Planned Parenthood to sue group behind fetal tissue videos

Hard to argue with that in the short term anyway.

 

This is probably closest, but you're doing the IP and float silliness - setting definitions that support a concrete worldview.

 

But at the end, even the skin cells do die, so death to them does occur. Finally stops. But the cell (baby) keeps dividing and growing until it one day also dies. Even those cells that continue for a short amount of time, eventually cease. In the case of life, they continue from that first splitting until the last splitting at death.

 

Have to play with the players!

 

That's ugly for IP. He'll have some silliness about cognition or something essentially immeasurable.

 

Going back to the PP videos, I think this is actually the point. A lot of people have latched onto the "selling baby parts is illegal! PP is breaking the law!" thing, and if that were true, maybe it would be good ammunition, but it's not the point. The point is that seeing hearts and lungs chopped out and sold is viscerally horrifying, just like the thought of aborting a kid who can suck its thumb. It's not about logical definitions, and it's not about breaking current law. It's about generating an emotional reaction--showing people that there is horrifying stuff going on with legal sanction.

 

The mental gymnastics involved in some of these arguments remind me of my kids' overly complicated explanations for why they got caught doing something wrong.

 

Canseco going on about chimera ranches on twitter. Seemed to fit here.

 

José?

 

It takes a lot to apply an arbitrary rule to justify killing a growing human life. Women's rights

 

Yup

 

If cellular division and growth is all that is necessary, then your lung is also a life. Nobody would call it murder, or morally wrong to remove a lung.

I don't mind the cellular division definition, because it is necessary. But it isn't sufficient. You'd have to further call it "potential human life," to differentiate between general cellular division and specific cellular division.

But if it is a "potential human life," it can't also be a "human life."

So we're back to JQK's view in that we have to use morality. And that's how we got here in the first place.

 

Nah, it just has to be in proximity to an enemy of the state, then we just call it collateral damage from military action, and it's all good.

 

I don't like abortion or airstrikes on Pakistani villagers. I'd love to see us get rid of drone strikes, seems like something Darth Vader's bunch would do.

I will say that with abortion we know exactly who we are targeting though. There's no accident/collateralness involved. It's a sure thing. The victim is identified and destroyed.

 

What I was thinking when I read this...

 

Very well said.

 

Ok, it is human life. Those particular cells only become one thing.

 

but we don't have a debate about it at that point, it requires boss action, can be canned by congress or could result in prison sentence for the killer. I'm perfectly fine with aborting every kid in enemy states, if that helps clarify.

 

I don't think I contradicted that. I'm just saying it'd be silly to carry a fetus for that long if you didn't want it, in terms of what it does to your body.

 

I've almost started a thread about that twice. I'm very concerned about it. There is every reason to believe it will spread across the US. We have mosquito species here already that act as a vector. It's a terribly cruel thing, robbing parents of healthy children.