(June 30, 2022 at 2:21 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(June 28, 2022 at 9:00 pm)Jehanne Wrote: An acorn is not an oak tree.

Same organism—at different stages of it's development.

Pro-life arguments have a definite advantage on this front. And I would be surprised if you've ever convinced someone that a fetus isn't a developing human by saying acorns aren't oak trees.

That's why it's necessary to understand that pro-choice positions aren't dependent on such facts. The famous example is that of someone being connected to a sick person as a kind of living dialysis machine. There's no doubt here that the sick person is a fully grown human being. The question is whether it's right to keep the healthy person tied up to the sick person if they ever wanted to leave.

I could be cloned from a fingernail paring. Should my nail clippings be protected by law and preserved because they have the same potential to become a functioning human being as does a zygote?

Boru

(June 30, 2022 at 2:48 pm)Angrboda Wrote: They have the potential to become something.  Arguing that simply because something has a potential to become something that they should be treated as the completed thing is no less devoid of facts.

I would say that sperm is what has reproductive potential, and conception is the tipping point that transforms that potential into the developing organism.

Now, when I use the phrase developing organism, I don't mean that the end result of that development is the emergence of the organism. What I mean is that the organism itself has begun to pass through stages of development. So I agree with you, but the potential we should be talking about isn't whether one stage of development can reach another stage, it's whether any of those stages precedes the organism.

(June 30, 2022 at 3:17 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(June 30, 2022 at 2:48 pm)Angrboda Wrote: They have the potential to become something.  Arguing that simply because something has a potential to become something that they should be treated as the completed thing is no less devoid of facts.

Hmm when a ball is resting on a table, we call that potential energy, right? But once it falls, that potential is transformed into actual movement. Likewise, we can say that sperm has reproductive potential (as an incomplete gamete) but conception is the tipping point at which that potential is transformed into the actual development of a new organism.

To be clear, when I use the phrase developing organism, I don't mean that the end result of that development is the organism. What I mean is that the organism itself has begun to pass through its stages of development. So I agree with you, but the potential we should be talking about isn't whether one stage of development can reach another stage, it's whether any of those stages produces the new organism.

Whatever that organism is or is not, it is dependent on its mother for its survival; it is part of her body, and unlike a mechanical dialysis machine, cannot be replaced, transferred, etc.

(June 30, 2022 at 3:17 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(June 30, 2022 at 2:48 pm)Angrboda Wrote: They have the potential to become something.  Arguing that simply because something has a potential to become something that they should be treated as the completed thing is no less devoid of facts.

I would say that sperm is what has reproductive potential, and conception is the tipping point that transforms that potential into the developing organism.

Now, when I use the phrase developing organism, I don't mean that the end result of that development is the emergence of the organism. What I mean is that the organism itself has begun to pass through stages of development. So I agree with you, but the potential we should be talking about isn't whether one stage of development can reach another stage, it's whether any of those stages precedes the organism.

All preceding stages precede the organism back to the beginning of time. You are simply doubling down on treating it as all one thing or the other. Like I said, rather than acknowledge nuance, some prefer to insist on black & white thinking.

Quote:I would say that sperm is what has reproductive potential, and conception is the tipping point that transforms that potential into the developing organism.

Potential is meaningless. It isn't now, therefore, it isn't.....

Quote:Now, when I use the phrase developing organism, I don't mean that the end result of that development is the emergence of the organism. What I mean is that the organism itself has begun to pass through stages of development. So I agree with you, but the potential we should be talking about isn't whether one stage of development can reach another stage, it's whether any of those stages precedes the organism.

Anything and everything is a development....

(June 30, 2022 at 3:24 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Whatever that organism is or is not, it is dependent on its mother for its survival; it is part of her body, and unlike a mechanical dialysis machine, cannot be replaced, transferred, etc.

The dialysis analogy aims to capture all of that. In the analogy the sick person depends on being plugged into you for their survival. They will die if you wish to be unplugged. The question is whether you are legally or morally obligated to remain connected to them against your wishes.

The analogy takes every aspect of a pregnancy into account, and even treats the fetus like a full grown adult so there's no ambiguity. (The analogy works even if you were forced into this position or did so voluntarily.)

I guarantee you'll win over more pro-life supporters with this analogy than by attempting to dehumanize a human fetus, etc.

(June 30, 2022 at 5:53 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: The dialysis analogy aims to illustrate all that. In the analogy the sick person depends on being plugged into you for their survival. They will die if you wish to be unplugged. The question is whether you are legally, or perhaps even morally, obligated to remain connected to them against your wishes.

The analogy takes every aspect of a pregnancy into account, and even treats the fetus like a full grown adult so there's no ambiguity.

Some flatworms depend on the human body to survive but that doesn't mean that the host is obligated to feed them.

Act and potency arguments for/against abortion is irrelevant anyway (I somewhat agree with John on that). Of course, a human fetus has the potential to be a human being and is nothing like a sperm cell, but that is all moot. The pro-choice isn't (or shouldn't) depend on what the fetus is or is not. It is about providing the fairest solution to a moral dilemma, whereby the woman herself bearing the child in her womb gets to ultimately decide whether she wishes to carry it to full term because she is the one intimately dealing with the burden and her body, health, and liberty is what is being affected. And if we respect women's rights, we should afford them that freedom to decide and be in control of their personal matters.

(June 30, 2022 at 5:53 pm)John 6IX Breez Wrote: I guarantee you'll win over more pro-life supporters with this analogy than by attempting to dehumanize a human fetus, etc.

They believe that an individual human being is a hybrid, part physical, part spiritual; the spiritual part comes into existence at the moment of conception, supposedly, the result of a divine act.

Of course, in the history of Western Christianity, the Catholic Church, after the regional Council of Carthage, taught that all infants, born or unborn, who died without sacramental Baptism were consigned to Hell proper, to suffer some torments for all time and eternity, the punishment of original sin.  Later on this view was mitigated by Peter Abelard, who said that such infants were only deprived of the Beatific Vision, Heaven, a view that was taken up by Thomas Aquinas and entered into the realm of scholasticism.

The Church tolerated such a viewpoint, which became the basis of centuries long practice of excommunication for having an abortion, but, not for infanticide.  In any case, very few of the so-called pro-life people believe in the damnation of unbaptized infants.  Their belief system, as always, continues to be a work-in-progress.

Mandatory child support from the time of conception to include medical care and any other needs. As soon as pregnancy is detected, that's a tax deduction.

While I agree that men should have some say on this matter the fact of it is only the pregnant woman can feel all the feels and is in the position of having to endure everything a pregnancy entails...wanted or not.

I tend to close my ears when men start telling me what women should and shouldn't do when it comes to their bodies. We are not incubators.

Roe being overturned pisses me off in ways I can't even begin to list.

And let's take a moment to look at how many pregnancies end before the woman even knows she was pregnant. God's grand plan for reproduction has plenty of flaws.