a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 The idea that it is not a human being, but rather just tissue etc... this is an opinion not fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asimov Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 The idea that it is not a human being, but rather just tissue etc... this is an opinion not fact. A human being has a brain, an embryo does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 A human being has a brain, an embryo does not. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Main Entry: 2human Function: noun : a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens) : MAN; broadly : any living or extinct member of the family (Hominidae) to which the primate belongs - hu·man·like /-m&n-"lIk/ adjective Now I have already established that the scientific view is that an embryo is life and is alive. Again opinion, or if you really want to get technical, my opinion is technically correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 again: I am willing to agree to disagree with you. THe is just as much factual basis for my opinion as there is for yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japedo Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Main Entry: 2humanFunction: noun : a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens) : MAN; broadly : any living or extinct member of the family (Hominidae) to which the primate belongs - hu·man·like /-m&n-"lIk/ adjective Now I have already established that the scientific view is that an embryo is life and is alive. Again opinion, or if you really want to get technical, my opinion is technically correct. Question midnight? Is a seed a Tree? Would you classify a seed at the same level as a Tree? It would be a potential tree, given the right growth environment, same goes for an embryo. It's a potential Human. However development and the right environment is needed for it to become officially human. same concept... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 When do you consider a tree a tree? When you plant it? When I starts growing? Or not until it can be reconized as a tree? When it starts growing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japedo Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 When do you consider a tree a tree? When you plant it? When I starts growing? Or not until it can be reconized as a tree? When it starts growing. well not when it's a seed. When It's sprouted and taken shape as a tree it's officially a tree. When I hold seeds in my hands to feed the birds, I don't consider myself giving the birds trees and flowers, I don't know anyone that does? Could be I'm wrong, have been before. They are seeds not plants. Just as embryos are potential humans, not officially humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 SO both the scientific term and the dictionary terms mean nothing? Again opinion not fact. Look opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. I have been nice nor have I tried to invalidate your opinions and twice now I have agrred to disagree. Why is it so important that I agree with you all? I feel like I have made an intellegent and thoughtful case for my side. My opinions are not more invalid than yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japedo Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I didn't state that they ment nothing, I suppose it's all a matter of Interpretation. What constitutes as Life? If one is living off a host is it really Life or is it living off a host until it can support itself? I was trying to give you a different way to look at things, I ment no offense. While I was seeking out answers, I did some studying on Jewish point of views. I question what or If God even is now, however during my seeking I wanted answers to a lot of my Political stances. Things that were difficult and didn't have a definitive answer. Such as if a women is raped or incest does she have a moral right to have an abortion. If it is okay in these instances why would it be prohibited in other instances? I have always held the belief that it was morally acceptable to have an abortion especially if one was raped, incest or what have you. I wanted solid proof that my feelings were perhaps wrong. or perhaps I wanted proof that I was right? anyways Long story short, I forget where I read it anyways one Jewish writing somewhere stated that when God created Adam he was made from dust, dirt, earth. There was no life until god breathed a soul into Adams nostrils. It clicked logically to me, and I saw the creation story, and life in a different perspective. I have since turned to science to answer these hard questions. You're correct that an opinion is not fact, Facts need support opinions are a thought, feeling with no proof. I suppose with me anyways, that the "embryos are humans" debates, reminds me of the fundies, I dunno. Anyways, I'll stay off this topic as well. I guess next time I reply to you, I'll look for something to agree with you on so you don't feel as though you're being attacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I did not feel attacked. My morals, values, belief systems, or what have you are not based on religion. Christians are not the only ones who are pro-life etc... The difference is, christians are always wanting to tell you it is "their way or no way", I on the other hand happen to respect the fact that no everybody is going to think the way I do, that doesn't bother me in the least. I just feel sometimes that people feel that since I am an xer then I "shouldn't" think this way." To me that is no different than the fundies. It is like since I don't fit the mold, then my opinion doesn't count. (or maybe it is the fact that I didn't fit the christian mold either). I feel like I don't belong anywhere. I don't belong in christian forums because I am an xer, I don't feel like I fit in here because I am a repub. Even as a christian I was looked down upon because I make my judgements and decisions on what I feel is the right thing. Do you have any idea how fustrating that is? But at the same time liberating, because it is all me, not what anybody thinks I should believe. It really is a double-edged sword. I make up my own mind. My opinions are mine and mine only, not puppeted from some group. (no I am NOT saying that is what you are doing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I guess next time I reply to you, I'll look for something to agree with you on so you don't feel as though you're being attacked. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I like your avatar!!! We agree on that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenoce Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 I could argue that since nature created it so then it belongs to nature rather than any person. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nature is not a physical being, lays no claim to anything, and cannot have rights of it's own. Dictionary.com: 1. The material world and its phenomena. 2. The forces and processes that produce and control all the phenomena of the material world: the laws of nature. 3. The world of living things and the outdoors: the beauties of nature. 4. A primitive state of existence, untouched and uninfluenced by civilization or artificiality: couldn't tolerate city life anymore and went back to nature. 5. Theology. Humankind's natural state as distinguished from the state of grace. 6. A kind or sort: confidences of a personal nature. 7. The essential characteristics and qualities of a person or thing: “She was only strong and sweet and in her nature when she was really deep in trouble” (Gertrude Stein). 8. The fundamental character or disposition of a person; temperament: “Strange natures made a brotherhood of ill” (Percy Bysshe Shelley). 9. The natural or real aspect of a person, place, or thing. See Synonyms at disposition. 10. The processes and functions of the body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samurai Tailor Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Main Entry: 2humanFunction: noun : a bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens) : MAN; broadly : any living or extinct member of the family (Hominidae) to which the primate belongs - hu·man·like /-m&n-"lIk/ adjective Now I have already established that the scientific view is that an embryo is life and is alive. Again opinion, or if you really want to get technical, my opinion is technically correct. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I sense a bit of equivocation. The dictionary definition specifies "living" as opposed to dead. But it does not say what it means to be a non-dead human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Maybe because there is no such thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samurai Tailor Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 No such thing as what? A non-dead human? I think you are confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Ok show that it is scientific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samurai Tailor Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Show that what is scientific? Now I am confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Show me that an "un-dead human" is in any way supported by science. Show me that science supports that there is even such a term. You can't debate what has become a debate using science and word meaning with a word or phrase that does not exist within the dictionary or science. Otherwise you are just making up words to support your opinion. Which in fact turns your post into an opinion piece. Which is fine is you were using it only to show your opinion and not fact in anyway, shape, or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samurai Tailor Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 Well, I wrote "non-dead human" rather than "un-dead." In any case, "non-dead" is a rhetorical device intended to call attention to the fact that "living" is being used in two slightly different ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a midnight star Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 Still waiting for proof that it is not a word that you made up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts