Page 145 of 154 FirstFirst ... 4595135143144145146147 ... LastLast
Results 1,441 to 1,450 of 1533

Thread: Christianity Today Op Ed

  1. #1441
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    60,424
    Amen (Given)
    13032
    Amen (Received)
    27576
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    They can be. But you can't be wrong about there being no consciousness in the fetus before it has a brain. Consciousness is in the brain. This is the real world, not Oz.
    I'll go back to ignoring your big pompous self.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  2. #1442
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,014
    Amen (Given)
    5255
    Amen (Received)
    23014
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam View Post
    I'm pro-life and I'm pointing out matters that go directly to the constitutional limitations permissible on the issue of abortion and I definitely will not continue trying to explain important distinctions if you're going to falsely label me an "abortionist".

    --Sam
    If it looks like a duck.

  3. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  4. #1443
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,282
    Amen (Given)
    499
    Amen (Received)
    1836
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    Actually no. I never said "person" - Sam did. I said "being" and said I meant it as "organism" - a separate and distinct organism. and in this case a HUMAN organism. Member of the Human Species.

    Person is a legal term. There is talk of conferring personhood to apes.
    I'm wondering if you can stop avoiding the point and get to it. You can't murder a rock, or a fish, or a dog for that matter. You can only murder a person. If there is no person there yet, whatever you do can be wrong, but it can't be murder.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  5. #1444
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,014
    Amen (Given)
    5255
    Amen (Received)
    23014
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I'm wondering if you can stop avoiding the point and get to it. You can't murder a rock, or a fish, or a dog for that matter. You can only murder a person. If there is no person there yet, whatever you do can be wrong, but it can't be murder.
    The point is, if the law defines a person as someone 5 years old or older, then legally you can't murder an infant if you kill it. PERSON is a legal term.

  6. Amen Cow Poke amen'd this post.
  7. #1445
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,282
    Amen (Given)
    499
    Amen (Received)
    1836
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    In a previous discussion I noted that some patients in deep comas can have even less brainwave activity than an unborn baby at about 7 weeks. The former virtually flat lines though some recover. The latter continues to grow and develop.


    In contrast, electroencephalograms have been detecting brainwaves as early as 6 to 6˝ weeks since back in the mid-1950s and this has been confirmed multiple times since then. As Parents Magazine succinctly puts it in their series about the development of the baby at week 6 "brain waves can now be recorded."




    Hopefully, abortions will soon go the way of slavery but I'm afraid it's going to take Christ's return to put an end to this scourge.
    you have a couple of problems there. the first is can these nascant 'brain waves' be seen as actual conscious activity. The second is that you are still 1 1/2 to 2 months in. And that doesn't change the fact that prior to the brain beginning to form, there is no rational basis on which to confer personhood, and without it being a person, it can't be murdered. It can still be wrong to kill it, to stop it from becoming, and I do believe it is wrong to do that, but the fetus isn't a person yet.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  8. #1446
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,282
    Amen (Given)
    499
    Amen (Received)
    1836
    Quote Originally Posted by Sparko View Post
    The point is, if the law defines a person as someone 5 years old or older, then legally you can't murder an infant if you kill it. PERSON is a legal term.
    (1) we don't define person in such a way that killing a 4 year old is not murder.
    (2) It is not ONLY a legal term Sparko. The point is there is no reason to define a body without a brain as any sort of person. The person is gone, or has not yet arrived.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

  9. #1447
    tWebber Mountain Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    United States
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    20,103
    Amen (Given)
    6112
    Amen (Received)
    7495
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    You are only wrong in that what you are not really applying innocent correctly, so your premise is false.

    Innocence doesn't technically apply to that which is not conscious and has no capacity for consciousness. We can confer innocence on a rock if we want to. We can confer it on a fish too if we say being innocent just means never having done evil. But technically, it doesn't apply. Rocks and fish don't have the capacity to do wrong. Therefore they can't be innocent of wrong. Or conversely, you could reverse the logic say that the sort of innocence that applies to a zygote also applies just as well to a rock, or a fish.

    But the potential to become a human being - that doesn't exist in a rock or a fish. And THAT is why abortion is immoral, even if in the early stages it is not murder.
    I notice you didn't attempt to defend your argument and instead tried to attack mine. Since you accept "potential" as a valid quality of a human being then it can be argued that a fetus will have the potential to make moral decisions, and since it has not yet chosen to do wrong then it is innocent. For that matter, babies don't even have self-awareness until some months after birth and are incapable of making moral decisions, but wouldn't you still classify them as innocent? Why not the fetus, which is nothing less than an earlier stage of that baby's existence?
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

  10. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  11. #1448
    Troll Magnet Sparko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    52,014
    Amen (Given)
    5255
    Amen (Received)
    23014
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    (1) we don't define person in such a way that killing a 4 year old is not murder.
    (2) It is not ONLY a legal term Sparko. The point is there is no reason to define a body without a brain as any sort of person. The person is gone, or has not yet arrived.
    I am more than my brain, Jim. So are you. You have set an arbitrary line in the sand and now are trying to defend it. Other than your opinion, there is nothing that says a human organism is not a human organism until it has consciousness. It is perfectly normal for an embryo to not have a brain. At that stage of development humans don't have brains yet. It doesn't mean they are not humans or not alive. What if someone wanted to say someone without the ability to think rationally and speak is not a person? After all how much different is an infant from a dog? Heck my dog can reason better than a 3 month old. So what if someone wanted to draw the line in the sand at language? They can make a good case for the infant to be nothing more than an animal at that stage.

    But it is perfectly normal for an infant to not have his full faculties or speech yet. Just like it is perfectly normal for an embryo to not have a brain yet. Still a human being.

  12. Amen Bill the Cat, Chrawnus, Cow Poke, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  13. #1449
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,995
    Amen (Given)
    5275
    Amen (Received)
    3614
    Quote Originally Posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    They can be. But you can't be wrong about there being no consciousness in the fetus before it has a brain. Consciousness is in the brain. This is the real world, not Oz.
    You're right, this is the real world, not the world imagined by materialists/physicalists, where if something cannot be measured or detected by scientific instruments it doesn't exist. You're arguing like someone who believes the material is all there is, and that the spiritual aspect of reality is non-existent.

    God seems to have managed consciousness without a brain, so that's at least 1 (3?) examples where consciousness is not in the brain. And if you don't believe in soul sleep or something similar the number rises to several billion examples of consciousness not being in the brain.

    I'm not sure consciousness is a requirement for personhood either. It might very well be that the zygote is ensouled from the very moment of conception, and the brain would then simply be the necessary interface for the soul to start interacting with and being influenced by the material world. So the soul would exist in a sort of slumberlike/unaware state prior to the brain being developed enough that it could start interacting with and receiving sensory inputs from the physical world.

  14. Amen Cow Poke, Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  15. #1450
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Maryland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    7,282
    Amen (Given)
    499
    Amen (Received)
    1836
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    You're right, this is the real world, not the world imagined by materialists/physicalists, where if something cannot be measured or detected by scientific instruments it doesn't exist. You're arguing like someone who believes the material is all there is, and that the spiritual aspect of reality is non-existent.

    God seems to have managed consciousness without a brain, so that's at least 1 (3?) examples where consciousness is not in the brain. And if you don't believe in soul sleep or something similar the number rises to several billion examples of consciousness not being in the brain.

    I'm not sure consciousness is a requirement for personhood either. It might very well be that the zygote is ensouled from the very moment of conception, and the brain would then simply be the necessary interface for the soul to start interacting with and being influenced by the material world. So the soul would exist in a sort of slumberlike/unaware state prior to the brain being developed enough that it could start interacting with and receiving sensory inputs from the physical world.
    I'm speaking in terms of what can be determined legally and scientifically within our legal system. You cant legislate religious belief.
    He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

    "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •