Something to ponder in the Rowe vs Wade decision:

[Ripsnort]

Controversial and sensitive subject matter, that can elevate our internal emotional feelings, so, lets keep the discussion focusing on the subject, and not personal attacks on ones opinions posted here.  My question to you is...at what point is it a fetus, and at what point is it a child?  Read on:

This is pretty amazing. Read the story first, then bring up the picture.
 

THE HAND:
A picture began circulating in November. In many people's opinions, it should be proclaimed as "The Picture of the Year," or perhaps, "The Picture of the Decade." It won't be. In fact, unless you obtained a copy of the paper you probably will never see it.
The picture is that of a 21-week-old unborn baby name  Samuel Alexander Armas, who is being operated on by a surgeon named Joseph Bruner. The baby was diagnosed with spin a bifida and would  not survive if removed from the mother's womb. Little Samuel's mother,  Julie Armas, is an obstetrics nurse in Atlanta. She knew of Dr. Bruner's remarkable surgical procedure.  Practicing at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, he performs these special operations while the baby is still in the womb. In the procedure, a C-section removes the uterus and the doctor makes a small incision to operate on the baby. During the surgery on little Samuel, the little guy reached his tiny, but fully  developed, hand through the incision and firmly grasped the surgeon's  finger.  The photograph captures this amazing event with perfect clarity.  The editors titled the picture, "Hand of Hope." The text explaining the picture begins, "The tiny hand of 21-week-old fetus Samuel  Alexander Armas emerges from the mother's uterus to grasp the  finger of Dr. Joseph Bruner as if thanking the doctor for the gift life...." You can see the actual picture, its incredible.

Hand of Hope

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: Ripsnort ]

[Mickey1992]

Modern medicine is truly amazing.

[Eagler]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
My question to you is...at what point is it a fetus, and at what point is it a child

I think you have hit the nail on the head with that question Rip. It shouldn't matter WHEN someone thinks a "fetus" becomes a "child", the question is, at what point has a "LIFE" been created.
That point is called conception, the rest is called "growth" and the termination of this innocent life, for no other reason than it's an inconvience to one's lifestyle, is called "MURDER", er the "right to choose" for those on the left....

Eagler

[straffo]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:
My question to you is...at what point is it a fetus, and at what point is it a child?

I see no difference between fetus and child except perhaps that the child is out of the "belly" (dunno the right term) of his mother.

 

the question is, at what point has a "LIFE" been created

When there is 2 "blastomères"

In french (sorry for medical term I use my native language   )
A partir du moment ou la membrane pellucide de l'ovocyte devient infranchissable pour d'autres spermatozoïdes.

Translated by a robot :
From the moment or the pellucid membrane of the ovocyte becomes insuperable for others spermatozoïdes.

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: straffo ]

[blur]

Okay, okay, I give. The stink of hypocrisy is rising so high I'm starting to gag!

LOL, let's protect LIFE when it comes to a fetus. But in the meantime lets KILL everything else, let's use tax payers money to fund the spraying of Monsanto's Roundup on the crops of Colombian peasants, let's pour billions of dollars into military programs when there's no one left to fight, lets bring back nuclear power as if the lessons of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island weren't enough warning.

The right wing motto: Let's claim to protect LIFE when in fact everything we do concerns DEATH.
 
I've often pondered over the obvious hypocrisy of the right wing stance. Yes, the left wingers are guilty too.

This will sound farfetched but I have a theory. In the case of abortion we have a tiny itty-bitty little creature completely helpless before the harsh abortionist. Isn't this analogous to the helpless weak Christian standing before his stern all-powerful Lord Our God?

My theory on why the right wingers get their panties all in a twist over abortion is that it's a psychological projection of their deepest beliefs of helplessness. Except in this case they have a chance of doing something about it even if it may require trashing the rights of others.

So let's shoot an abortionist in order to save a fetus so that when the fetus reaches eighteen years of age we can pat it on the back and send it off to war in good conscious.  

[Ripsnort]

Blur:"Except in this case they have a                       chance of doing something about it even if it may require trashing the rights of others.

And, I ask you, what of the rights of a fetus, again, the question, at what point is it a child or a fetus, and , to add, at what point does this fetus/child gain "rights" as you put it?

[Toad]

Hey! There goes "drive-by Blur!" He's snapped off a few sentences at your front porch and put the pedal to the metal!

Don't bother engaging his more obvious inanities. He won't be back this way for a while.  

[AKSWulfe]

Aren't they trying to save that fetus' life?

What does this have to do with abortions?
-SW

[fscott]

"So let's shoot an abortionist in order to save a fetus so that when the fetus gets eighteen years of age we can pat it on the back and send it off to war in good conscious....."

The FBI monitors this forum for vigilantes.  I'd be careful.

[fscott]

Actually, they want to save the life of convicted POS murderers on death row, but kill as many unwanted babies as they want.

And the next time I rape and kill the fetus of an expected mother, I hope I get community service for assault.  Or would that be aggravated assault with a deadly weapon?

[Eagler]

Originally posted by SWulfe:
Aren't they trying to save that fetus' life?

What does this have to do with abortions?
-SW

It has to do with the timetable concerning when a "fetus" becomes a "child" as once it becomes a "child", the rights of the child will interfere with the "right to choose" by the mother. As long as they can call it an "it" instead of a "he" or "she" they can kill the "baby" legally without taking the "child's" rights into consideration.

Too bad the left is for abortions, if they were against them I think they have the lawyers on staff now who could double speak around exisiting laws.

Eagler

[Karnak]

I think that a fair point to consider a fetus as human would be when its brain waves become coherent.  I'd have to look this up at home, but I seem to recall that it occurs at the end of the first trimester.

[Yoj]

Well hey - I don't mind a good head to head. Let me suggest that the question of when a fetus becomes a child has nothing to do with biology at all.  Its entirely a social decision.  If the society has determined that it is not a person until some specific point in its development, then it isn't, and aborting it before then is not murder.  Morals and ethics are not some absolute standard - they are always what a given society has determined they are, and they change over time.

In this case, the very real question of who owns a citizen's body is also a consideration.  Any attempt to restrict a woman's access to an abortion is quite literally to assert that the state has some right of ownership over her body.  (Of course, the state DOES consider that it has rights of ownership over the bodies of its citizens, since it restricts what can be put into them - but in neither case is it often argued from that point of view).  

Actually, this debate is, by definition, not resolvable, since both sides have valid arguments (though each side naturally considers its stance valid and the other's not).  Which is why it MUST be a decision that the society makes.  For better or worse, the US, along with most of the western world, has made a choice.  Some peope don't like the choice that was made, but, as with so many things, that's just tough.  Personally I find it repugnant that Plastic Surgeons are far more valued than Secondary School teachers - but that's how this society sees things.

- Yoj

[AKSWulfe]

In that case, I have NO idea when a fetus could be considered a human life.
-SW

[blur]

Originally posted by Ripsnort:


And, I ask you, what of the rights of a fetus, again, the question, at what point is it a child or a fetus, and , to add, at what point does this fetus/child gain "rights" as you put it?

Rip, your asking a black and white type question where there will never be a clear-cut answer. Some fundamentalist types claim it's a human being at conception while spiritual types claim that its not a human child until the soul enters.

If my wife became pregnant I would have to deal with this issue. Unless there were other circumstances involved I personally wouldn't opt for abortion. But if my neighbor became pregnant I feel it's absolutely none of my business.

I try not to concern myself with too many abstract problems. Life's much simpler this way.

Toad I'm throwing my "drive-by Blur Mobile" into reverse for a moment. When I make a statement I throw it out there for the world to see. Read it, ignore it, rant and rave about it, I really don't care. I'm not going to get worked up over defending it as I may change my mind after a while.

Isn't debate really just another form of violence? Aren't we really trying to make another succumb to our will? We can smash our pet beliefs over each others heads until the cows come home but do we really expect our opponent to stop and suddenly say, "I'm sorry, you're RIGHT!"