Abortion: Your Views...

[SOLDIER #819]

Not trying to be rude, but one doesn't have to hold a belief in a subject to argue for it. What I'm arguing is that abortion, except in cases where the child and/or mother's life would be endangered if carried to full term, should retain its right to life.

I have absolutely no problems with you not stating your position without good reason. You're not being rude at all.

As I said before, heartbeats develop around 22 days after conception. Brain activity develops at about six weeks.

Hmm... I'm not sure what you mean by brain activity. Again, when I speak of brain activity, I mean activity that can be detected by EEG. That, according to a source like this, happens at around the 3rd month. What is your take on the term?

That depends on how much you value human life. If somebody is "braindead", are they still alive? What if they're just comatose?

That is true. By the 3rd month the fetus may be in a coma-like state. It is possible to argue that the brain has not developed to the point to where "human" consciousness is possible. Or I could say that there is no precedent for such consciousness before entering into this comatose state due to the lack of a developed brain, unlike a comatose patient, making any sort of experience impossible. However, you may be able to render this a falsehood with citations, or just assert the opposite. If you do the latter, we'd be stuck.

Therefore, if I were to assume that six weeks were the proper cut-off period for an abortion, would that bring us to an agreement? A lack of a functioning brain would have me assume there is no reason for it to be living on the "level", if you would, of a human.

I wonder if this would actually bring anything to a conclusion, however. There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding. We both value human life and I think it is fair to assume that the vast majority of those on either side of the debate, as well as those in between, do as well.

The issue is not with how much value we place in a human life, but where this life begins. What distinguishes a clump of cells from the sperm and egg from which they were derived, blood cells, or any other organism on the cellular scale? When and why do we distinguish a "human" from a group of cells? For me, I think that science can answer this question. Whether it's 3 months or 6 weeks, I'm willing to go along with it if it has its proper empirical basis.

The debate's answer has its roots in beginnings. Without proper understanding of the basis behind a person's words we cannot ascertain whether the entirety of the argument holds water. Critiquing one's argument may have merit, but the critique itself does not necessarily advance the critic's stance or goals.

This is why I asked why you are taking a pro-life-esque stance. I believe it is quite relevant.