Abortion

[Into the Night]

Actually, they do. They just don't have -2- complete sets of DNA,

Paradox. Irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

 

[AProudLefty]

Obviously. You try to justify murder.

Blatant lie.

 

[Into the Night]

It's a catch all for all stages of human development. I know of no other term that can encompass them all.

So? You try to justify murder.

You, Into the Night and gfm all exclude the human stages of human development known as human sperm and human egg from the term "living human". I don't.

Go study biology.

A dictionary, encyclopedia or legal tome is far more than just an IP address. Wordnik, which I use on a regular basis, is an enormous trove of information.

False authority fallacy. No dictionary defines any word.

From Wikipedia:

False authority fallacy. Wikipedia does not define any word (except Wikipedia).

Legal dictionaries, such as legaldictionary.net, are also great as they delineate how the law defines words, which is quite important, especially on such subjections such as abortion and the legal definition of a natural person.

Pivot fallacy. False authority fallacy. No legal dictionary defines any word or any law.

 

[Into the Night]

Human sperms and eggs are living and human. For me, that's enough to classify them as living humans. Together, they can create embryos, fetuses and if a pregnancy comes to turn, born babies, but that doesn't change the fact that they are still living humans even if they don't join.

You are still locked in this paradox. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

 

[Into the Night]

Setting aside your description of performing an abortion, I was actually thinking of cases where the mother decides to freeze her fertilized eggs thinking that she may wish to conceive at a future date, but then decides not to conceive. I suppose you would consider her pulling the plug on the life support of her fertilized eggs to be murder?

Word games won't work, Scotch. Abortion is murder.

 

[Into the Night]

I agree with 1 and I think I agree with 2. However, with 3, I have my doubts that there is some medical way to determine when pregnancy termination would be akin to murder.

Irrelevant. Abortion is murder.

 

[AProudLefty]

So? You try to justify murder.

Go study biology.

False authority fallacy. No dictionary defines any word.

False authority fallacy. Wikipedia does not define any word (except Wikipedia).

Pivot fallacy. False authority fallacy. No legal dictionary defines any word or any law.

Roll em dice!

 

[Into the Night]

Blatant lie.

Lie.

 

[AProudLefty]

Irrelevant. Abortion is murder.

At what stage?

 

[Into the Night]

Sperm lack a heartbeat and a complete set of DNA (only 23 chromosomes instead of 46). Sperm in and of themselves will NEVER EVER grow/develop into a living human (and any/all of the associated growth/development stages). There is no "living human" involved with sperm.

See above.

I think you meant to say "same egg were to be fertilized by a sperm". Yes, all sorts of "things" change at that point. At that point, there's now a zygote (a diploid cell) containing a FULL/COMPLETE unique set of DNA from both parents (46 chromosomes, 23 from the father's sperm and 23 from the mother's egg).

At that point, the now-formed zygote (a newly formed human with a unique set of DNA, distinguishing it from any other human) will continue to grow/develop as a human, going through all of the various stages of human growth/development [from zygote to elder] (unless, of course, some killer-doctor gets contractually hired by the child's mother to snuff the life out of the child before it can even be born).

Indeed, we do believe that.

I think he just finds it to be irrelevant. Like I said, he's like a "buck in rut" when it comes to staying laser-focused on the relevant information.

He is locked in a paradox here:
1) Sperm or eggs have a complete set of chromosomes.
2) Sperm or eggs do not have a complete set of chromosomes.

He is also trying to seriously claim that a sperm is a baby.

Killing a zygote is killing a human being. It is murder.

 

[Into the Night]

At what stage?

RQAA. Pay attention.

 

[AProudLefty]

RQAA. Pay attention.

Roll em dice!

 

[AProudLefty]

He is locked in a paradox here:
1) Sperm or eggs have a complete set of chromosomes.
2) Sperm or eggs do not have a complete set of chromosomes.

He is also trying to seriously claim that a sperm is a baby.

Killing a zygote is killing a human being. It is murder.

 

[Scott]

1. What abortions are performed without the customer signing the contractual paperwork and waivers?

Illegal ones I imagine.

Are you saying that they enter a verbal contract?

I'm saying that when it comes to illegal abortions, there is probably little if any paperwork involved.

 

[Scott]

2. What entities with a heartbeat and human DNA are somehow not living humans?

As I've mentioned before, I have been unable to find a dictionary entry for 'living human'.

Immaterial. We're using the definition I provided.

No, we aren't. Since I have been unable to find a dictionary, encyclopedia or legal dictionary definition, I am using my own definition of 'living human'. My definition of 'living human' includes human sperm and eggs.

 

[Scott]

3. How is {customer who is a pregnant woman} somehow not a proper subset of {customer}?

I have no problem with this part.

Is that an answer?

It is, though it looks like I need to elaborate. You seem to have assumed that I wouldn't agree that a "customer who is a pregnant woman" is a proper subset of a customer. You've made a false assumption.

 

[Scott]

4. How is the killing of a living human somehow not a killing?

2 problems here:
1- We haven't come to an agreement as to what constitutes a "living human".

I can't control your "agreement".

On that, at least, we can agree.

 

[Scott]

{abortion} is a proper subset of {contract killing}.

You're a perfect example of someone whose words used to describe abortion reflects their beliefs.

Therefore, what beliefs are my words reflecting [snip]

The fact that you believe that abortions are contract killings reflects the fact that you believe that abortions are killings, rather than other words that I've seen used in dictionaries, such as the termination of a pregnancy or the removal of the fetus from a pregnant woman.

 

[Scott]

I keep pointing out that you refuse to engage in the discussion.

An unsubstantiated assertion.

An observation.

An unsubstantiated one.

My questions remain unanswered.

Another unsubstantiated assertion.

 

[Scott]

The customer part isn't the problem. It's the killing part that's the problem. I just explained this in my previous post here to IBD and it's why I asked if you could find a dictionary or encyclopedia entry that used the word kill in reference to abortions.

When a living human is caused to die, what would you call that? Hint: starts with a "k".

I've already pointed out time and again that I have yet to find a dictionary use the k word when it comes to abortions. wordnik.com has an extensive list of dictionary definitions for abortion. None of them use the k word. See for yourself if you don't believe me:

abortion — definition, examples, related words and more at Wordnik

All the words

www.wordnik.com