View Single Post
Old 03-07-2006, 01:29 PM   #61
ET Warrior
PhD in horribleness
 
ET Warrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Evil League of Evil
Posts: 9,405
LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
Why can't you have a timetable if it's just a physical occurance? Surely there is some point that a fetus can be certain not to have perception?
There isn't an exact TIME-table because development occurs at varying speeds. However, as I said in my last post, you CAN test for neurological activity, and that is the basis. This is different from your analogy that you refuse to let go of, despite the fact that it is a STRAWMAN analogy, because the fetus can't have neurological activity because there isn't a nervous system there. Your braindead patient could in theory start brain activity at any point, because the necessary equipment is there.

If you take the CPU out of this laptop I'm typing on, it's not a computer anymore. It's got most of the hardware necessary, but it can't do anything. I couldn't be typing on it, it's not a computer. This is different than if I had my cpu sleep(5000). It's still got a CPU that can function, it's just out of comission for 5000 seconds, but it is STILL THERE.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
Simply using marijuana does not risk an innocent dying.
That wasn't my point. The point is that making it illegal doesn't stop it from happening. You're not saving any lives by making abortion illegal, you're sending the people who were going to get abortions into the back alleys and across state/country borders to make it happen. And when they go to the back alleys there is a MUCH higher chance that the mother is ALSO going to die. ALL you accomplish is making yourself feel better because it's not in the public eye anymore. If you don't see it happening it's not a problem anymore?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
I'm interested in if you oppose the death penalty, and if so, why?
Absolutely, I'm very against killing people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
You don't know if your current physics is correct, so basing your actions on assumptions should be done a little more carefully than you are.
I didn't say my current physics is incorrect, merely that my current physics is incomplete. And my assumptions aren't being based on physics, so much as they're being based on biology. They're different sciences. And while biology itself is also an incomplete science, that doesn't mean it is an incorrect science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis
My second point was that you have no way of defining physics other than by itself, and because of that you have no way of knowing that all there is to physics is really all there is to know. Therefore, you do not have a way to prove that a fetus is not a person by science.
And you have no way of PROVING that the fetus is even of the same species as I am. Sure, it's got the right genetic material, but maybe our theories of genetics are WAY off of what reality is. You can't prove that, so maybe abortion is killing an infant chimpanzee that's going to mutate into a human at some undetermined point. You are assuming that you know what it is that makes a human. Sure, science has shown that it's very likely, but there's no such thing as a verified theory, there is ALWAYS room for falsification. So maybe we should just give up on science? Not make our judgements based on the most recently accepted data and theories and knowledge? Sounds like progress to me.



ET Warrior is offline   you may: quote & reply,