The Abortion Ministry of Dr. Willie Parker

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by XXROCKYTOPXX, Aug 5, 2014.

  1. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    Does it matter if it's historical? We've also covered why I think so. Who gets to decide that and why?

    Do I mourn every miscarriage? Luckily, I don't hear about many miscarriages. I've seen the effects in people that had a miscarriage and it's terrible. Miscarriages are natural, right? Without any person deciding the fate. So how is that similar?
     
  2. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    Why does the next of kin get to decide what happens to another person?
     
  3. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    Why not the father? If the mother is nothing more than an incubator/life support engine, then shouldn't the father also have rights to the fetus?
     
  4. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    At XX weeks we can do everything we can and that fetus isn't improving. Until XX+Y time.

    But since "advance time" isn't an action, but is instead a passive event that happens regardless, we aren't really "doing" anything.

    So brining them down on the level, at a specific time, as in, making them comparable, there is nothing you can actually do for either.

    You are messing up the comparison by adding an additional component, the time component. Which means you are skewing the comparison.
     
  5. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    We're 80+ posts in and this hasn't turned hostile yet. I'm impressed.
     
  6. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Father isn't the next of kin.

    His decision must either agree or violate the decision of the mother.

    Whereas the mother cannot violate her own decision.

    Really is simple.
     
  7. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    As opposed to who deciding?

    A panel of community volunteers? Can they be lobbied or bought? Because that would make things fun. Like a huge protection racket.
     
  8. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    If the person affected can't decide, then what gives anyone else the right to decide what happens to that person?
     
  9. Indy

    Indy Pronoun Analyst

    Not true. The situation itself requires that the Y component be considered. We don't take people off life support because at XX time they are brain dead. We take them off life support because at XX time they are brain dead and because at no Y time will they ever be un-brain dead.

    If at some point down the road,it becomes possible to restore brain activity at Y time to a person who became brain dead at XX time, will we continue to pull the plug at XX time?
     
  10. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    The fact that the person cannot decide AND is reliant on someone else. Thus, that someone else gets to decide.
     
  11. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    But we can "do" things to help the fetus along. Proper nutrition, avoiding cigarettes and alcohol, lowering of blood pressure, sewing up a weak cervix, etc.

    Time is definitely a factor, and I cannot fathom how you do not consider it one. Actions at time XX will lead to what happens at time XX + Y. They are not isolated beings, living in little time slices. XX+Y can never exist unless XX had happened first.

    Therefore, the brain dead old man, no matter the amount of +Y you add will never get better. Ever.

    You add enough +Y to a fetus, and their brain is now 10x as big and doing 20x as much stuff. Big difference.
     
  12. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    A newborn is reliant on its parents for survival. So, according to you, they can just dump it in a field to die?
     
  13. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    As to the first, you are making a supposition that Y time is greater away than the normal life span of the individual at XX time. Suppose Y time is tomorrow. If we pull at today (XX), did we make the wrong decision? Of course not, because we can only presume to know that Y time isn't tomorrow. And we can only presume to know that Y time for the fetus will result in a positive outcome. But we cannot know for sure, we can only be reasonably sure.

    As to second: depends on the cost, the benefit, the risk and the patient's wishes.
     
  14. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Founder of the Mike Honcho Fan Club

    Take the 73 year old:

    His wife is already deceased. His mom and dad are also deceased, leaving two sons.


    If one son wants to pull the plug on brain dead dad, and the other son doesn't. Who's will does the law follow? The eldest? Or does the lone dissent overrule the son that wants to pull the plug (or if there are 4 kids, 3 for, 1 against)?

    If we are going to use the brain dead analogy, then the mother must be considered the incubator, with the fetus having two next of kin: mom and dad.
     
  15. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Sure they can.

    But since we have an AND for the parents, as in, a parent can decide for itself AND so can the government... the government tends to frown up your scenario.
     
  16. lylsmorr

    lylsmorr Super Moderator

    Also, why did float bring arithmetic into this?
     
  17. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Except that you forget one thing, the fetus alone at no point in time Y will get better on its own, either.

    It requires its incubator.
     
  18. Indy

    Indy Pronoun Analyst

    You're looking at the entire process as one, but I don't think that's the right way to view it. The initial foundation doesn't, if unimpeded, ever result in a born baby, unless it is acted upon by an outside force. Woman does not = baby without something acting on her. Pregnant woman = baby a decent percentage of the time without that outside force acting on it.

    By your thought process, "issues regarding [male] life and reproductive means prior to an age when reproduction becomes impossible (as in, never) is disrupting that foundation, and we must conclude is taking away life" as well, right? The male is equally important to the initial foundation transitioning to the second foundation, is he not?
     
  19. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    In the above analogy, presume the wife isn't dead, but is instead having to pedal a stationary bike in order to provide oxygen circulation for the brain dead husband.

    If we take your second analogy to be proof of something, then in my analogy the wife wouldn't be next of kin. She would be the oxygen system.

    Do you agree? And since no rational person would, and by all accounts you are rational, you can see why the dad isn't next of kin.
     
  20. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Absolutely. If we are going to say foundations are important, we'd conclude that a male having a vasectomy would be horrifying.

    That's the point. Why would we ever say a foundation was important?
     

Share This Page