184

Because the definition of an organism isn’t dependent on a particular gestational stage.

A tumor is not an organism because it is a cellular component of an organism. It is a part of a whole.

185

Yet that’s all I’m focused on. Abortion is about whether or not we can kill our offspring. Without life, no other rights and privileges matter.

Leftists keep repeating this falsehood.

186

Actually, Adroit, there is debate in the biological community even now as to whether to classify tumors as organisms.

The definition of life and distinct forms of life is very fuzzy…gets fuzzier the more we learn.

@Samson_Corwell in another thread warned about the dangers of s\ascribing to scientism.

He was right to do so.

187

Your focus of value is too narrow. Killing a life is not the only way to devalue it.

And the latter is not a falsehood (nor am I “a leftist”). It is an easily seen thing in many (not all) pro-lifers.

Vigorous defense of a child in the womb. The value of that child’s life surpasses all other considerations.

Once that child is out of the womb, what happens to him/her is no longer of any concern. It’s the parents’ responsibility, and if they make bad choices so that child has poor quality of life…oh well.

The value of that child’s life is now subordinate to other conditions.

188

Simplified, a tumor is just ordinary cells—which are definitely not organisms—whose telomeres don’t deplete and thus divide indefinitely. One could argue that if they divide enough, they eventually accumulate enough mutations to be genetically distinct from the host. But that’s a whole separate evolutionary argument beyond the scope of what we’re talking about here. An unborn human, at every single gestational stage, is a distinct human organism (i.e. life). That is indisputable, biologically speaking.

I would argue I’m hardly ascribing to scientism. I’m pointing out very basic biology definitions. Regardless, they have no bearing on the legal argument of abortion.

189

No, the textbooks don’t say that because that’s not biology. It’s morality. Take a bioethics class and you’ll have plenty of discussion, but embryology does not bog itself down with determining what constitutes a individual human life.

190

I think the definition of an organism depends on many things and characteristics of a gestational age have impact on those things.

A fetus is a part of a whole too.

191

Science has a hard enough time when it gets to defining what even is alive.

Part of the problem is that it’s so obvious 99% of the time if something is alive. It doesn’t take a genius to know a rock and a horse are different. But when you get into the fuzzy gray area between, then it gets very difficult.

192

No, it’s not. It’s distinct from the mother. That it’s dependent on the mother to grow during the gestational stages doesn’t change that fact. It is not some sub-component of the adult organism. It is a distinct organism, full stop. No biologist would agree with you. This isn’t some normative argument. It’s simply a descriptive one.

We’ll have to agree to disagree as I think we’re at an impasse. No big deal.

193

conservative republican christian

194

Let’s not forget all the kids in cages in this country too…being watched by adults who have NOT been investigated to wean the child molesters out.

195

It’s different from the bother but it’s not separate. It’s completely inseparable. That matters. Biologists don’t care for determining what is or isn’t a “individual human life”. It serves no purpose.

But I agree to disagree.

196

Yes…like I said…why I hate moral absolutists.

Because most of them are not being honest with themselves.

Provide them the right context and they will value some human life over others.

Not might…WILL.

197

I’ll repeat: Abortion is about whether or not we can kill our offspring. Life and death is the question at hand.

Your attempt to justify abortion by expanding your focus to people whose live you judge to be harsh just begs the question of whether you are suggesting those lives should be terminated too.

Most leftists say that.

You’ll keep repeating this until I flat out call it a *** and get a time out.

198

You’re flat out wrong.

199

Ah I see your misunderstanding. You’ve made the same mistake before

I have made no attempts, in this thread or any other, to justify abortion.

Your bias is that if someone does argue the same way you do, in favor of the same positions you’re in favor of, they’re obviously aguing in favor of the thing you’re against.

I rarely advocate positions here…I spend my time questioning the assumptions behind the arguments people make.

200

I’m sorry, but why are you still tugging at my apron?

201

Thanks.

202

Right. And you’re not a leftist. :roll_eyes:

Just everything you are saying here is leftist and agrees with the pro-abortion arguments.

You can pretend you’re playing that game, but your posts betray you.

203

Because you’re wrong and you can’t stand it.

You can come here and pester everyone with your attitudes and trolling, but man, when someone pushes back on you, you can’t handle yourself with any sort of grace.

You’re wrong here, and you know it. You can pretend to make the current state of our exchange my fault, but that won’t change the fact that you’re wrong. And you hate that.