Should we take eggs from aborted babies?

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by adjensen

 

Why would this disgust you?

It is revolting because it diminishes human beings to vaguely sentient (after a point) and vaguely sovereign sacks of meat who can be used, involuntarily, as a means of production and profit.

Nothing personal, but I don't understand why anyone wouldn't find this revolting.

It would give women who cannot have children the chance to be mothers.

As noted earlier, I am not opposed to in-vitro fertilization and there are several billion living, breathing donors who can provide eggs voluntarily.

reply to post by adjensen

It is revolting because it diminishes human beings to vaguely sentient (after a point) and vaguely sovereign sacks of meat who can be used, involuntarily, as a means of production and profit.

Nothing personal, but I don't understand why anyone wouldn't find this revolting.

But 16 week old foetus is not sentient, not sovereign, doesnt have volition and is not a human being. Id argue that comparing human beings as equals with it is what actually diminishes them.

Some of you are revolted by using the eggs, but not everyone has to be. It has more to do with superficial, unexamined emotions than real ethical problems, IMHO.

Originally posted by Maslo
But 16 week old foetus is not sentient, not sovereign, doesnt have volition and is not a human being.

What magic happens that turns a non-human being into a human being? Are you saying that any offspring from these harvested eggs would not be a human, because its mother was not a human?

Originally posted by Glinda
reply to post by newcovenant

 

There is NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY in the US Constitution. Abortion, prior to Roe v. Wade, was a STATES' RIGHTS ISSUE (given each state the right to self determine its position on the legality of abortion). R v. W made it a federal decision (and many legal theorists claim the Federal Court had no standing and that Roe v. Wade was/is in error).

sorry Glinda, there certainly is ... see the 4th Amendment.
the Constitution does not grant rights, it protects them, supposedly including "privacy".

when states enact laws depriving one from exercising their natural right (privacy) is how and when the Feds and SCOTUS get involved.

which goes back to this topic in the sense of 'who' owns the aborted material ?
does it default to the State since 'parental rights' would be a non-issue or does the 'ownership' become questionable by both 'donors' ??

what happens when the mother wants to donate the material and the father does not
(or vice versa) ?
what happens when the donation becomes a 'religious' offense to one of the 'donors' ??
what happens when the potential father isn't advised of the pending outcome ??

imho, there are too many questions to be answered before anything like this is becomes 'standard practice'.

Originally posted by links234

Originally posted by MyLifeRocks
On the other hand it will indirectly encourage abortion.

I think that's a bit of a stretch. An abortion isn't a decision that's come too lightly by a vast majority of people. I find it highly unlikely that anyone would get pregnant for the express purpose of aborting the fetus to harvest eggs. None of that makes sense.

It might make sense when they do it for the sole purpose of making some quick cash. Some people simply just don't care at all.

Anyways its a terrible idea.

reply to post by Honor93


The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Fourth Amendment DOES NOT guarantee privacy.

Roe v. Wade was decided upon a convoluted interpretation the Fourteenth Amendment:

. The Supreme Court chose to base its decision on the Fourteenth Amendment. Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A criminal statute that did not take into account the stage of pregnancy or other interests than the life of the mother was deemed a violation of Due Process.

The Fourteenth Amendment (due process) has been used (and abused) as at best a catch all and at worst a political battering ram.

Can't a adult woman give her eggs once she is..done?

I straddle the yes and no on this, but it seems redundant is my biggest thought on it..why do that when you can just get eggs from say, a 20 year old whom is done having kids.

Originally posted by Glinda
reply to post by Honor93

 

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The Fourth Amendment DOES NOT guarantee privacy.

Roe v. Wade was decided upon a convoluted interpretation the Fourteenth Amendment:

. The Supreme Court chose to base its decision on the Fourteenth Amendment. Roe v. Wade was decided primarily on the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A criminal statute that did not take into account the stage of pregnancy or other interests than the life of the mother was deemed a violation of Due Process.

The Fourteenth Amendment (due process) has been used (and abused) as at best a catch all and at worst a political battering ram.

i never said it 'guaranteed' privacy (and neither did you in prior post), why add words that didn't exist?

however, it does intend to protect it from unlawful search or seizure.
if not, then what do YOU think it protects ??

last i checked, my person, my papers, my home, my effects and my property are directly intertwined with my 'privacy' and as stated, neither agent of the State or government MAY snoop (search or seize) without cause and warrant.

yes, the PA and NDAA make the argument moot, however, the Constitution does specifically intend to protect our privacy. the government, perpetually, seeks to invade/manipulate it.
psssst ... the Constitution doesn't 'guarantee' anything

RvW was decided based on several amendments, have you ever read the decisions ?
yes, the 14th was part of it, and the 4th, 9th & even the 10th considering it was a 'state' law that initiated the process ... each held influence in their final decision.

need a reference ?
source

the court declared the abortion statutes void as vague and overbroadly infringing those plaintiffs' Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
- snip -
3. State criminal abortion laws, like those involved here, that except from criminality only a life-saving procedure on the mother's behalf without regard to the stage of her pregnancy and other interests involved violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy. Though the State cannot override that right, it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman's health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a "compelling" point at various stages of the woman's approach to term. Pp. 147-164.

but please, don't let the facts stand in your way ... it's settled law of which truly has no bearing on what the 'harvesting' procedures may or may not evolve to be.

harvesting 'stem cells' has certainly had its time in the under-ground, what makes you or anyone think this development wouldn't if the desire to 'study' the concept is strong enough ??

"Should we take eggs from aborted fetuses?"

There's 7 billion of us. Do we need to? Jeez.

reply to post by Honor93


What Roe vs Wade did, in actuality, was to redefine what a human being was. Because the Declaration of Independence guarantees rights, endowed by our creator, to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", what the court did in RvW was to declare that the unborn were not to be defined as humans.

In addition, the court has upheld the right of prosecutors to charge those who, outside of the procedure of abortion, cause harm or death to the unborn. Witness d-bag Scott Peterson.

The result? In the United States, a human being is defined as someone who is wanted.

Defend that.

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by Honor93

 

What Roe vs Wade did, in actuality, was to redefine what a human being was. Because the Declaration of Independence guarantees rights, endowed by our creator, to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness", what the court did in RvW was to declare that the unborn were not to be defined as humans.

In addition, the court has upheld the right of prosecutors to charge those who, outside of the procedure of abortion, cause harm or death to the unborn. Witness d-bag Scott Peterson.

The result? In the United States, a human being is defined as someone who is wanted.

Defend that.

edit on 13-4-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)

disagreed and i am the last person you want to debate "parasites" with, deal ?

how 'bout you prove that rather spew nonsense rhetoric that is beyond old and stale ?

i have a question for you ... every 7 minutes, both a woman and child die from an illegal abortion, somewhere in this world ... every 7 minutes.

now, knowing that 2 lives are at risk, every 7 minutes, why is it wrong to save one of them via a lawful abortion ? when did saving a life become a bad thing ?

Originally posted by Honor93
now, knowing that 2 lives are at risk, every 7 minutes, why is it wrong to save one of them via a lawful abortion ? when did saving a life become a bad thing ?

How's about we just avoid all of those unwanted pregnancies, hmmm?

Ever heard of abstinence? If you haven't, ever heard of birth control?

How dare you refer to human beings as parasites? You emerged from your mother's birth canal, and this somehow makes you superior to those who have yet to do so?

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Honor93
now, knowing that 2 lives are at risk, every 7 minutes, why is it wrong to save one of them via a lawful abortion ? when did saving a life become a bad thing ?

How's about we just avoid all of those unwanted pregnancies, hmmm?

i'm all for it, what ya suggesting ?
any chance we can avoid all those rapes, too ?

Ever heard of abstinence? If you haven't, ever heard of birth control?

yep, practiced it daily until i was forcibly raped at 15, then the pill worked until i developed excessive ovarian cysts (surgical removal necessary) and now, endo has pretty much rendered me sterile, so what's your point exactly ?

How dare you refer to human beings as parasites?

easy, it's what they've been called since the beginning of 'medicine' and since the new terms seem to invoke such emotion and passion, why not speak of them, as they ARE ??

ever looked up the medical definition of 'parasite' ??
if so, do tell, which part of that definition does NOT fit what a zygote/embryo/fetus is ?
does it have the potential to become a living, breathing, human being, sure ... but it isn't until it is.

You emerged from your mother's birth canal, and this somehow makes you superior to those who have yet to do so?

edit on 13-4-2013 by adjensen because: (no reason given)

fortunately, your superiority complex isn't something we share.

ps - simply because you went there ... ever heard of minding your own business ?
try it, you might like it

Please dont hate me but I think the moral issue presented by OP or the article is a just an interesting "what if" thought presented to the mind. Religiously or Scientifically that body that is dead, the person resting in it has moved on, it is nothing but useful parts that can be used in science. I am open to any disagreements and not being argumentative.

Okay thinking into it more the ONLY unethical part about it is if people have abortions on purpose to have these scientists pay them. I think that has to be illegal in any language. @_@

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by newcovenant
Not at all. The people who are trying to close planned parenthood and skip birth control are promoting and increasing abortion in this country. People who are in favor of "family planning" are not. They just aren't telling people if you don't want to get pregnant, don't have sex. They are more realistic than that. Get real. Everyone isn't going to get religious.

I am sorry, but just because you choose to indulge in reckless behavior does not make it my responsibility to pay the price. Birth control is very easy. Nobody ever got pregnant from a blowjob. Cunnilingus makes no babies. We all know what causes pregnancy. Be smart or pay the consequences yourself.

YOU know what causes pregnancy but you think every kid does? Really? Do their friends all provide the right information? We don't allow sex ed in schools until half of them have already dropped out so I wouldn't say it's a given. I wouldn't say all juniors in HS know what cunnilingus or a blowjob is unless they spend enough time diddling over porn sites. Eventually you become a pro, right?

Since when is anyone asking you to pay the price for anything? Insurance is insurance. People have the right to have it. And it is a good idea. You are kind of a small thinker. You do not see how unfettered birth could ever contribute to a problem that you actuality have to deal with? Does the fact there are already more children than adults can "guardian" so they are being abused, neglected, trafficked, sold into slavery or made wards of the church and get used by the priests as sex toys.. even bother you? In 30 years when the, poor, uneducated and unwanted grow up into poor, uneducated, adult criminals preying on society like an infestation, you will be able to harken back to the incubation period now. Years ago every child was accounted for and had a chance of growing up "normal" because someone took care of them. When both parents started working and welfare increased families and kids got lost in the shuffle we lost track of a generation and they came back to haunt us. If birth control were part of a reasonable health care package - we wouldn't be in the mess we are in right now. The one that's getting worse thanks to slow learners and fast forgetters.

Originally posted by Glinda
reply to post by newcovenant

 

[B]Can you see telling a man he must carry his drunken night out to term and care for it forever? LOL None of us would stand for it so why ask this of women?[/B]

Yes you can. It's called a paternity test and then an ensuing legal action for child support.

LOL If abortion was legal, which it is...is that what you think would happen?


Gosh. I haven't laughed that hard in a while. Thanks. I needed that.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by newcovenant
Can you see telling a man he must carry his drunken night out to term and care for it forever? [

Society already does this, and gives the man absolutely no say in whether the result of said night will be carried to term or not.
I absolutely oppose abortion, BUT if the mother can decide to abort why not the father? Why is the mother allowed to avoid the consequences of her reckless behavior, but not the father? Hypocrisy much???

You oppose abortion. Good. Don't have one then. Nobody is forcing you.

I think nature made these choices for us. It is her body. What part of that are you having trouble with? Can you see anyone telling a man he has to incubate a human egg in his body when their is a medical choice to expel the egg before it grows into a human being? Do you think men would allow the government, or anyone to say they HAVE to carry the egg until it grows into a human being, the better part of a year. Don't make me laugh. It would never happen.

Originally posted by Glinda
reply to post by newcovenant

 

There is NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY in the US Constitution. Abortion, prior to Roe v. Wade, was a STATES' RIGHTS ISSUE (given each state the right to self determine its position on the legality of abortion). R v. W made it a federal decision (and many legal theorists claim the Federal Court had no standing and that Roe v. Wade was/is in error).

If you think there is no right to privacy between a patient and her doctor you have stumbled into the wrong country. Right now you are here in America where there is.

reply to post by newcovenant


so, which "years ago" ??
please, be specific as this ought to be good.

Years ago every child was accounted for and had a chance of growing up "normal" because someone took care of them.

any idea when the first orphanage opened in the US ?
but you're right, all those kids were accounted for and provided a chance of growing up "normal", weren't they?

When both parents started working and welfare increased families and kids got lost in the shuffle we lost track of a generation and they came back to haunt us.

maybe you're correct to some extent cause that same 'lost generation' is now sitting in the position of POTUS and cabinet ... but yeah, they were lost in the shuffle alright

If birth control were part of a reasonable health care package

what's the point when it is already free to everyone who wants it ?

The one that's getting worse thanks to slow learners and fast forgetters.

you said it, not i

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by newcovenant
every conception to term is State sponsored rape.

So, just to be clear. State sponsored rape = bad. But State sponsored murder of an innocent = good?

Murder of an innocent? What innocent?

The mother? Because that is the only human.

Yes forcing childbirth on her can lead to death, so technically it can be murder.

In fact I believe that just happened in an Irish hospital. They killed a young mother, she died in childbirth. The innocent woman who died suffered, Her innocent husband who hoped to grow old with her suffered. Her parents who watched her grow up and hoped to die first suffered. The children she left motherless suffered. The society that permitted it suffered.... All because your religion is squeezing into her womb.