- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question about the definition of 'person' for anti-choicers
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:49 am
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:49 am
If an embryo and sperm become a 'person' the instant they join - what becomes of that 'person' if it splits in two to form identical twins?
Further - if someone absorbs a fraternal twin in utero (which is quite common actually) - is does that mean they are actually two people? Should they get two votes?
EDIT - for Jesus believers - the scientific basis for a 'virgin birth' would be parthenogenic reproduction. If that is actually possible for humans - it means every single oocyte in a woman's ovaries are human beings - (and not just a any human being, but a potential 2nd coming). Wouldn't that mean removal of the ovaries would constitute mass murder?
Further - if someone absorbs a fraternal twin in utero (which is quite common actually) - is does that mean they are actually two people? Should they get two votes?
EDIT - for Jesus believers - the scientific basis for a 'virgin birth' would be parthenogenic reproduction. If that is actually possible for humans - it means every single oocyte in a woman's ovaries are human beings - (and not just a any human being, but a potential 2nd coming). Wouldn't that mean removal of the ovaries would constitute mass murder?
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 10:55 am
15
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:50 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
If an embryo and sperm become a 'person' the instant they join - what becomes of that 'person' if it splits in two to form identical twins?
another person is formed.
/thread
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:50 am to catholictigerfan
quote:
another person is formed.
So the second twin is the son or daughter of the first twin?
How do you tell which is which?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:51 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
So the second twin is the son or daughter of the first twin?
How do you tell which is which?
No, the second twin is the sibling of the first twin. This isn't that complicated.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:51 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
So the second twin is the son or daughter of the first twin?
How do you tell which is which?
it is how the natural process of identical twins comes about, it is still the son/daughter of the women.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:55 am to SpidermanTUba
This is all called "science" and "biology" and, judging by your participation on this board, is obviously something that you are against.
The Abortion industry is as anti-science a movement as we have in American culture and that is obvious to anyone who has seen an ultrasound.
Why don't you push for outlawing abortion after 12 weeks at the very least? The science is clear. That is a human child.
The Abortion industry is as anti-science a movement as we have in American culture and that is obvious to anyone who has seen an ultrasound.
Why don't you push for outlawing abortion after 12 weeks at the very least? The science is clear. That is a human child.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:55 am to kingbob
quote:
No, the second twin is the sibling of the first twin
So siblings can now begat other siblings?
That's an interesting concept.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:57 am to catholictigerfan
quote:
it is how the natural process of identical twins comes about, it is still the son/daughter of the women.
So your concept of a 'person' includes the ability to split into two whole separate persons?
I think that's just wild. Though I'd still like to know which of the two is the original person. How do you tell? Certainly there must be a way - a "person" has a unique identity, by definition almost they have to be distinguishable from other persons.
This post was edited on 7/17/14 at 10:58 am
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:57 am to SpidermanTUba
Question for you - when does the embryo become a person?
On a side note, can you ever have an honest discussion with anyone? Are you so craving attention that you had to headline your post with "Anti Choicers?" Are you that needy?
On a side note, can you ever have an honest discussion with anyone? Are you so craving attention that you had to headline your post with "Anti Choicers?" Are you that needy?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 10:59 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Question for you - when does the embryo become a person?
As a just recently fertilized egg is not a person under any reasonable definition - and a just about to be born baby is a person by any reasonable definition - it must happen somewhere in between.
quote:
On a side note, can you ever have an honest discussion with anyone? Are you so craving attention that you had to headline your post with "Anti Choicers?" Are you that needy?
I was hoping to talk to anti-choicers. If I had wanted to talk to pro-choicers I would have used the term "pro-choicer". Jeez.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:00 am to Wolfhound45
quote:
Are you that needy?
He is, and this board feeds him every damn day. Just ignore him. He'll go away eventually.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:01 am to SpidermanTUba
Pregnancy begins at implantation, not conception. A zygote cannot ever become a fetus if it doesn't implant somewhere. This is an area where some religious ideas about pregnancy and medicine which are just blatantly false.
Beyond that, it's a lot of personal beliefs on the matter.
Beyond that, it's a lot of personal beliefs on the matter.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:02 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:In the womb and in Alabama, yes.
So siblings can now begat other siblings?
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:03 am to DrunkenStuporMan
quote:
In the womb and in Alabama, yes.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:03 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
- it must happen somewhere in between.
When?
quote:
I was hoping to talk to anti-choicers.
Your lack of intellectual depth and ability to reason is showing. Badly.
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:03 am to SpidermanTUba
and Tuba embarrasses himself in another thread.
you should really start thinking these things out before typing
you should really start thinking these things out before typing
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:04 am to SpidermanTUba
So i guess if "pro life" has turned into "anti choice", then you must be "anti-life"...???? Amirite tuba??
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:05 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
As a just recently fertilized egg is not a person under any reasonable definition - and a just about to be born baby is a person by any reasonable definition - it must happen somewhere in between.
Brilliant! You come up with this all by yourself? Quit showing off that 188 IQ! Show off!
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:05 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
If I had wanted to talk to pro-choicers I would have used the term "pro-choicer"
you mean "anti-lifer"
Posted on 7/17/14 at 11:07 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
If an embryo and sperm become a 'person' the instant they join - what becomes of that 'person' if it splits in two to form identical twins?
Both.
quote:
Further - if someone absorbs a fraternal twin in utero (which is quite common actually) - is does that mean they are actually two people? Should they get two votes?
Yes, and yes.
quote:
Wouldn't that mean removal of the ovaries would constitute mass murder?
No.
This shite is really not that complicated. Abortion is always wrong. However whenever a morally wrong act is being conducted to avoid another moral act the principle of double effect applies. Ectopic pregnancy is a good example of a situation where the principle of double effect applies.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News