Bush Declares National Sanctity of Life Day

[Jack the Bodiless]

But it obviously hasn't begun when there is no brain yet. I can be quite sure about that.

No brain yet. At what point may we kill the child? 1 day before she develops her brain to the standard of sentience you set? This is why my example is valid.

This is a logical fallacy, the "slippery slope" fallacy.

I can say, with absolute 100% certainty, that sentience does NOT exist when the brain does not exist. The fact that there is a later stage of development where the degree of sentience sufficient for "personhood" is uncertain, does not change the absolute 100% certainty that a fetus with NO brain is not sentient.

Similarly, there is a "gray area" between life and death for many coma patients. Does this mean that all long-dead corpses should be immediately dug up and attached to life-support machines? Should the ashes of cremated people be rushed to burn-treatment units?

As for your 'exercise'.

Rape is wrong because of the lack of consent. The woman has not consented to the assault on her person, which therefore is wrong. If the woman does consent, then the same act changes from an assault, to consensual sex.

And this argument applies to both of the subsequent examples I gave.

1. Forcibly preventing rape victims from seeking abortion.

This is wrong because of the lack of consent. The woman has not consented to the pregnancy (an assault on her person), which therefore is wrong. If the woman does consent, then the same act changes from an assault, to consensual pregnancy.

2. Forcing women to endure pregnancy in the event of contraceptive failure.

This is wrong because of the lack of consent. The woman has not consented to the pregnancy, which therefore is wrong. If the woman does consent, then the same act changes from a forced to a voluntary pregnancy.

Millions of women who CHOOSE to proceed with unwanted pregnancies are pro-choice.

Let's see. Pro-choicers have the option of abortion available to them. If pregnancy is such a torture as you claim, why don't these women have abortions? Why do they keep the child if the child is so much of a burden, that to kill, relieves the mother?

I have never claimed that PREGNANCY is torture, you're losing your focus again. This is equivalent to a claim that, because SEX isn't torture, rape is OK.

But why do some rape victims choose not to report the rape? Who knows? Should we therefore assume that rape victims who don't seek to prosecute their rapists must automatically agree that ALL rape should be legalized? That is what you're implying.

If I CHOOSE to perform a somewhat unpleasant activity (tattooing myself, for instance), does this mean that I support compulsory tattooing?

There are many, many people who support freedom as an important principle: the freedom of others to make choices that may differ from those WE might make.

What YOU are doing (in blaming women for contraceptive failure) is directly equivalent to saying that a rape victim is guilty for her rape because she went out to a bar.

The woman is NOT guilty for her rape. Where have I said she was?

You didn't. But you are invoking a double standard to AVOID saying that. It is hypocritical and inconsistent to hold this view while simultaneously saying that a woman who suffers contraceptive failure must "accept the consequences" for something that wasn't her fault.

Hence the "exercise" I presented you with. You failed to provide an argument against rape that doesn't also apply to forced pregnancy. That doesn't mean that you approve of rape, but it DOES mean that you can't argue that what you're proposing is wrong.

The forced pregnancy of rape victims is a monstrous evil. It is, in fact, WORSE than rape. Rape is unpleasant, but it is brief. You support a form of rape that lasts for nine months and is a MUCH greater violation of the victim.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by obiwan18
Couple points, Urban Ranger.

I'm not entirely sure of your reference here.
Do you mean adult stem cells?

Adult stem cells cannot form another zygote, although they can theoretically become any other cell in the body.

Sorry for being somewhat obtuse.

No, I mean body cells, like your skin cells and white blood cells. Red blood cells don't count since they have no nucleus.

[Ben Kenobi]

Jack,

Typical.
You ignore the main thrust of my previous post.

Similarly, there is a "gray area" between life and death for many coma patients. Does this mean that all long-dead corpses should be immediately dug up and attached to life-support machines? Should the ashes of cremated people be rushed to burn-treatment units?

No... this 'gray area' you assume is not present. After the irreversable cessation of brain activity, we can safely conclude the person is dead, and any further medical treatment is futile.

I believe I have made that point already though.

When does a person attain sentience? Unless you set down a clear position of personhood, it is impossible to properly argue about abortion due to rape.

1. Forcibly preventing rape victims from seeking abortion.

True. You are right IF the unborn are not persons. IF the unborn are persons, this changes the whole ballgame.

2. Forcing women to endure pregnancy in the event of contraceptive failure.

Again, if the unborn are not persons, there need be no justification for abortion, since the mother has no responsibility to her child.

However, if the child is a person, then the mother DOES have a responsibility to protect the life of her child. The issue hinges on the status of the unborn child.

I have never claimed that PREGNANCY is torture

Millions of women who CHOOSE to proceed with unwanted pregnancies are pro-choice.

Note the phrase 'unwanted pregnancies,' indicating a distinction between unwanted and wanted pregnancies.

Here is just one example from earlier in the thread:

It will release her from the greater horror and psychological torture of being forced to carry a hated parasite within her body for nine months.

Clearly you do argue unwanted pregnancy due to rape is torture, hence contradicting your latest statement.

Your choice is this:
Abandon the analogy that pregnancy due to rape is torture, or retract your latest statement. Both cannot be true.

[Ben Kenobi]

No, I mean body cells, like your skin cells and white blood cells.

Urban Ranger,
So skin cells can become zygotes?
News to me.
Source?

Zygotes have the capacity to develop and grow given only nourishment and shelter, no different from the infant, except in the location of the shelter.

Can the same be said for skin cells or white blood cells?

[Jack the Bodiless]

Similarly, there is a "gray area" between life and death for many coma patients. Does this mean that all long-dead corpses should be immediately dug up and attached to life-support machines? Should the ashes of cremated people be rushed to burn-treatment units?

No... this 'gray area' you assume is not present. After the irreversable cessation of brain activity, we can safely conclude the person is dead, and any further medical treatment is futile.

What about coma victims in a "persistent vegetative state"?

And when, exactly, can we KNOW the moment that "irreversible cessation of brain activity" has occurred, in every case?

In the case of long-dead corpses, we CAN know that it has occurred. Similarly, in the case of brainless fetuses, we CAN know that sentience has not occurred.

When does a person attain sentience? Unless you set down a clear position of personhood, it is impossible to properly argue about abortion due to rape.

When a rape victim urgently requests an IMMEDIATE abortion, it is absolutely 100% certain that there is no sentient fetus involved. It is simply NOT an issue in these cases.

1. Forcibly preventing rape victims from seeking abortion.

True. You are right IF the unborn are not persons. IF the unborn are persons, this changes the whole ballgame.

The reason WHY THE VICTIM IS BEING WRONGED does not change. The SUFFERING of the victim does not change.

2. Forcing women to endure pregnancy in the event of contraceptive failure.

Again, if the unborn are not persons, there need be no justification for abortion, since the mother has no responsibility to her child.

Again, the mother did not CONSENT to any such responsibility. The issue of CONSENT does not change.

You have yet to provide an answer to "WHY IS RAPE WRONG" that does not also apply to forced pregnancy due to either rape or contraceptive failure. The supposed personhood of the fetus is not relevant to the question of WHY IS RAPE WRONG.
"

It will release her from the greater horror and psychological torture of being forced to carry a hated parasite within her body for nine months.

Clearly you do argue unwanted pregnancy due to rape is torture, hence contradicting your latest statement.

Your choice is this:
Abandon the analogy that pregnancy due to rape is torture, or retract your latest statement. Both cannot be true.

Unwanted pregnancy due to rape IS torture. You were attempting to misrepresent my position by stating "If pregnancy is such a torture..."

You appear to have great difficulty in seeing any difference between forced pregnancy due to rape and normal pregnancy. This is equivalent to the difference between rape and normal sex. "If pregnancy is such a torture" is like saying "if sex is such a torture" when talking about rape.