|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 4:37 pm
I agree that a sea turtle and a human are very different. How else could I be prolife? But I never said they were the same at all. All I say is that these completely different organisms have something similar, they've both got embryonic stages. One is protected more than the other. I don't use the sea turtle argument personally because I find it to be a pointless argument. What's the use of comparing the legal value of embryos of different species? All it does is state the obvious. An endangered species has more legal protection at all stages than a human does. Everyone can agree on that, and there are reasons why it is that way. Upsetting the balance can cause devestation among human populations. It's in our best interests to protect turtles from humans, and they are at risk in a way that human embryos are not, because they are considered delicacies in some cultures.
I don't agree with a human fetus having less protection, but I do agree that it's important to keep the balance in nature and without protecting these turtles, that wouldn't be as possible. Humans, on the other hand, are at their carrying capacity. We'll most likely start declining soon, but there is no...ecological reason to protect human embryos. I push for people to have the same protection of turtles because I am human and these are my people. Maybe they aren't considered people to everyone, but to me they are, and I believe that they have as much value humanly as a sea turtle has ecologically.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:11 pm
If humans laid eggs, how big would they be? Like ostrich-sized, since we're about as big as ostriches? Ouch...at least you're not carrying it around for 9 months...
Anyways xp there's several debates in this: whether a sentient being's life should be valued, be they near extinction or running over the planet, whether turtles should have more value than humans, or vice versa, given that they're near extinction and we're not, and are we just biased because we're human.
If 1000 humans are aborted, it's not going to put a dent in the population. But that doesn't make it any less tragic than 1000 turtle eggs being stomped on. The fact that we're not turtles and can't understand their language, etc., will lower most people's level of sympathy felt for 1000 dead turtles.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:44 pm
Theoretically, they'd be about as big as a newborn would be, or newborns would need to be smaller, it's an amniotic egg, an adaptation that allowed reptiles to live on land. The problem is that when it hatches it needs to be able to survive, and naturally we wouldn't be able to do that until many months in. Also, that'd be a real pain in somewhere that is not the a** to women. laying eggs. Giving birth's gotta hurt, but the egg would need to be big enough and all..ever wonder what it'd be like to be a bird and see your eggs you just laid crack open? I dunno why I've never wondered before what happens if a bird lays an egg and the surface isn't soft enough. That'd be awful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
