Lets discuss about Abortion/contraceptives

[Apoplexic]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

Apoplexic

.

tell me everything you know

Please, please, put this into some context for me.
Or I could go all existential, and say that by knowing, I'm actually changing the outcomes of the unknown, causing them to modify their behavior to continue to remain unknown and thus, I know nothing.

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

As technically defined life must have these 7 characteristics:
1:Are Composed of Cells
2:Require Energy
3:Reproduce
4: Display Heredity
5:Respond to Stimuli
6:Evolve and Adapt
7:Maintain Homeostasis
8. It is moving

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe a fetus meets these criteria within the first 20 days of conception.

i was searching for that before for that guy, ive forgotten my biology classes.
i think as the meeting of sperm and egg goes on it forms life because from what ive watched is that i observed these : it requires energy to live, it is composed of cells, it reproduce cells, it displays heredity, it responds to stimuli, it evolves and normally adapts, in our biology class even the smallest creatures such as bacterias possess life

How so?

when mother smokes they die

Citation needed.

why do we need citations? it is clearly understandable that if mother smokes baby dies but here "nicotine contained in tobacco causes disruption of the nervous system. Therefore, the process of stimulation by the baby's acceptance to the change in external conditions was slow. "

[Jolie Maidele]

Apoplexic

Jolie Maidele

Apoplexic

One more thing; let's go back to my eighth grade gen science class.

Are viruses alive?

I had a feeling someone would bring this up. A virus is only considered alive when able to replicate within a host. Although I see what you're likely getting at, I don't feel the comparison is really appropriate.

But it is, in the same way that the single-celled (although rapidly becoming multicellular) organism growing inside a womb is not capable of sustaining itself outside of that environment. Even on the most microscopic level, organisms are capable of existing in multiple environments, be it due to encystment or some other means. This "life" at the moment of conception is not. Remove it from its environment and it will die.

Similar to removing a virus from its environment after it has invaded a cell; do not allow the process to finish naturally, and it dies. It is incapable of sustaining that "life" without the very specific host circumstances.

So the rapidly becoming multicellular cells would be alive, just as a virus is, when inside it's host?

When I said I don't find it an appropriate comparison, you can probably figure why. Development beings at the moment of conception and, unlike any virus, that zygote will continuously develop to become an embryo, a fetus, a baby, and so on. I understand that you're viewing this in a specific time frame, in order to compare it to a virus, but I'm choosing to view this "life" from a more continuous and developmental standpoint. I know people can compare these early stages of development to other microscopic forms of life, but the two will never be exactly the same.

[frozen_water]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

As technically defined life must have these 7 characteristics:
1:Are Composed of Cells
2:Require Energy
3:Reproduce
4: Display Heredity
5:Respond to Stimuli
6:Evolve and Adapt
7:Maintain Homeostasis
8. It is moving

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't believe a fetus meets these criteria within the first 20 days of conception.

i was searching for that before for that guy, ive forgotten my biology classes.
i think as the meeting of sperm and egg goes on it forms life because from what ive watched is that i observed these : it requires energy to live, it is composed of cells, it reproduce cells, it displays heredity, it responds to stimuli, it evolves and normally adapts, in our biology class even the smallest creatures such as bacterias possess life

How so?

when mother smokes they die

Citation needed.

why do we need citations? it is clearly understandable that if mother smokes baby dies but here "nicotine contained in tobacco causes disruption of the nervous system. Therefore, the process of stimulation by the baby's acceptance to the change in external conditions was slow. "

You need citations because when you make a claim, you need to show evidence to support it. Right now I have no way of knowing if you're making up your information or drawing it from a legitimate source. I can't discuss something I can't verify or analyze.

Also, it is not "clearly understandable." None of that shows me smoking kills babies, especially not within the first 20 days of conception.

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

Apoplexic

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

Apoplexic

.

tell me everything you know

Please, please, put this into some context for me.
Or I could go all existential, and say that by knowing, I'm actually changing the outcomes of the unknown, causing them to modify their behavior to continue to remain unknown and thus, I know nothing.

i know less sorry, so wanted to hear the stand of different people regarding this to get a more appropriate answers to my questions. what do you think will be the impact of abortion in a country, both good and bad (morality and economic basis?

[Apoplexic]

Jolie Maidele

So the rapidly becoming multicellular cells would be alive, just as a virus is, when inside it's host?

When I said I don't find it an appropriate comparison, you can probably figure why. Development beings at the moment of conception and, unlike any virus, that zygote will continuously develop to become an embryo, a fetus, a baby, and so on. I understand that you're viewing this in a specific time frame, in order to compare it to a virus, but I'm choosing to view this "life" from a more continuous and developmental standpoint. I know people can compare these early stages of development to other microscopic forms of life, but the two will never be exactly the same.

Very true, but it can still extend further; that was more for the sperm/egg portion than the entirety of the development process, but you get that.

Still, take it out after a month and see what happens.

Granted, a fully healthy newborn baby isn't capable of living without the care and attention of others, but neither would it die instantly, such as an undeveloped fetus would. And if it is incapable of sustaining its existence outside of very specific conditions, it isn't alive.

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

How so?

when mother smokes they die

Citation needed.

why do we need citations? it is clearly understandable that if mother smokes baby dies but here "nicotine contained in tobacco causes disruption of the nervous system. Therefore, the process of stimulation by the baby's acceptance to the change in external conditions was slow. "

You need citations because when you make a claim, you need to show evidence to support it. Right now I have no way of knowing if you're making up your information or drawing it from a legitimate source. I can't discuss something I can't verify or analyze.

Also, it is not "clearly understandable." None of that shows me smoking kills babies, especially not within the first 20 days of conception.

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand although it can be answered by common sense
what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_%28physiology%29
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

frozen_water

how are we going to consider fetuses from 10-20 days old now? Im really getting into the point to believe that it should live but still not sure

[frozen_water]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand

Providing evidence for your point is an integral part of making an argument. It's called Burden of Proof.

Quote:

although it can be answered by common sense

No it can't, even with numerous studies on the matter results are often highly controversial.

Quote:

what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_(physiology)
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

I'm not seeing anything about smoking killing babies, I suppose there is the bit about sudden death syndrome in infants, but that's after they've been born and can no longer be aborted so I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion on abortion.

[frozen_water]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

how are we going to consider fetuses from 10-20 days old now? Im really getting into the point to believe that it should live but still not sure

I'm not sure I understand the question.

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand

Providing evidence for your point is an integral part of making an argument. It's called Burden of Proof.

Quote:

although it can be answered by common sense

No it can't, even with numerous studies on the matter results are often highly controversial.

Quote:

what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_(physiology)
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

I'm not seeing anything about smoking killing babies, I suppose there is the bit about sudden death syndrome in infants, but that's after they've been born and can no longer be aborted so I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion on abortion.

therefore it responds to stimuli

[frozen_water]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand

Providing evidence for your point is an integral part of making an argument. It's called Burden of Proof.

Quote:

although it can be answered by common sense

No it can't, even with numerous studies on the matter results are often highly controversial.

Quote:

what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_(physiology)
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

I'm not seeing anything about smoking killing babies, I suppose there is the bit about sudden death syndrome in infants, but that's after they've been born and can no longer be aborted so I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion on abortion.

therefore it responds to stimuli

I don't follow your logic, I realize at some point a fetus does respond to stimuli, but we were discussing specifically the first 10-20 days. I see no reason to believe this is the case during that stage.

[Lacarnum Inflamaurae]

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand

Providing evidence for your point is an integral part of making an argument. It's called Burden of Proof.

Quote:

although it can be answered by common sense

No it can't, even with numerous studies on the matter results are often highly controversial.

Quote:

what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_(physiology)
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

I'm not seeing anything about smoking killing babies, I suppose there is the bit about sudden death syndrome in infants, but that's after they've been born and can no longer be aborted so I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion on abortion.

therefore it responds to stimuli

I don't follow your logic, I realize at some point a fetus does respond to stimuli, but we were discussing specifically the first 10-20 days. I see no reason to believe this is the case during that stage.

lets move on from 10-20 days to 1month old fetus

[Apoplexic]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

i know less sorry, so wanted to hear the stand of different people regarding this to get a more appropriate answers to my questions. what do you think will be the impact of abortion in a country, both good and bad (morality and economic basis?

Morality, as I stated in my first post, is largely defined by the religious views of the majority of the country (and peoples in general, as they tend to ignore arbitrary lines on pieces of paper).
If you want an example in the real world of the effects of abortion mandates in a country, look to China.

Economically, I don't see how it could be any different no matter which stance is taken. If abortion is to be outright banned everywhere, and people don't sneak off and get unsafe and unhealthy ones anyway (which they will, and have done since the dawn of man), then ostensibly you're worried about overpopulation.

But that, too, would work itself out eventually, through homelessness, poverty, and starvation.

To get back to the main point (I think), there should be no debate on the legality of abortions. Stigmatize the women all you want, but taking away the right of the individual choice is itself unethical. The only way a true resolution to this could occur would be either a precise definition of when a mass of cellular tissue is capable of sustaining itself outside of a host, or the dissolution of most religious beliefs.

[frozen_water]

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

frozen_water

Lacarnum Inflamaurae

from now on i ought to answer with preferences to strengthen my stand

Providing evidence for your point is an integral part of making an argument. It's called Burden of Proof.

Quote:

although it can be answered by common sense

No it can't, even with numerous studies on the matter results are often highly controversial.

Quote:

what is stimuli?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulus_(physiology)
does smoking affect the baby?
http://www.e-womenhealth.com/2010/03/smoke-make-baby-hard-wake.html

I'm not seeing anything about smoking killing babies, I suppose there is the bit about sudden death syndrome in infants, but that's after they've been born and can no longer be aborted so I don't see how it's relevant to a discussion on abortion.

therefore it responds to stimuli

I don't follow your logic, I realize at some point a fetus does respond to stimuli, but we were discussing specifically the first 10-20 days. I see no reason to believe this is the case during that stage.

lets move on from 10-20 days to 1month old fetus

So is it not a baby until it can respond to stimuli?