5 ms·

Nope; I don't need to discuss the 'personhood'. I'm clearly fine with abortion before the 3th month. And no if you wanna have it clarified: I think a human be

Nope; I don't need to discuss the 'personhood'. I'm clearly fine with abortion before the 3th month. And no if you wanna have it clarified: I think a human being is more than just a small or big blob of cells My opinion did not change after we lost our 'fetus' in the 3th month. And no seeing a small body lying there was not a nice experience.

Damorian 6y ago
Given the grammar mistakes, I'm assuming English is not your first language, and you aren't properly understanding what I'm saying. It's fine if you don't want to engage, but if you are going to engage, please do so in good faith, seeking to understand the other person as completely as possible, particularly if you are working against a language barrier. I had assumed you were being disingenuous/willfully ignorant before, but I doubt that now, my apologies for making that assumption.
- Fumtumi 6y ago
  You still can try to clarify what you are trying to say instead of being dismissive. Let me try to reword it: Yes it is a human fetus; Its not a human being.
  - Damorian 6y ago
    There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, rational, and consistent. Your choice of words is particularly egregious, in my opinion. Killing is not the same as homicide. Human is not the same as person. A fetus is not a clump of cells, or a baby. A "human being" is just a human (a common usage scientific term), and human is just a species of animal. So yes, a "human fetus" is a "human being". "Person" is a legal/philosophical term, not necessarily a scientific one. "Killing" simply refers to ending the life of a living thing. "Homicide" (the mention of which you removed?) is a legal term for killing a person. To drive this point home further, we have concepts for non-human persons, and non-person humans. They aren't interchangeable in all contexts. The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. The debate is whether these humans are "persons", which entitles them to rights, or if they are not, if they deserve rights in some other capacity (e.g. my dog isn't a person but has rights). Again, when people say "it's not killing" or "it's not a human", or tangentially, "it's a clump of cells" or "it's a baby" they are factually wrong and are deliberately misusing those words in an attempt to strengthen their argument, when in reality it makes them look either dishonest or ignorant. To me, your posts are either dishonest, or ignorant. That was my entire point.
    - orwin 6y ago
      A human foetus w/o personality or any human trait, or a person that have a life to live and don't want to forcibly stay attached to that violonist for 9 months, i think i'm pretty okay with killing the foetus and everyone should be too.
    - Supermancho 6y ago
      > The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. Killing <animal> and killing <animal> fetus is not a an equivalence in animal medicine. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-in-large-animals/overview-of-abortion-in-large-animals https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-... I do not subscribe to your belief that there is no debate, with that assertion.
      - Damorian 6y ago
        To kill simply means to put a living thing to death. A fetus (human or otherwise) is a living thing. I don't know what the purpose of your link was, or how it has anything to do with the misuse of words above. Unless you think I'm implying that all forms of killing are the same, which obviously I'm not. That being said "killing <animal> fetus" is merely a subset of "killing <animal>" by basic logic. Were you implying otherwise by citing that link?
        Supermancho 6y ago
        > That being said "killing <animal> fetus" is merely a subset of "killing <animal>" by basic logic. No, that is not logical. Killing a caterpillar is not killing a butterfly. Known forms of life are not absolute in classification. You have decided to classify a fetus as a subset and others do not. Good luck with whatever.
        Damorian 6y ago
        They're still the same animal though (e.g. a butterfly caterpillar vs a moth caterpillar). The only distinction, which is specific to this case, is that the words caterpillar and butterfly imply a stage of development where the word human does not, making it a poor analogy. I just want people to stop trying to change the definition of words for the sake of perception.

Damorian 6y ago

Given the grammar mistakes, I'm assuming English is not your first language, and you aren't properly understanding what I'm saying. It's fine if you don't want to engage, but if you are going to engage, please do so in good faith, seeking to understand the other person as completely as possible, particularly if you are working against a language barrier. I had assumed you were being disingenuous/willfully ignorant before, but I doubt that now, my apologies for making that assumption.

Fumtumi 6y ago
You still can try to clarify what you are trying to say instead of being dismissive. Let me try to reword it: Yes it is a human fetus; Its not a human being.
- Damorian 6y ago
  There is a common theme among people who argue over abortion; they choose particular words that are either unscientific or misleading, in a disingenuous way, to promote their side as being more rational. My initial assumption is that you were doing this, and you may still be, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. I feel it is very important that when we discuss abortion, we do so in a way that is scientific, rational, and consistent. Your choice of words is particularly egregious, in my opinion. Killing is not the same as homicide. Human is not the same as person. A fetus is not a clump of cells, or a baby. A "human being" is just a human (a common usage scientific term), and human is just a species of animal. So yes, a "human fetus" is a "human being". "Person" is a legal/philosophical term, not necessarily a scientific one. "Killing" simply refers to ending the life of a living thing. "Homicide" (the mention of which you removed?) is a legal term for killing a person. To drive this point home further, we have concepts for non-human persons, and non-person humans. They aren't interchangeable in all contexts. The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. The debate is whether these humans are "persons", which entitles them to rights, or if they are not, if they deserve rights in some other capacity (e.g. my dog isn't a person but has rights). Again, when people say "it's not killing" or "it's not a human", or tangentially, "it's a clump of cells" or "it's a baby" they are factually wrong and are deliberately misusing those words in an attempt to strengthen their argument, when in reality it makes them look either dishonest or ignorant. To me, your posts are either dishonest, or ignorant. That was my entire point.
  - orwin 6y ago
    A human foetus w/o personality or any human trait, or a person that have a life to live and don't want to forcibly stay attached to that violonist for 9 months, i think i'm pretty okay with killing the foetus and everyone should be too.
  - Supermancho 6y ago
    > The scientific reality and proper usage of the English language is abortion is killing humans (human fetuses). This is not up for debate. Killing <animal> and killing <animal> fetus is not a an equivalence in animal medicine. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-in-large-animals/overview-of-abortion-in-large-animals https://www.merckvetmanual.com/reproductive-system/abortion-... I do not subscribe to your belief that there is no debate, with that assertion.
    - Damorian 6y ago
      To kill simply means to put a living thing to death. A fetus (human or otherwise) is a living thing. I don't know what the purpose of your link was, or how it has anything to do with the misuse of words above. Unless you think I'm implying that all forms of killing are the same, which obviously I'm not. That being said "killing <animal> fetus" is merely a subset of "killing <animal>" by basic logic. Were you implying otherwise by citing that link?
      - Supermancho 6y ago
        > That being said "killing <animal> fetus" is merely a subset of "killing <animal>" by basic logic. No, that is not logical. Killing a caterpillar is not killing a butterfly. Known forms of life are not absolute in classification. You have decided to classify a fetus as a subset and others do not. Good luck with whatever.
        Damorian 6y ago
        They're still the same animal though (e.g. a butterfly caterpillar vs a moth caterpillar). The only distinction, which is specific to this case, is that the words caterpillar and butterfly imply a stage of development where the word human does not, making it a poor analogy. I just want people to stop trying to change the definition of words for the sake of perception.