Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Removing a feeding tube is definitely killing them. You are cutting off their means of staying alive.

    But no, I don't think we should have to keep them alive. Not because they don't currently have cognition, but because they never will.
    An unfertilised egg potentially has cognition...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    An unfertilised egg potentially has cognition...
    As much potential to have cognition as I have potential to win the lottery.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    As much potential to have cognition as I have potential to win the lottery.
    Are you comparing the odds of getting pregnant to those of winning the lottery? If all potential cognition deserves the right to exist, then every egg should at least attempt to be fertilised...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    You say obviously, but it's not a baby as soon as it's fertilised is it? It's still only potentially a baby. All manner of things can go wrong still at that point.

    As soon as I cut a tree down and take it into my workshop is it already a table?

    I find it hard not to veiw it as a baby seeing as my birth mother was this close to aborting before she was persuaded to give me up for adoption. I couldnt abort, just cuz it almost happened to me and i would always be wondering what sort of person could have come from it
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Are you comparing the odds of getting pregnant to those of winning the lottery? If all potential cognition deserves the right to exist, then every egg should at least attempt to be fertilised...
    I'm comparing the odds of any given unfertilized egg to the odds of winning the lottery, yes.

    But an egg on its own has no potential. It can't get anywhere on its own. A fertilized egg however has potential, because it's met the biological requirements to grow into an organism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    I'm comparing the odds of any given unfertilized egg to the odds of winning the lottery, yes.

    But an egg on its own has no potential. It can't get anywhere on its own. A fertilized egg however has potential, because it's met the biological requirements to grow into an organism.
    An egg on it's own still has potential, it just requires something which it doesn't innately posess to fulfill it. Much like a fertilised egg, which can't incubate itself.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    An egg on it's own still has potential, it just requires something which it doesn't innately posess to fulfill it. Much like a fertilised egg, which can't incubate itself.
    Well that gives the unfertilized egg one more requirement, giving it that much less potential than a fetus.

    What's the point of this little sidenote though, by the way?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Well that gives the unfertilized egg one more requirement, giving it that much less potential than a fetus.

    What's the point of this little sidenote though, by the way?
    I'm just wondering how you can distinguish between the two quite so easily.

    So that one extra requirement suddenly makes the potential life no longer worth worrying about?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    I'm just wondering how you can distinguish between the two quite so easily.

    So that one extra requirement suddenly makes the potential life no longer worth worrying about?
    Well, yes. Because with the fetus, all it has to do is sit tight and it will grow up fine. With the egg, sitting tight means it's going to be flushed out of a uterus and stuck to a tampon to be thrown away. While the egg requires intervention to realize its potential, intervention with the fetus on the other hand will kill its potential.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Well, yes. Because with the fetus, all it has to do is sit tight and it will grow up fine. With the egg, sitting tight means it's going to be flushed out of a uterus and stuck to a tampon to be thrown away. While the egg requires intervention to realize its potential, intervention with the fetus on the other hand will kill its potential.
    This is pointless me trying to debate this, as I simply can't comprehend how anybody could consider a fertilised egg alive or to have rights. It's nothing to do with you, I just can't understand the rationale whatsoever...

    You're wanting us to infringe on the rights of a person who does exist in order to protect the potential rights of something that could possibly exist....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    This is pointless me trying to debate this, as I simply can't comprehend how anybody could consider a fertilised egg alive or to have rights. It's nothing to do with you, I just can't understand the rationale whatsoever...

    You're wanting us to infringe on the rights of a person who does exist in order to protect the potential rights of something that could possibly exist....
    The thing is, I don't see it as a potential, I see it as a reality. I don't think that just because it's unable to survive out of the womb that it's any less of a human. It has all the genetic makeup of a human and it's growing into one. People can call it a clump of cells all they want, but their definition of what they call "human" is purely arbitrary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    The thing is, I don't see it as a potential, I see it as a reality. I don't think that just because it's unable to survive out of the womb that it's any less of a human. It has all the genetic makeup of a human and it's growing into one. People can call it a clump of cells all they want, but their definition of what they call "human" is purely arbitrary.
    There are so many things that can go wrong though. 25% of pregnancies are miscarried before the baby becomes a fetus. I can just about understand where people who claim that it's immoral once it's a fetus are coming from, but I still disagree.

    Out of interest, how do you feel about the morning after pill? I take it you think that's the same as abortion?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    There are so many things that can go wrong though. 25% of pregnancies are miscarried before the baby becomes a fetus. I can just about understand where people who claim that it's immoral once it's a fetus are coming from, but I still disagree.

    Out of interest, how do you feel about the morning after pill? I take it you think that's the same as abortion?
    25%? You sure?

    Anyway, I was thinking about the morning after pill earlier. I'm not sure how I feel about it. I prefer not to have a stance because it gives me too many things to argue about. :p:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    25%? You sure?

    Anyway, I was thinking about the morning after pill earlier. I'm not sure how I feel about it. I prefer not to have a stance because it gives me too many things to argue about. :p:
    Yeah, it's a massively high number, that's why generally people don't even tell anyone about pregnancies till a bit later on.

    Why is the morning after pill any different to abortion?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    Yeah, it's a massively high number, that's why generally people don't even tell anyone about pregnancies till a bit later on.

    Why is the morning after pill any different to abortion?
    Where did you get those figures from exactly?

    And I don't know much about the morning after pill. But if I'm not mistaken, it doesn't kill the embryo, but actually prevents fertilization before it actually happens.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)
    Where did you get those figures from exactly?

    And I don't know much about the morning after pill. But if I'm not mistaken, it doesn't kill the embryo, but actually prevents fertilization before it actually happens.
    This source actually puts it a bit higher even considering what pregnancy means to you (a fertilised egg).

    http://www.womens-health.co.uk/miscarr.asp
    The risk of miscarriage decreases as pregnancy progresses. It is possible that as many as 50% of pregnancies miscarry before implantation in the womb occurs. Early after implantation, pregnancy loss rate is about 30% (i.e. this is still before a pregnancy is clinically recognised). After a pregnancy may be clinically recognised (between days 35-50), about 25% will end in miscarriage. The risk of miscarriage decreases dramatically after the 8th week as the weeks go by.
    Infact, with those figures the majority of fertalised eggs never actually result in children.


    And the morning after pill actually in many cases alters the womb lining, preventing a fertilised egg from embedding itself.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RobertPires)
    This source actually puts it a bit higher even considering what pregnancy means to you (a fertilised egg).

    http://www.womens-health.co.uk/miscarr.asp


    Infact, with those figures the majority of fertalised eggs never actually result in children.
    Interesting. But in spite of this, my point was still that as long as everything goes according to plan and nothing goes wrong, it will grow into a human.


    And the morning after pill actually in many cases alters the womb lining, preventing a fertilised egg from embedding itself.
    Apparently that's a possible function of progestin-only ECPs, but they aren't completely positive that it's how it works. Also, that's only one type of pill.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Delta Usafa)

    Why isn't it human? It has the DNA of a human, it's growing into an adult.
    a) My hair has the DNA of a human but I don't see people screaming genocide whenever I get a haircut

    b) It's not growing into a human if you abort it.


    Why does it have to cross some arbitrary line to suddenly become a human? Why do we draw that line where it is, anyway?
    a) Because distinctions have to be made in people's minds to distinguish between a fertilized ovum or zygote and a well-developed foetus. They are incredibly different organic things, but people tend to throw a blanket over the situation and think they are the same.

    b) I don't know exactly, it's just where the politicians feel comfortable about it. I personally think that it should be before the time it can survive successfully and independantly* out the womb, because it seems both ironic and wrong that on one side of the hospital you have doctors seeking to save premature births and on the other you have doctors seeking to abort them.

    (*Independantly meaning with the assistance of doctors, not just left on some steppe somewhere)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PinkMobilePhone)
    No, I'm not condoning rape at all. How you've come to that conclusion is totally beyond me. I shan't reply to you any longer because you are clearly quite delusional so it seems a waste of time.
    One of your previous posts stated that you would encourage a woman to have a baby, or at least privatley encourage, if she had been raped. That to me sounds like you're totally encouraging rape if the end product is a child, which is totally wrong.

    I find it quite pathetic you chose to call ME delusional when you've quite blatantly stated that if you're pregnant after being raped, it's okay, have the child. -.-

    As a mother, and expecting mother I know it's difficult to consider the alternative option, but it isn't, by any means, wrong just because you disagree with it.

    I didn't realise that you could see the sex of a baby that early, and I know that when you have an abortion later on actually have to give birth to it (even though it isn't alive) and you see the foetus in front of you. Fair enough, to you it may seem wrong, but no one really considers ever how the woman would feel. People just harp on about how cruel these women are when in fact, I find them brave to go through something quite so traumatic. And yes, I have experience in this matter; a friend of mine went through one and I went with her. Our friendship, as a result, was ruined because I saw her at her most vulnerable and she has never quite gotten over it.

    But, if it came down to it, I would still have an abortion, I think, because I would prefer to actually live my life, become financially secure and either be married or with someone I'm spending the rest of my life with before considering bringing a child into the world. Single mothers who live off benefits, who's children barely know their dad and who have no prospects in life other than being a mother sadden me, and it is not something I'd choose to do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Georgecopter)
    a) My hair has the DNA of a human but I don't see people screaming genocide whenever I get a haircut

    b) It's not growing into a human if you abort it.
    a) Your hair isn't growing into a life form of its own.

    b) Neither are murder convicts on death row when they get their lethal injection, but you think that's wrong somehow.


    a) Because distinctions have to be made in people's minds to distinguish between a fertilized ovum or zygote and a well-developed foetus. They are incredibly different organic things, but people tend to throw a blanket over the situation and think they are the same.

    b) I don't know exactly, it's just where the politicians feel comfortable about it. I personally think that it should be before the time it can survive successfully and independantly* out the womb, because it seems both ironic and wrong that on one side of the hospital you have doctors seeking to save premature births and on the other you have doctors seeking to abort them.

    (*Independantly meaning with the assistance of doctors, not just left on some steppe somewhere)
    a) It's for comfort. They like having an imaginary line that the fetus crosses in order to become a human, because it's discomforting to knowingly kill a person. The differences between a zygote, fetus, and baby are simply stages of development - none of them mark the beginning of humanity.

    b) You're right, they should be trying to save them in all cases.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.