Comment: 1. I can agree with

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: 1. The essence of human life (see in situ)

1. I can agree with

1. I can agree with rational, but I don't see what absolute proof you have, derived from logic, that there exists a soul or even why it matters if there is a soul. If there is and it is separate, then murder of the soul would be impossible. If there is and it is one with the body, then you would conclude that the soul is the mind and its consciousness which is little understood. And the last sentence is a contradiction. If we define life as being conscious, then by definition we CANNOT possibly murder that body/conglomeration or organs and organisms which has no consciousness. If we define life in terms of brain function, then it is possible to murder someone who is comatose or unborn. But if the brain is not functioning, has never functioned, or is broken beyond repair to a functioning state, then when correctly defined, it is possible to destroy the organic 'life' without having committed murder. With abortion we might argue that the brain will or might function in the future, and therefor it is possible to murder that person. But I would argue that life has not existed, and it is not possible to murder a life which does not exist. The future is contingent and every decision in the past has uniquely and distinctly altered who (say) I am. By, for example, not having altered my sex during pregnancy, they have killed the woman who would have existed today in order to have produced me.

2. There is not enough evidence to show that fetuses feel pain. At best, there is evidence to show that they feel pain starting around 20 weeks. I did not say my speculations about what a fetus feels had a bearing on reality. It was what it was, speculation. The statement you made about the uterus being designed for a purpose is contentious enough with the "design" part, but I'll also say the body was "designed" to grow over time causing things like shin splints and menstrual cramps. Those hurt, and they can hurt a lot. Something being "designed" to do something does not mean it is not painful. Finally with the last sentence you have presumed an abortion to be not only painful, but actually more painful than living in a uterus. Leaving behind the fact that you already prohibited me from speculating on pain, I'll just throw out examples of who we kill people on death row with lethal injection. Assuming there isn't a glitch, it is not painful at all.

3. Right only half the Dna comes from the mother. Still I don't know what bearing that has on this conversation. But you are right, the mother does not feel the fetus sensations nor could she considering the fetus also does not feel sensations.

4. Sure the mother may take a few health benefits but the baby has a capacity to kill the mother too. I was merely taking the dictionary definition of parasite and it does fit. I don't know where you got your definition, but it doesn't sound like one that came out of a specialized scientific dictionary.

5. Right so it is ok to operate on parasitic twins. The parasitic twin with a body and no brain function can be deprived of organic life because it has no conscious life. The siamese twin cannot unless the two agree. A fetus does not have the requisite brain function as I mentioned above since it has never existed before and it impossible to take a nonexistent life (in terms of brain function.)

+ Consider a baby born with Anencephaly. Certainly it is impossible to take the life of a baby that has never had brain function, and if it were to be allowed to continue its organic life, it would never have a capacity to create a conscious life.

+ Consider a baby has no rational capacity to determine if he wants to live or not. There have been cases relatively recently dubbed "wrongful life" suits, where the baby was prohibited from 'dying' in the womb and their life proved to be so miserable that they wish they had never lived. The basic principle here is that what happens in the future to a being that has no rationality to decide for itself cannot be assumed to be preferable or not preferable.

23