Here Is An Interesting Scenario

[singinbeauty]

Hello All!
Ok, so I came across something very interesting last night that I would like your opinion on. There are some people out there who are considered mentally unstable because of a desire they have to have certain limbs or parts of their bodies surgically removed. The parts are perfectly fine and normal. The person just feels like they don't need it, the feel it's a nuisance, or it is causing them to feel like it's hindering them in some way. It is against the law for a surgeon to perform these surgeries and they can lose their lisence for it. Is this any different then say a woman wanting to abort her baby because, with nothing being wrong with the baby, she just feels like it's going to hold her down, she doesn't need it, or it's going to be a nuisance? I mean this is a part of her and is very attached to her. Let me know what you think!

[TQWcS]

What I consider to be irrational is to call an embryo or zygote a child in the first place, if they were one and the same, why the different names?

I believe what he meant was that it is a person. Just because it is in a different stage of development does not take away from the fact that it is still a person.

[Piper Plexed]

What I consider to be irrational is to call an embryo or zygote a child in the first place, if they were one and the same, why the different names?

I believe what he meant was that it is a person. Just because it is in a different stage of development does not take away from the fact that it is still a person.

See now that is very interesting cause the thread started with the idea that the embryo could be considered as a body part of the Mother like an arm or a leg....

Hello All!
Ok, so I came across something very interesting last night that I would like your opinion on. There are some people out there who are considered mentally unstable because of a desire they have to have certain limbs or parts of their bodies surgically removed. The parts are perfectly fine and normal. The person just feels like they don't need it, the feel it's a nuisance, or it is causing them to feel like it's hindering them in some way. It is against the law for a surgeon to perform these surgeries and they can lose their lisence for it. Is this any different then say a woman wanting to abort her baby because, with nothing being wrong with the baby, she just feels like it's going to hold her down, she doesn't need it, or it's going to be a nuisance? I mean this is a part of her and is very attached to her. Let me know what you think!Back to top

Singingbeauty alone has covered the extremes from body part to Child
Is it a part of the Mother or a child or a person? I think it is an embryo, anything beyond that is opinion and projection.

[singinbeauty]

Singingbeauty alone has covered the extremes from body part to Child
Is it a part of the Mother or a child or a person? I think it is an embryo, anything beyond that is opinion and projection.

I never once said that I considered the child to be anythings less than a child. The only way that the child is a part of the mother is because they contain similar DNA (for this the child is just as much a part of the father) and the child is attached inside the mother for food and nutrients to grow. A child and a person, by the way, are one and the same. You wouldn't look at a child and not grant them personhood would you?

I think it is an embryo, anything beyond that is opinion and projection.

In YOUR opinion it is just an embryo. Just because you think it doesn't mean it's so. To me an embryo is a child. Like TQWcs said above,

I believe what he meant was that it is a person. Just because it is in a different stage of development does not take away from the fact that it is still a person.

What I consider to be irrational is to call an embryo or zygote a child in the first place, if they were one and the same, why the different names?

We have different names for different stages... Newborn, toddler, child, pre-teen, teenager, young adult, adult, and senior. All these can describe one person as they grow through life. You would not look at a baby and say "Well, since this newborn cannot survive on it's own then we should kill it because it is an inconvenience to the mother." No, because it is what? A person not matter if it is a newborn or an adult. So we can just add embryo/zygote to the beginning of that list because this is the beginning of life for a PERSON.

[illuminatus]

We have different names for different stages... Newborn, toddler, child, pre-teen, teenager, young adult, adult, and senior. All these can describe one person as they grow through life. You would not look at a baby and say "Well, since this newborn cannot survive on it's own then we should kill it because it is an inconvenience to the mother." No, because it is what? A person not matter if it is a newborn or an adult. So we can just add embryo/zygote to the beginning of that list because this is the beginning of life for a PERSON.

Yes we have different stages for our lives. However, we know a catapillar a butterfly because it is not a butterfly and we don't refer to a maggot as fly. A human being is a life form, not a zygote, not an embryo, not a fetus. A life form is the characteristic morphology of a mature organism. Something an embryo is not, something a zygote is not, something a fetus is not. However, a newborn child is a senstient life form. The child is a developed organism and is no longer an embryo or a zygote. That child knows he/she exists. A zygote, an embryo, a fetus does not. They are not life forms, they are not sentient, they are not intelligent. They are nothing more than a collection of cells with the potential to becoming a human being.

You don't consider corpses oil or coal do you? Then why do you insist on calling embryos children?

[Jose]

This is an interesting point of topic... Rape and abuse is in no way a light subject and I am not talking from the victim's point of view. But when you add a child there is someone else that needs to be added to the equation and I am sad to see that society is trying to rationalize things so that killing a child, who is helpless and defensless, is ok. It's horrible what thesee women have gone through but killing a human is not the answer.

Therein lies the problem. There is no good answer. All the choices are bad. Perhaps, the only saving grace is that they say the child will go straight to heaven.

Singingbeauty alone has covered the extremes from body part to Child
Is it a part of the Mother or a child or a person? I think it is an embryo, anything beyond that is opinion and projection.

Hmmm...it's everything. It is a part of the mother because it has reworked her tissues into a placenta. This is an integral part of the mother, just as it is an integral part of the embryo. The trouble with defining "what it is" is that it goes through so many different stages, from a blob of cells not much different from something you'd scrape from your cheek, to something that is hard to distinguish from a fish or a cow at the same developmental stage, until it finally begins to look vaguely humanoid. Hippocrates even went so far as to conclude that human embryos start out as water, then become plants, then become animals, and then become humans--at each stage, being infused with an additional soul. He believed that abortion was acceptable up until the embryo was infused with the soul of a human. We seem still to be having the same discussion. The stance each of us takes on abortion is colored by our interpretation of the significance of these different developmental stages, of the direct involvement of the mother, and how our notion of relative morality assigns various "weights" to each aspect.

[Gaunt]

the child is attached inside the mother for food and nutrients to grow.

The tapeworm is attached inside the host for food and nutrients to grow. you have just proven that the unborn forms a parasitic relationship with the mother.

A child and a person, by the way, are one and the same.

Actually, no they are not. Women were not allowed to vote because they were not considered persons. This has changed of course, but it illustrates that simply because something is human and alive does not mean it is considered a person. Children are not granted the rights of an adult. They are granted some rights and priviledges, but some they are denied until they reach a certain age.

You wouldn't look at a child and not grant them personhood would you?

Of course I would. I do not want to see children voting, or being held to the same criminal standards as adults. Personhood in the eyes of the law implies equality under it.

Children are humans, but this does not necessarily make them persons.

[singinbeauty]

The tapeworm is attached inside the host for food and nutrients to grow. you have just proven that the unborn forms a parasitic relationship with the mother.

Yes, but the child in the mother is human... the parasite is not. According to DNA and the structure of the cells.

Actually, no they are not. Women were not allowed to vote because they were not considered persons. This has changed of course, but it illustrates that simply because something is human and alive does not mean it is considered a person. Children are not granted the rights of an adult. They are granted some rights and priviledges, but some they are denied until they reach a certain age.

Main Entry: per·son
Pronunciation: 'p&r-s&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French persone, from Latin persona actor's mask, character in a play, person, probably from Etruscan phersu mask, from Greek prosOpa, plural of prosOpon face, mask -- more at PROSOPOPOEIA
1 : HUMAN, INDIVIDUAL -- sometimes used in combination especially by those who prefer to avoid man in compounds applicable to both sexes <chairperson> <spokesperson>
2 : a character or part in or as if in a play : GUISE
3 a : one of the three modes of being in the Trinitarian Godhead as understood by Christians b : the unitary personality of Christ that unites the divine and human natures
4 a archaic : bodily appearance b : the body of a human being; also : the body and clothing <unlawful search of the person>
5 : the personality of a human being : SELF
6 : one (as a human being, a partnership, or a corporation) that is recognized by law as the subject of rights and duties
7 : reference of a segment of discourse to the speaker, to one spoken to, or to one spoken of as indicated by means of certain pronouns or in many languages by verb inflection
- per·son·hood /-"hud/ noun
- in person : in one's bodily presence

Your definition of person may be #6 but I like #1... A HUMAN or INDIVIDUAL. So different people think of personhood as different things. It wouldn't have so many definitions in the dictionary if that wasn't so.

[Piper Plexed]

Singingbeauty alone has covered the extremes from body part to Child
Is it a part of the Mother or a child or a person? I think it is an embryo, anything beyond that is opinion and projection.

I never once said that I considered the child to be anythings less than a child. The only way that the child is a part of the mother is because they contain similar DNA (for this the child is just as much a part of the father) and the child is attached inside the mother for food and nutrients to grow. A child and a person, by the way, are one and the same. You wouldn't look at a child and not grant them personhood would you?

Obviously you did as you generated the question for debate. To even consider a fetus an attached body part requires one to not consider it a child. At the very least you must admit that you briefly toyed with the idea to the point where the question for debate resulted.

A child/person is a independent sentient being that can be interacted with and cared for by any other independent sentient being. A fetus is not an independent sentient being and can only survive inside of the host, a fetus is not a person.

We have different names for different stages... Newborn, toddler, child, pre-teen, teenager, young adult, adult, and senior. All these can describe one person as they grow through life. You would not look at a baby and say "Well, since this newborn cannot survive on it's own then we should kill it because it is an inconvenience to the mother." No, because it is what? A person not matter if it is a newborn or an adult. So we can just add embryo/zygote to the beginning of that list because this is the beginning of life for a PERSON.

Go back to the definitions I supplied there is only mention of cells and development not personhood.

Webster's

1in·fant
Pronunciation: 'in-f&nt
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English enfaunt, from Middle French enfant, from Latin infant-, infans, from infant-, infans, adjective, incapable of speech, young, from in- + fant-, fans, present participle of fari to speak -- more at BAN
1 : a child in the first period of life
2 : a person who is not of full age : MINOR

Hmmm... first period of life?
Like I said before, opinion and projection.

[singinbeauty]

If you want to quote definitions...
Main Entry: child
Pronunciation: 'chI(&)ld
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural chil·dren /'chil-dr&n, -d&rn/
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English cild; akin to Gothic kilthei womb, and perhaps to Sanskrit jathara belly
1 an unborn or recently born person
2 a : a young person especially between infancy and youth b : a childlike or childish person c : a person not yet of age
3 usually childe /'chI(&)ld/ archaic : a youth of noble birth
4 a : a son or daughter of human parents b : DESCENDANT
5 : one strongly influenced by another or by a place or state of affairs
6 : PRODUCT, RESULT <barbed wire... is truly a child of the plains -- W. P. Webb>
- child·less /'chI(&)l(d)-l&s/ adjective
- child·less·ness noun
- with child : PREGNANT

I especially like #1... Don't you?

[singinbeauty]

Obviously you did as you generated the question for debate. To even consider a fetus an attached body part requires one to not consider it a child. At the very least you must admit that you briefly toyed with the idea to the point where the question for debate resulted.

My question was not that the child was part of the mother's body but that some people are so delusional as to cut off a limb was it to be assumed that delusions affect a mother so much that she would kill her own unborn child growing inside her.