Joined: 22 Jul 2004 Posts: 173 Location: USA: NY & DC
Truth: Abortion Is Not Surgery Posted: 07-22-04 02:50am
Surgery:
1. The branch of medicine that deals
with the diagnosis and treatment of
injury, deformity, and disease by manual
and instrumental means.
2. A surgical operation or procedure,
especially one involving the removal or
replacement of a diseased organ or
tissue.
Abortion:
1. Termination of pregnancy and
expulsion of an embryo or of a fetus that
is incapable of survival. (is it
perfectly capable of survival if left
intact in the womb as nature intended)
2. The premature expulsion of a
nonviable(? See below) fetus from the
uterus.
Viable:
1. Capable of living, developing, or
germinating under favorable conditions.
(the favorable conditions for an embryo or
fetus is in the womb)
how can we justify interrupting this
natural process of human
development/growth? This process begins
as soon as we come into existence and well
after birth. According to the
definitions, most of what we call
abortions are not in actuality abortions
at all, because the human being at
whatever stage of development is capable
of living in those favorable conditions
with which "abortion" interrupts.
Last edited by where_is_the_line on 07-23-04 23:39pm; edited 1 time in total
|
PattyV
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 01 May 2004 Posts: 1103 Location: Chicago area
Posted: 07-22-04 21:25pm
This sounds like sami
|
JanetBee
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 28 Apr 2004 Posts: 332
Posted: 07-23-04 12:08pm
You mean because of the terrible syntax
and nonsensical posting, and the
i'm-right-and-you-are-all-stoopid
attitude? Surely not.
|
where_is_the_line
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 Posts: 173 Location: USA: NY & DC
Humorosity Posted: 07-23-04 15:35pm
Are you calling my post nonsensical and
claiming it has terrible syntax? Or are
your just making fun of samie? I'm not
claiming I use perfect grammar in every
sentence I type, but surely you see some
logic in there no? Or is that too much
"i'm-right-and-you-are-all-stoopid
attitude" for ya?
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003 Posts: 3717
Posted: 07-23-04 16:04pm
Some people never learn.
|
PattyV
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 01 May 2004 Posts: 1103 Location: Chicago area
Posted: 07-23-04 21:24pm
No-no logic here.
|
where_is_the_line
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 Posts: 173 Location: USA: NY & DC
Posted: 07-23-04 23:38pm
Well if anyone is seriously claiming there
is no logic what so ever in that first
post, you are fooling yourself.
What do some people never learn
hotasfrick?
Nobody has yet to answer my original
question. Or is it too illogical? My
bad...
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003 Posts: 3717
Posted: 07-24-04 15:03pm
Favorable for whom? The fetus? Okay,
sometimes, but what about the mother? It
may not be favorable for her at all, thus
not viable.
Some people never learn....(samie,
catlick, manipulator, gordon....)all
kicked off of the forum for abusing it and
they all (if not all the same person to
begin with) just keep coming
back.......That is what some people never
learn.
|
where_is_the_line
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 Posts: 173 Location: USA: NY & DC
Posted: 07-24-04 17:21pm
The womb is always the "favorable"
environment for a human being to develop
in the first nine months of life. I used
the word favorable according to how it was
used in the definition in reference to
condition of living. Not favorable as in
the situation.
And viable has three main definitions, so
we must be clear on which one we are
refering to. I already showed one of
them, so a pre-born human is viable so
long as it has no major defects that would
inhibit it's development or ability to
live after birth. Of course a fetus is
not viable outside of the womb, but that
does not justify abortion. And you just
used viable in the "capable of success or
continuing effectiveness; practicable"
meaning. But if the fetus is capable of
success (continued life after birth) than
it is still viable.
Thank you for clarifying, now I get it.
|
2ferano
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 23 Dec 2003 Posts: 3717
Posted: 07-24-04 19:07pm
No, I was using viable in the same way you
were. If it is not "favorable" for the
mother to carry the child (ie it will kill
her) then the womb is not "favorable" for
the fetus. Or the mother for that
matter.
|
where_is_the_line
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 22 Jul 2004 Posts: 173 Location: USA: NY & DC
Posted: 07-24-04 21:39pm
Ok I get it now, it sounded different when
you originally said it.
