The Abortion Paradox

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
Okay, well as a biochemist you are certainly more adept at understanding it than I.

Not necessarily, I just hope we can agree on the basics. If you read a research paper on T1 cells, I bet you could quiz me on it and I'd likely get a lot wrong. Not because either of us are 'smarter' but because you've done some digging into it and it's not involved in my daily worklife.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
You do agree that genetics plays a role in who we are and why we act the way we do then right?

Well I...

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
If yes,

Hey, no fair. You didn't let me answer yet

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
then if you put a soul in a different body wouldn't they be a different person?

It's an interesting experiment. Since we have no scientific answer, there have been many o' sci-fi movies where a soul had swapped bodies. I see the body as a tool, not who I am. If I were in a different body, I'd likely be the same 'person', just have to use the tool differently than I do in some cases.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
And if souls can be injected into different bodies, why wouldn't the "aborted soul" also share the same fate?

All pure speculation of course, but maybe the soul got sent back to where it came from? Or, perhaps the soul got sent to a final destination instead of a mere bodily replacement. Maybe the enegry of the soul was dispersed to wander aimlessly as microscopic energy in the universe. No one knows, no valid reason to assume either.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

You are dancing around the subject in an attempt to say that abortion is wrong. This was not the point of the thread.

I'm not dancing, I'm saying your logic is flawed and I explained why.

reply to post by Xtrozero


And yet so is yours. Had my mother slept an extra minute one day, she still (on a probability standpoint) would have met my father after hanging out for a couple hours in a night club. However, had him and his friend continued to smoke and not been walking near her car when she needed help she wouldn't have and I still wouldn't be here today.

Your logic has it's points, I admit that. But it also has flaws.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

If we're not talking about souls, then broken down, the human body is worth about $4.50

Technically speaking of course. As for the rest of your post, you're absolutely right, every choice has a butterfly effect hence the argument of some not being alive today due to a decision to not have an abortion.

Value as in socal or moral value of life. Why put a value on any life...

Originally posted by OhZone
What is so great about life?

Many of us who do not feel life sucks or are indifferent towards it feel that living is a wonderful and beautiful state of being as well as learning. There's much to do, explore and experience. Without it, my soul would eternally be lacking. I've come to know some great people, go though great trials, and persevere with some great successes. I've come to know love, patience, understanding, hope, faith, and peace. My good memories are always something to smile back upon and my bad ones a testament to overcoming adversity. Life is worth living, if you ask me, and cannot understand how anyone could justify killing merely because they're unhappy with theirs.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
One life sacrificed for the creation of two.

One life is sacrificed for what could've been the creation of three. No matter how you do the math, you're still -1

reply to post by saint4God


Do you feel the same way about animals and plants? Because we kill a lot of them without people getting all up in arms about it and calling it murder(there are some that do though). Do you feel that the value of an animal's life is less than the value of yours?

reply to post by saint4God


This isn't true, the two that came after wouldn't have existed if the one hadn't died in the first place. We're not -1. We were until the two were created. Now it's +1 if you want to be mathematical about it.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
Do you feel the same way about animals and plants? Because we kill a lot of them without people getting all up in arms about it and calling it murder(there are some that do though). Do you feel that the value of an animal's life is less than the value of yours?

The question is "do animals have souls?" To that I say I don't know. I won't be killing and eating babies however. Equate babies to animals and plants if you like, but I have a lot of respect for people.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
And yet so is yours. Had my mother slept an extra minute one day, she still (on a probability standpoint) would have met my father after hanging out for a couple hours in a night club. However, had him and his friend continued to smoke and not been walking near her car when she needed help she wouldn't have and I still wouldn't be here today.

Your logic has it's points, I admit that. But it also has flaws.

My logic is any action spins a totally different future, so saying abortions change the future is correct, but I need to ask one question then....

Why say abortions and not putting your left sock on first instead of your right for both actions will change the future. What I find flawed in your logic is to pick one event when the events are infinite.

So since you had a choice of infinite events why pick this one…maybe that is more important to talk about than an infinite paradox.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
This isn't true, the two that came after wouldn't have existed if the one hadn't died in the first place. We're not -1. We were until the two were created. Now it's +1 if you want to be mathematical about it.

Three zygotes were formed according to history. One was destroyed:

3 - 1 = 2

QED

The rest is mere speculation.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]

reply to post by saint4God


No one said anything about eating babies. By the explanations given here, killing the animals and plants are still murder. We use plants to make things that give our lives convenience as well. They're alive, and by killing them (considering that people are saying all life has value) we are still committing "murder".

Originally posted by saint4God
The question is "do animals have souls?" To that I say I don't know. I won't be killing and eating babies however. Equate babies to animals and plants if you like, but I have a lot of respect for people.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]

Ok, I just spit my coke out my nose and mouth reading this....you my friend are a funny guy.

reply to post by saint4God


Either way you say it, it's not a negative number. Lives were gained because one was lost.

EDIT: Not one line.

[edit on 1/15/09 by TasteTheMagick]

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
No one said anything about eating babies. By the explanations given here, killing the animals and plants are still murder. We use plants to make things that give our lives convenience as well. They're alive, and by killing them (considering that people are saying all life has value) we are still committing "murder".

A dictionary is a big help in this case:

Main Entry: 1mur·der
Function: noun
1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

www.merriam-webster.com...

Rewrite the dictionary as you wish, but I wouldn't expect the whole of humanity to abide by your personal definitions.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
No one said anything about eating babies. By the explanations given here, killing the animals and plants are still murder. We use plants to make things that give our lives convenience as well. They're alive, and by killing them (considering that people are saying all life has value) we are still committing "murder".

You are heading in the direction or morals and social values. So I guess it all depends on what you find sacred. I do not know you so do you put the value of a stock of corn as the same as a human, or even your own life?

Since I eat meat, does that mean my morals are that I can kill at will anyone who just might happen to interfere with my life? Morals are a funny thing, Plato, one of the founding fathers of morality sat and ponder these issues as he had slave boys around to take care of him.

So we would need to determine if you view human life as having any value or not. If you view it having no value over let’s say a plant then it would be interesting how you lead your life.


[edit on 15-1-2009 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by saint4God


I didn't rewrite anything. People said IN THIS THREAD that abortion was murder. Now, by the very definition that you have just provided, this is not true. It is not unlawful to get an abortion, nor is any malice intended.

Now the argument comes down to the matter of life:

life     –noun 1. the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.

This designates that animals and plants are living as well. Killing them would be putting and end to life.

reply to post by Xtrozero


If you're going to find life sacred at all (I'm not taking a stand either way on the subject) then you must consider ALL life. You are doing something that a lot of humans tend to do and placing human life above and beyond everything else (save any god you may believe in). The fact of the matter is that humans ARE animals. There's no way around it.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick

If you're going to find life sacred at all (I'm not taking a stand either way on the subject) then you must consider ALL life. You are doing something that a lot of humans tend to do and placing human life above and beyond everything else (save any god you may believe in). The fact of the matter is that humans ARE animals. There's no way around it.

I didn't say life as sacred, I said human life as sacred. So you are suggesting that we should all die if we view any life as sacred, or if we didn't then all life has zero value?

Can I view plants and other animals as sacred and thank them in preserving my sacred life as I eat them?

You are jumping off in a very different direction than "the abortion paradox"

So once again why is a mother's life more important than the baby in her womb? Or why does it matter if the future has changed because a child was born and not aborted?

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
It is not unlawful to get an abortion,

It is against the law that I ascribe to.

Originally posted by TasteTheMagick
nor is any malice intended.

Notice it says "especially" not that it is required, but we can look at malice for a moment anyway:

Main Entry: mal·ice
desire to cause pain, injury, or distress to another

www.merriam-webster.com...

So you're saying there's no intent to cause pain or injury to another?

life     –noun 1. the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.

This designates that animals and plants are living as well. Killing them would be putting and end to life.

I'm glad we agree that abortion is killing a life. A tree will never become a person, nor will a mouse become a person, or a sponge become a person. This is the difference.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by saint4God]