If the wing-nuts now call fetuses the "unborn"

[prodigal_green]

are those of us out of the womb the "undead?"

Don't know why that just popped into my head...strange weather today I guess...

[Inland]

1. We are the "dead-to-be", so they can concentrate on saving our souls nt

[jdj]

19. LOL

I am the "unaborted".

[Riding this Donkey]

2. "unborn" is better than being born

And than reborn if that rebirth makes us religious zealots like them.

[SharonAnn]

31. Years ago they called them "preborn"

[Lars39]

3. Then the question is:

Do the "undead" have "recreational" sex?:think:

[Skidmore]

9. Not if they are...

"deadheads".

[SammyBlue]

4. That's fine

I've been calling the Wing Nuts unthinking, unfeeling, unAmerican and unpatriotic for a long time.

[CornField]

5. Those who are anti-woman cannot afford to let the conversation be honest

Those who are anti-woman cannot allow people to walk around using all these different terms -- baby, fetus, embryo, etc. To do so would be an acknowledgement of there being differences at different stages of pregnancy. It's much safer for them to coin a single term, preferably one that creates a mental image of a full-term, living and breathing outside of the womb child.

They did the same with "partial birth abortion." There is no such beast. But for them to stand on street corners and yell about D&X procedures just wouldn't have drawn the same emotional response. Toss in the honest facts about D&X procedures accounting for less than 1 percent of all abortions and that 99 percent those performed are done because the fetus has either died or has a terminal defect and, well, where's the emotion in that? It's so much better for their anti-woman stance if they proclaim that some mothers and doctors are murdering healthy unborn babies.

If you can't make your appeal based on scientific fact and logic, you have no other choice than to resort to emotional heart-strings.

[pelagius]

6. I've heard some other nutty labels...

...like "fetal survivor" or "born fetus". Really twisted.

[youthere]

26. I think that I might be

fetally challenged.

[EVDebs]

7. Zygote rights movement ? eom

[youthere]

27. Brotherhood of Blastocysts? eom

[Coastie for Truth]

8. The IDers and Creationists really have no understanding

of biology, biochemistry, or theology.

As an example, stem cell research is not "abortion" - it is very definitely "pro life" -- according to Rabbi Daniel Eisenberg, MD, Bio-ethicist and Radiation Oncology Professor, Thomas Jefferson Medical School, Philadelphia PA, in his study "Stem Cell Research in Jewish Law."

As a further example, intelligent design is even less scientifically based then creationism or an earth-centric universe, see Kenneth Miller, "Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution" -- clearly discusses the biochemical deficiencies of the IDer position.

Meanwhile, we South Bay Faith Based Progressive Lefties are going to come out of the closet at a seminar at Christ the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, 1550 Meridian Avenue, San Jose, CA at Noon on Thursday.

[HereSince1628]

21. I don't understand difference between H. sapiens and human beings

I have a PhD in a biological field and I have to say I have trouble with the notion that an individual human being and an individual _H. sapiens_ are different. I support choice, fully. But I can't do it on terms of when something becomes a human being or when it becomes alive.

My knowledge of the _H. sapiens_ life-cycle actually makes it hard for me to listen and read many people's prochoice arguments because often they are flawed biologically. All human beings are _Homo sapiens_. But apparently all _Homo sapiens_ are not human beings.

Somehow _living_ gametes are not always perceived to be alive for at some point after their fusion into a zygote, "life" is said to "begin." Well this makes no sense at all to me in a biological sense. Life began 100's of millions of years ago (and if you are into exobiotic origins maybe longer). Nonetheless, the life we see around us is a continuous stream since it began on this planet. To speak of life beginning at conception makes no strict biological sense. Conception for humans is merely a very fortunate transition for a very limited number of gametes to proceed from the haploid portion of the life cycle to the diploid portion.

Now, gametes of _H. sapiens_ are part of the life cycle of _H. sapiens_, but apparently not part of a human life span. Because of the way terminology is used haploid gametes are not human beings. Consequently, although our seed may be wasted, wasting it is not murder or even killing of any kind.

Although we speak of human sperm and human eggs it is perfectly clear that in this sense "human" is a descriptive adjective referring to source of origination in a manner similar to speaking of human sweat, or human toil. Sperm can be wiped away with a toilet tissue and discarded with no guilt--with all the concern of wiping away nasal discharge after a sneeze.

Well, OK, I can accept that in a non-arbitrary biologically based sort of way the definition of "human beings" refers to something that is diploid.

But that means human being is a term that must be restricted to an individual _H. sapiens_ within the diploid portion of the Homo sapiens life cycle.

That implies that while human beings have a life span, they do not have a life cycle. So, human beings cannot give rise to human beings that give rise to human beings.

Now THAT sounds weird, but it must be so to be consistent with language use. Now, people I am asking you, do you really want to construct a reality in which human beings do not give rise to human beings? Maybe, and, and well speaking biologically that's OK with me!

Before you get VERY upset consider that there are many types of living beings. We quite easily divide plant life cycles into saprophytic and gametophytic generations. Indeed what we know of plant evolution seems a trial over many millions of years of which generation should be dominant. Judged by success it seems that while gamete-bearing saprophytes are tremendously successful, various strategies work well, even in our world.

But, I digress.

Consider, while it is common to think of ferns as having a life cycle divided into 2 component generations with different modes of reproduction, it makes most people uncomfortable to think of their gametes as a separate haploid generation within a _H. sapiens_ life cycle--and human life cycles do not exist.

Well, so we've gotten ourselves rhetorically and sematically to the point of accepting from our culture that the term "human being" refers to a being that is diploid. This, too, is OK, biologically.

Diploid beings give rise to haploid individuals (and although distinctly _H. sapiens_ and not to be confused with human individuals) called gametes that fuse to form diploid individuals.

The fusion of haploid "individuals" to form diploid "individuals" is not only strange sounding, it is a clear biotic transitional point.
(If creating one individual from two sounds strange, you don't
appreciate the symbiotic nature of animal life, for apparently all of us mitochondrial bearing entities are made up of billions and billions of several genetically distinct strains of life.)

So, diploid individuals are human.Things are looking hopeful...

Unfortunately, according to a much disputed conceptualization human beings do not begin here. Not all of the diploid life-span is human according to many people.

Now biologically that raises the specter that some time after the beginning of a diploid _H. sapiens_ life span the life span of a human being begins.

It leaves open the question is a blastocyst a Homo sapiens but not a human being?

Biologically this isn't a problem. The "human" blastocyst clearly contains a developing diploid _H. sapiens_. It may not look like an adult or even a baby _H. sapiens_ but it is certainly genetically, metabolically, indeed it is biologically a _H. sapiens_. But it isn't according to some a human being.

The exact same question can be asked of when "human" embryos and "fetuses" which are biologically individual developing _H. sapiens_ become HUMAN BEINGS.

Thats biologically unfortunate. It creates a biological absurdity of the same sort as saying that "life" begins at conception, when clearly egg and sperm were perfectly "alive" prior to their fusion according to any biological definition of life.

Indeed, the resolution of when a human being's life span begins is obviously based on NON BIOLOGICAL phenomenon. For except for the successful delivery of a baby into a state of existence independent of the support of the umbilicus that has sustained it, there are no other stark biological transitions. Embryonic and fetal development is marked by gradual changes without stark transitions. Privileging one "stage" over another as to its "human beingness" is a cultural definition imposed upon biotic reality.

And THAT is exactly how the biological contribution to the anti-abortion/choice debate stands. The debate doesn't hang on biological conceptualizations, it hangs on other cultural constructs/experiences.


Now, as a final comment, completely unrelated to biology, I share an observation. _Homo sapiens_ kills. Killing of our own species is technically called homicide by whatever cause though we may call it manslaughter, or execution. We do it. Sometimes it is socially acceptable and sometimes it is not.

When it is acceptable and when it is not, is a determination that is made BEYOND the realm of science. Science can only inform decision and policy making and develop the understanding that generates the technology we use to kill.

[Coastie for Truth]

22. Which is a "Legal" or "Theological" or "Moral" decision

as to

"Now, as a final comment, completely unrelated to biology, I share an observation. _Homo sapiens_ kills. Killing of our own species is technically called homicide by whatever cause though we may call it manslaughter, or execution. We do it. Sometimes it is socially acceptable and sometimes it is not."

And my favorite theologian is Moses Ben Maimon (Maimonides) who says stem cell research is permitted and therapeutic abortions are probably mandated.

[Djinn]

33. the problem is very few

pro-choice people would ever actually claim that a zygote, embryo, fetus isn't a human being - in fact I've only EVER heard that from the pro-forced-birth folks distorting our argument.

The argument is that while clearly the fetus is human (even a human being) because it's clearly not a dog nor a lump of steel - it does NOT deserve legal rights.

You can not give full legal right to fetus + mother, so we choose the mother over the fetus. Simple

[New Earth]

34. i've heard quite a few pro-choice people say a fetus is not a human

it's the worst thing to say to try to defend the pro-choice argument.

i really think i like how you just explained it....that it IS a human, but because it really has no legal rights (it is unborn) the mother has a right over the fetus. it doesn't change the fact that the fetus IS human.

[Djinn]

35. but it's "debunked" as if what people mean by that

is that it's another species - the "debunking" that follows is then a fairly pompous description of the life cycle of humans from fertilised egg to wheezing old person on death bed.

Even if there are those that exist who say "it's not human" which I have honestly never seen/heard it's most likely to mean "it has no human rights" or "it isn't legally a person" they just don't put their case too well.

Do you think there are actually people who think a male human and female human can breed chooks? or is it that they're not that articulate.

I guess for me it boils down to is that the fact that a human fetus is a human has zero bearing on abortion, I agree though I wish people would think a bit about what they were saying before arguing with the "other side"

[uppityperson]

10. Undead soungd better than pre-born and pre-dead

[ulTRAX]

11. no........we're the.....

pre-dead ;-)


edit.... oops... someone beat me to the punchline.

[datasuspect]

12. the dead hate the living

that is why they reanimate and feast on live human flesh.

how would a fundy deal with a problem like widespread zombie rampages?

[htuttle]

20. They would assume it was the End Times

...And probably sit there like fools wondering when they're going to be raptured.

[youthere]

29. Zombies rampage, hmmmmm...

Is there any way we can limit this carnage to the right wing? Because if so...I'd like to volunteer my services as an organizer for this fine cultural event.

[ulTRAX]

13. which leads to the question of post-death humans

who's fighting for THEIR rights? ;-)

[prodigal_green]

14. I believe they are pre-reincarnated

oops, wrong religion...

[leftofthedial]

15. I've got their unborn

right here in my pants

[ArkDem]

16. Looks like they may be on to something

fe·tus ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fts)
n. pl. fe·tus·es
The unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural resemblance to the adult animal.
In humans, the unborn young from the end of the eighth week after conception to the moment of birth, as distinguished from the earlier embryo.

[K-W]

17. This isnt new, theyve always done this.

The pro-lifers at alma mater have a cemetary of the unborn every year to raise awareness about abortion. As if anyone wasnt aware yet.

[OneBlueSky]

18. next step . . . outlawing masturbation . . .

because sperm have rights, too . . . then we'll fit every adolescent boy with implanted detectors that sense the evil deed and ignite flashing lights at the local Masturbation Control Center . . . where specially trained agents will be dispatched to pay him a visit and, if necessary, send him away for re-programaming . . .

[independentchristian]

23. Yes and yes

Fetuses are the "unborn" and there is no way to deny that fact.

People who are born and still alive are "not dead," and there is no way to deny that one either.

Those are two "facts", now abortions increase under Republican administrations and decrease under Democratic administrations.

Run with that and you'll get somewhere instead of trying to ignore reality, like expecting a "fetus" not to be called an "unborn" when that's exactly what it is.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

24. Hmmmm. What do they call sperm?

(see Every Sperm Is Sacred): http://www.mwscomp.com/movies/mol/every-sp.mp3

DAD:
There are Jews in the world.
There are Buddhists.
There are Hindus and Mormons, and then
There are those that follow Mohammed, but
I've never been one of them.

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is:
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came,

Because

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate.




GIRL:
Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is wanted.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

MUM:
Hindu, Taoist, Mormon,
Spill theirs just anywhere,
But God loves those who treat their
Semen with more care.

MEN:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.

WOMEN:
If a sperm is wasted,...
CHILDREN:

...God get quite irate.

PRIEST:
Every sperm is sacred.

BRIDE and GROOM:
Every sperm is good.

NANNIES:
Every sperm is needed...
CARDINALS:

...In your neighbourhood!

CHILDREN:
Every sperm is useful.
Every sperm is fine.

FUNERAL CORTEGE:
God needs everybody's.
MOURNER #1:
Mine!
MOURNER #2:
And mine!
CORPSE:
And mine!

NUN:
Let the Pagan spill theirs
O'er mountain, hill, and plain.
HOLY STATUES:
God shall strike them down for
Each sperm that's spilt in vain.

EVERYONE:
Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is good.
Every sperm is needed
In your neighbourhood.

Every sperm is sacred.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite iraaaaaate!

[paineinthearse]

36. Pre-unborn?

[Lexingtonian]

25. and we call their kind the "unbearable"

In any case, I suspect their mothers had severe regrets.

[RPM]

28. born-again-to-be

duH!!!!! :eyes:

[New Earth]

30. um

i would think fetuses ARE the unborn. have you ever had children? did you ever hear their heart beat for the first time? sounds like an unborn child to me....sounds like a human to me....grows up to be an adult just like you or me...:shrug:

don't get me wrong, i am pro-choice, but that part of the argument really makes me nauseas.

[Democrat Dragon]

32. let's use "born only to be used as cannon fodder"