That is one way, another and more likely way is through robotics/3d printing/growing.  If we can replace our body or parts of our body we will never die.

let me guess which part of you your GF thinks needs "growing"...

That is one way, another and more likely way is through robotics/3d printing/growing.  If we can replace our body or parts of our body we will never die.

3D printing? Tell me about that

let me guess which part of you your GF thinks needs "growing"...

Heads

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

You are going a little too deep. The situation is just the closest analogy I have come up with to date to present to someone as another way to look at stopping or allowing abortion. I am trying to make a thought experiment separate from abortion that can get as close as possible to the abortion situation the help understand the dilema of forcing someone to remain pregnant vs allowing someone to take a life for their own freedom.

Understood.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Turbine blades cannot be recycled either.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

I didn't read 16 pages of posts, but here's my thoughts on it.

I believe a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body to include abortion.  However this only goes up to a certain point in the pregnancy where the fetus is capable of conscious thought which I'm guessing is sometime in the 2nd trimester?  Where they can react to their environment, learn their mothers voice, etc which makes them an independent human.  I would not make exceptions to rape, incest, and disabilities because it would violate this principle.  The only exception I might make is if the woman's life is in extreme danger, but then it raises the question "can you trade one innocent life for another?"

There should definitely be no government funding to support this and no government mandates that insurance companies cover the cost.  Abortion should be a shameful thing to do and society should be very vocal in opposing abortions.  At the same time, government and the community should encourage adoptions more to prevent abortions.

As an agnostic I am unsure of the afterlife.  Fear of the unknown is common.  I don't have any dependents.  Don't think abortion would have any effect on my conscience, and I have never had one done for my sake.  One of the goals of my life is immortality just so I don't have to die, I enjoy life, why stop.  I am banking that during my lifetime medical tech advances to a point to cure aging.

Exactly what is life and what are you?  If you could download your thoughts in to a robot or a computer in a virtual world, would you still be alive?  If you body is perfectly fine but all your memories are wiped, are you alive?  Or your body is perfectly fine and your memory is wiped then replaced by another person's memories, are you alive?

I didn't read 16 pages of posts, but here's my thoughts on it.

I believe a woman has the right to do what she wants with her body to include abortion.  However this only goes up to a certain point in the pregnancy where the fetus is capable of conscious thought which I'm guessing is sometime in the 2nd trimester?  Where they can react to their environment, learn their mothers voice, etc which makes them an independent human.  I would not make exceptions to rape, incest, and disabilities because it would violate this principle.  The only exception I might make is if the woman's life is in extreme danger, but then it raises the question "can you trade one innocent life for another?"

There should definitely be no government funding to support this and no government mandates that insurance companies cover the cost.  Abortion should be a shameful thing to do and society should be very vocal in opposing abortions.  At the same time, government and the community should encourage adoptions more to prevent abortions.

Not to argue, but to see what your thoughts are ....

You said "Where they can react to their environment, learn their mothers voice, etc which makes them an independent human."

Biologically, when the egg and sperm combine, the resulting DNA is separate and apart from either parent's DNA.  In those terms, the embryo is "independent".  I'm sure you didn't mean independent in the sense that the fetus is capable of living apart from the mother, so I'm guessing from the context you are talking about the fetus no longer being considered part of the mother but rather an individual.

Close?

Not to argue, but to see what your thoughts are ....

You said "Where they can react to their environment, learn their mothers voice, etc which makes them an independent human."

Biologically, when the egg and sperm combine, the resulting DNA is separate and apart from either parent's DNA.  In those terms, the embryo is "independent".  I'm sure you didn't mean independent in the sense that the fetus is capable of living apart from the mother, so I'm guessing from the context you are talking about the fetus no longer being considered part of the mother but rather an individual.

Close?

Kind of.  I think what makes you "you"  is your thoughts and experiences, not a beating heart or functioning body.

Kind of.  I think what makes you "you"  is your thoughts and experiences, not a beating heart or functioning body.

And do you know of any way to scientifically determine at what point in development you became "you?" -- other than a rough estimate in number of weeks?

And do you know of any way to scientifically determine at what point in development you became "you?" -- other than a rough estimate in number of weeks?

I don't know, Im not really interested in the subject of abortion.  I suppose when the fetus can react to a stimulus like heart beat decreasing when the mother talks, moving around when taping on the stomach, something along those lines.  It would be difficult to determine in each case which is why I think they just go with general terms like # of weeks or heart starts beating.  It's also an uncomfortable topic to discuss for most people, thinking about the exact line when you can terminate a pregnancy before the fetus becomes conscious.

 

I don't know, Im not really interested in the subject of abortion.  I suppose when the fetus can react to a stimulus like heart beat decreasing when the mother talks, moving around when taping on the stomach, something along those lines.  It would be difficult to determine in each case which is why I think they just go with general terms like # of weeks or heart starts beating.  It's also an uncomfortable topic to discuss for most people, thinking about the exact line when you can terminate a pregnancy before the fetus becomes conscious.

I'm just wondering.  Drawing a line between "sentient" and "not sentient" to me would vary from fetus to fetus with regard to the exact time that occurs.

Without a test, the best way I can see is to set an absolute minimum time of development where sentience CAN happen, and make abortion legal before that point including an additional margin for error.

In most pregnancies, the date of conception is a guess.  All developmental timelines, including delivery date, are based on that initial date.  So, there should also be and additional margin for error added based on the likelihood the conception date was close.

Basically, conception date - that margin of error + date of sentience - that error margin = last day to abort.

Those margins of error are what concern me most.  If there's not a reasonable degree of accuracy in the estimates, you're running a risk of violating your "rule" that abortions must be before sentience.  If you miss that estimate by a few days, you just murdered a sentient human being.

It's a complicated and risky process when we try to give ourselves the greatest leeway possible to abort.

Exactly what is life and what are you?

 If you could download your thoughts in to a robot or a computer in a virtual world, would you still be alive? 
yes

If you body is perfectly fine but all your memories are wiped, are you alive? 
no

Or your body is perfectly fine and your memory is wiped then replaced by another person's memories, are you alive?
no

For me life is thoughts. I am me because of my brain.  If they can mimic that,  I belive you can "download" yourself if technology gets advanced enough to perfectly simulate your neurons etc. 

And do you know of any way to scientifically determine at what point in development you became "you?" -- other than a rough estimate in number of weeks?

It would have to be some point when the brain develops enough.  We probably would figure out the exact time with science but the testing would be unethical to most people. 

It would have to be some point when the brain develops enough.  We probably would figure out the exact time with science but the testing would be unethical to most people.

So, your "SHORT" answer is: no.

Given that there is no such test, setting the point of sentience as the point beyond which abortions should be prohibited is an unknowable event.

Please explain how an unknowable milestone can ever be logically used to set limits on abortion. 

It's easy to set limits based on theory and assumptions.  Abortion limits should be based on measurable or known criteria.  This is precisely why pro-abortion advocates want UNLIMITED and UNRESTRICTED abortions in demand.  It removes all ethical considerations and medical criteria.  As long as it's authorized by legal fiat, the individual responsibility to consider limits is no longer an issue.

So, your "SHORT" answer is: no.

Given that there is no such test, setting the point of sentience as the point beyond which abortions should be prohibited is an unknowable event.

Please explain how an unknowable milestone can ever be logically used to set limits on abortion. 

It's easy to set limits based on theory and assumptions.  Abortion limits should be based on measurable or known criteria.  This is precisely why pro-abortion advocates want UNLIMITED and UNRESTRICTED abortions in demand.  It removes all ethical considerations and medical criteria.  As long as it's authorized by legal fiat, the individual responsibility to consider limits is no longer an issue.

I'm sure it can be done, it's a matter of cost.  Make a $1,000 procedure cost $10,000.  The pro-abortion group would be so against that for the cost and ethics behind it.

I'm sure it can be done, it's a matter of cost.  Make a $1,000 procedure cost $10,000.  The pro-abortion group would be so against that for the cost and ethics behind it.

Actually, the technology to do those tests to a reasonable degree of certainty can not be done.  As time and medical knowledge progress, we are learning just how little we actually can and do know.

24 weeks?

20 weeks?

18 weeks?

According to this article, doctors have been reducing their time limit for abortions due to advances in technology and studies that document if sentience exists in a fetus or not.  This is not like measuring temperature or testing for down syndrome or diseases.

One medical question lies at the heart of the debate over the abortion time limit -
when does a foetus become a sentient being?

Professor Campbell insisted he was "pro-women and pro-choice" but said he was
in favour of reducing the time limit from 24 to 20 weeks.

"You have got to be human to the woman but you have got to be human to the foetus,
too. I don't think we could have a big change but we are at a point where we can
detect abnormalities sooner than we used to. It doesn't seem unrealistic to think we
could bring back the limit."

Officially, medical organisations such as the British Medical Association and the Royal
College of Obstetricians take no view on whether the 24-week limit should be reduced,
leaving it to Parliament to decide. A spokeswoman for the BMA said: "There are no
problems with the act - it is a practical and humane piece of legislation. We are not
pressing for a reduction in the time limit."

But privately, doctors and nurses, like their women patients, dislike late abortions and
many decline to do them.

Peter Bowen Simpkins, a consultant obstetrician at Singleton Hospital, Swansea, said:
"Most NHS hospitals stop at 18 weeks. The nurses - and the doctors - don't want to
look after patients beyond that limit. I can't speak for every hospital but late abortion
is not a very pleasant affair. They are mostly done in the private sector. Many doctors
and nurses don't do abortions at all."

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/the-key-question-when-is-the-foetus-a-sentient-being-528676.html

Is sentience / self awareness, the best determination of whether something is a human being or not? 

What about just the fact that the human fetus is alive and not dead?

Johnny 5 was alive but OG wasn't sentient yet