Ireland legalizes the killing of the unborn

[Roy]

What does it say about our society when it can even entertain such a reprehensible evil practice?

Perhaps you shouldn't harangue people from societies that don't.

[carpedm9587]

I see what you did there.

So...is that a good thing or a bad thing...?

[Cerebrum123]

So...is that a good thing or a bad thing...?

Depending on who you are, a pun can be "good" or bad.

[One Bad Pig]

Not really. I'm just highlighting flaws in MM's anti-abortion argument and his knowledge of basic biology. Have you fallen for MM and LPOT's other falsehoods, that I'm a rabid pro-choicer (I'm not) or that I've claimed hair and skin cells are organisms (I haven't)?

PS: thanks, but I do admit when I'm wrong.

I accept your attestation that you have not made such arguments - but an argument via spermatozoa isn't any better than the above.

[carpedm9587]

Depending on who you are, a pun can be "good" or bad.

I completely missed the emphasized text...

pun not intended...

[lilpixieofterror]

Not really. I'm just highlighting flaws in MM's anti-abortion argument and his knowledge of basic biology. Have you fallen for MM and LPOT's other falsehoods, that I'm a rabid pro-choicer (I'm not) or that I've claimed hair and skin cells are organisms (I haven't)?

PS: thanks, but I do admit when I'm wrong.

[Mountain Man]

So let's revisit this in light of some of the subsequent claims made by Ignorant Roy; here is my argument as originally presented:

At the moment of conception, the resulting organism:

1) Meets even the most conservative scientific definition of life.
2) Has human DNA.
3) Is guilty of no legal or moral wrong.

Therefore, abortion kills an innocent human life.

Q.E.D.

Tell me, Ignorant Roy, at what point did I move the goalposts like you claimed?

Of course we can't overlook the hilarious fact that you explicitly referred to spermatozoa as "organisms", and that Dimbulb, who boasts about his science degree, made a similar argument regarding skin cells.

[carpedm9587]

So let's revisit this in light of some of the subsequent claims made by Ignorant Roy; here is my argument as originally presented:

Tell me, Ignorant Roy, at what point did I move the goalposts like you claimed?

Of course we can't overlook the hilarious fact that you explicitly referred to spermatozoa as "organisms", and that Dimbulb, who boasts about his science degree, made a similar argument regarding skin cells.

So let's take the case of a culture of human stem cells (let's use induced pluripotent stem cells in a nourishing culture). These:

1) Meet even the most conservative scientific definition of "life"
2) Have human DNA
3) Are guilty of no legal or moral wrong

Therefore, flushing these stem cells down the toilet is killing an innocent human life...

Q.E.D.

Don't get me wrong - I think aborting an implanted fetus is indeed ending an innocent human life. I just don't think your argument gets you where you want it to get you.

[firstfloor]

At the moment of conception, the resulting organism:

1) Meets even the most conservative scientific definition of life.
2) Has human DNA.
3) Is guilty of no legal or moral wrong.

Therefore, abortion kills an innocent human life.

Q.E.D.

It is simply wrong to describe a fertilised ovum as a human being. A fertilised ovum is not a human being, it is a biological reaction. It has no head, no heart, no spine, and no consciousness. It is a collection of biological elements which is no more a human being than my leg, my arm, any of my organs, even my toe nails.

It may someday become a human being, but it is not a human being.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/i...uman-1.3181476

[Mountain Man]

So let's take the case of a culture of human stem cells (let's use induced pluripotent stem cells in a nourishing culture). These:

1) Meet even the most conservative scientific definition of "life"
2) Have human DNA
3) Are guilty of no legal or moral wrong

Therefore, flushing these stem cells down the toilet is killing an innocent human life...

Q.E.D.

Don't get me wrong - I think aborting an implanted fetus is indeed ending an innocent human life. I just don't think your argument gets you where you want it to get you.

Seriously, carpe? Stem cells are not organisms, nor can they be said to even loosely qualify as life-forms.

I expect this kind of nonsense from Dimbulb and Ignorant Roy, but not you.

[carpedm9587]

Seriously, carpe? Stem cells are not organisms, nor can they be said to even loosely qualify as life-forms.

I expect this kind of nonsense from Dimbulb and Ignorant Roy, but not you.

I can only respond to the argument as you put it forward. You did not say "organism" or "life-form" in your argument. You merely said "life." So your argument fails unless you can find a way to define "life" in a way that excludes stem cells in a living culture. As far as I know, viable stem cells meet the criteria for "life."

If you are changing or clarifying your argument, you are certainly free to do so. I'll try not to use the "moving the goal posts" line that so often gets used when I clarify my arguments.

[Tassman]

Please show me where I have ever said or implied that abortion was done "on a whim".

So you recognise that the fetus is clearly regarded by most people and most societies as something special that should not be casually discarded.

It's you sick 'lot' who equate it with "swatting a fly".

Ah, so those who are pro-choice are a "sick lot"; that's the judgemental approach we've come to expect from Evangelicals. As for "swatting a fly", I think the reference was to the equal lack of cognition between a fly and an insensate embryo in the first trimester, which is when virtually all abortions are performed.

[Starlight]

Of course we can't overlook the hilarious fact that you explicitly referred to spermatozoa as "organisms", and that Dimbulb, who boasts about his science degree, made a similar argument regarding skin cells.

Stem cells are not organisms, nor can they be said to even loosely qualify as life-forms.

You seem to think that repeating your idiocy over and over and over again will somehow make you go from being wrong and ignorant to correct. That's a very Trumpian approach to lies.

Try and get this idea from basic biology into your head: Cells are alive. They metabolize, reproduce, respond to their environment etc. "Alive". "Organism". Whatever you want to call it. Cells are the basic unit of life. Stop repeating your ignorant idiocies that they are not life.

Frankly, I still do not understand why you, a person ignorant on so many different issues, and who I think it's safe to assume never attended any university or opened any university textbook, feel bold enough to try to lecture scientists on things from YEC to climate change to cell biology, and you manage to put forth the silliest positions on all those issues. Get a grip.

[carpedm9587]

So you recognise that the fetus is clearly regarded by most people and most societies as something special that should not be casually discarded.

Ah, so those who are pro-choice are a "sick lot"; that's the judgemental approach we've come to expect from Evangelicals. As for "swatting a fly", I think the reference was to the equal lack of cognition between a fly and an insensate embryo in the first trimester, which is when virtually all abortions are performed.

Just to be clear, "virtually all" is about 90%. About 1.3% happen after the 21st week. Since the human gestation period is 9 months (40 weeks, 280 days), and the first trimester is about 13 weeks, that suggests that 8.7% of abortions happen between 13 and 21 weeks.

[Tassman]

Just to be clear, "virtually all" is about 90%. About 1.3% happen after the 21st week. Since the human gestation period is 9 months (40 weeks, 280 days), and the first trimester is about 13 weeks, that suggests that 8.7% of abortions happen between 13 and 21 weeks.