that’s why the debate *can not* be centered on the fetus, but a mother’s legal obligation to give birth. The debate is about the process of birth. Can the state legally compel a person to give birth against their own free will?
Click to expand...

In general, I agree, and this is well-stated. However, for some, the debate does also cover frozen embryos, fetal cell lines, research approaches, etc., and it is not just about birth.
 
scooter84 said:
Is this a serious question? That is a terribly sad situation that many people experience and one that should not be made light of.
Click to expand...

Yeah dude it fucking happened to my wife and me. You think I’m making light of it? My point is that a fetus is a fetus. It is not yet an unborn baby.
 
Rafi said:
In general, I agree, and this is well-stated. However, for some, the debate does also cover frozen embryos, fetal cell lines, research approaches, etc., and it is not just about birth.
Click to expand...

The prolife argument centers on the sanctity of life and the arbitrary legal defining of life. The pro choice argument centers on a mother’s right to physical autonomy. Choosing to join the debate over the definition of life is choosing to debate on prolife grounds, which is a mistake. If you believe that mothers should have legal access to abortion then the debate on abortion should be centered on the bodily autonomy and liberty of a pregnant person. Any attempt to define life of a fetus in utero is only going to result in restricting the freedom of a pregnant mother. It’s a non-starter.
 
BeachBumDeac said:
Yeah dude it fucking happened to my wife and me. You think I’m making light of it? My point is that a fetus is a fetus. It is not yet an unborn baby.
Click to expand...

My point is just the opposite. I am sorry that happened to you - we have been through it ourselves as well. The fact that it is so gut wrenching just brings home the point that it is a baby - if not, why else would it hurt so much when that happens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top