hi
I always look forward to picking my youngest daughter up from school. It gives me time to have a good long chat with her and she always gives me food for thought, so here goes our conversation today,
Crystal: Dad how long do you spend in mums stomach before you are born?
me: Well some children are born premature but on average about nine months!
Crystal: So when you come out are you nine months old?
me: No , you start your birthday on the day you are born!
Crystal: why? you just told me dad, that you are already nine months old when you are born!
OK guys that question got me stumped, I am not going to go into the debate regarding the rights of a foetus, but why not judge the birth of a person when it is conceived and not when it is born, afterall the foetus is alive, you guys can help me out on this one.
in the past people didn't know exactly how far along a baby was. you knew you were prgnant when you figured it out. you couldn't do like DNA tests or something to determine the exact moment of conception. so the earliest measurable date was the date of birth.
This could have serious impact on legal ages for drinking, voting, driving, military service, and retirement among other things.
Quote from: The Burgomaster on September 28, 2010, 03:02:54 PM
This could have serious impact on legal ages for drinking, voting, driving, military service, and retirement among other things.
lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol
I believe a person born in Japan is automaticly 1 year old. :buggedout:
QuoteOK guys that question got me stumped, I am not going to go into the debate regarding the rights of a foetus, but why not judge the birth of a person when it is conceived and not when it is born, afterall the foetus is alive, you guys can help me out on this one.
Sometimes we dont want to know where, when or why our parents conceived us.
Personally, I do believe life starts at the moment of conception; some groups dont want to believe in this because they want to believe they have justification in destroying the foetus and not feel bad about it.
I hate to be the one that say this... Abortion does destroy life and typically most woman that has abortions do feel the remorse about the ordeal. I know my mother had issues because she aborted a foetus after a few weeks after my birth; the doctor told her it was ok since "it hasnt developed" and my dad say he wasnt ready for another baby... but my mother often felt bad about abortion even years later. It was life that she destroyed and she'll always feel bad about it.
Saddly those that are for abortion dont talk about the psylogical ramifications.
Quote from: Skull on September 28, 2010, 03:30:27 PM
[Personally, I do believe life starts at the moment of conception; some groups dont want to believe in this because they want to believe they have justification in destroying the foetus and not feel bad about it.
You have
every right to speak on the issue, regardless of the femi-nazi groups who see their vaginas as their key to pigeonholing men on reproductive rights issues.
Men are one half of the creation process, and without us, there would be no babies (although I'm sure science will continue to break the laws of nature, so stay tuned.)
Quote from: Skull on September 28, 2010, 03:30:27 PM
I hate to be the one that say this... Abortion does destroy life and typically most woman that has abortions do feel the remorse about the ordeal.
Saddly those that are for abortion dont talk about the psylogical ramifications.
Agreed. And like you, I also believe life begins at conception. However, there are certain instances: rape, birth defects, threats to the mother's life, ect. where abortion is a viable option, But just to avoid the night before?
NO. The corner store has all you need to avoid a potential accident.
How about
adoption?
Adoption can make life very happy for those unable to have children, and it also saves the life of the child. Why does a child have to die? Wouldn't it make sense to bring some light into someone else's life with a bouncing baby boy or girl? Just a few thoughts...
I guess if u agree your daughter
then she will said " yeah, so you will buy me two birthday presents this year daddy?"
btw, lovely and warm little story
I wish I have my own daughter right now T_T
Aren't children wonderful in their honesty and openness?
We were sitting in Port City Java one with my children having hot chocolate while I enjoyed a Red Eye. The place was not overly crowded but there were plenty of other customers present, and nearby.
My daughter, 7 at the time, stated (and not quietly):
"So, let me get this straight. The sperm comes out of the penis and gets to the egg in the woman, right? How does it get there?"
I vowed to myself long ago that I would answer my children's questions truthfully and as honestly as they are asked. This is very difficult to put into practice I find. In any event, we had quite the conversation there in PCJ, with all those people listening. Oh well.
To answer your daughter's particular question is a wonderful opportunity to introduce her to the great mysteries of life and how it begins. Some people believe life begins at conception, and others take a different view, perhaps believing that before birth, the fetus is part of the mother and not an independent life (I disagree with this personally, but if my daughter asked about this, I would not shy from telling her things that I disagree with).
That we call it a "birth day," however, is self explanatory. We celebrate the day that a child truly becomes a separate being. It may be somewhat arbitrary, but it is easily definable...and a convenient definition.
The most important thing here is that she is talking to you about this stuff...keep that channel open (even if it becomes difficult for YOU sometimes).
Quote from: ulthar on September 28, 2010, 11:57:57 PM
Aren't children wonderful in their honesty and openness?
We were sitting in Port City Java one with my children having hot chocolate while I enjoyed a Red Eye. The place was not overly crowded but there were plenty of other customers present, and nearby.
My daughter, 7 at the time, stated (and not quietly):
"So, let me get this straight. The sperm comes out of the penis and gets to the egg in the woman, right? How does it get there?"
I vowed to myself long ago that I would answer my children's questions truthfully and as honestly as they are asked. This is very difficult to put into practice I find. In any event, we had quite the conversation there in PCJ, with all those people listening. Oh well.
To answer your daughter's particular question is a wonderful opportunity to introduce her to the great mysteries of life and how it begins. Some people believe life begins at conception, and others take a different view, perhaps believing that before birth, the fetus is part of the mother and not an independent life (I disagree with this personally, but if my daughter asked about this, I would not shy from telling her things that I disagree with).
That we call it a "birth day," however, is self explanatory. We celebrate the day that a child truly becomes a separate being. It may be somewhat arbitrary, but it is easily definable...and a convenient definition.
The most important thing here is that she is talking to you about this stuff...keep that channel open (even if it becomes difficult for YOU sometimes).
I wanna hear how you told her the sperm
"gets to the egg in the woman". :bouncegiggle: :wink: :bouncegiggle: :lookingup:
Quote from: Allhallowsday on September 29, 2010, 01:06:26 AM
I wanna hear how you told her the sperm "gets to the egg in the woman". :bouncegiggle: :wink: :bouncegiggle: :lookingup:
Do I need to explain it to you, too?
Quote from: Umaril The Unfeathered on September 28, 2010, 05:37:37 PM
Quote from: Skull on September 28, 2010, 03:30:27 PM
[Personally, I do believe life starts at the moment of conception; some groups dont want to believe in this because they want to believe they have justification in destroying the foetus and not feel bad about it.
You have every right to speak on the issue, regardless of the femi-nazi groups who see their vaginas as their key to pigeonholing men on reproductive rights issues. Men are one half of the creation process, and without us, there would be no babies (although I'm sure science will continue to break the laws of nature, so stay tuned.)
lol... science cannot manufacture male sperm (or any animal sperm) because the sperm cells are living tissue with dna. Those woman need us.
QuoteQuote from: Skull on September 28, 2010, 03:30:27 PM
I hate to be the one that say this... Abortion does destroy life and typically most woman that has abortions do feel the remorse about the ordeal.
Saddly those that are for abortion dont talk about the psylogical ramifications.
Agreed. And like you, I also believe life begins at conception. However, there are certain instances: rape, birth defects, threats to the mother's life, ect. where abortion is a viable option, But just to avoid the night before? NO. The corner store has all you need to avoid a potential accident.
Saddly rape does happen although I believe rape is often used as a smoking gun in abortion issues. It's a tough argement, the woman isnt consenting for the incident therefore she shouldnt be obligated to carried the child of a rapist... On the other hand, it's still life. Typically, the police department/doctor has a rap kit that is used for instant abortion. (I'm not against abortion when it comes to rape)
Birth defects does worrie me... At what range? Missing limbs, physical illness, siamese twins, the wrong color of hair, the wrong sex... silly as the last two may sound I could see somebody saying these are birth defects. It worries me because aborting babies based upon birth defects does devalues life.
threats to the mother's life... Another smoking gun, although I think this argument is sad and funny... Why? It's sad because it does happen very rarely... It's funny because those bringing up the
threats to the mother's life issue are assuming this happens all the time and then assumes the doctor will not do anything about this. Really, this isnt an issue; it's up to the mother and doctor (or doctors) at this point.
QuoteHow about adoption?
Adoption can make life very happy for those unable to have children, and it also saves the life of the child. Why does a child have to die? Wouldn't it make sense to bring some light into someone else's life with a bouncing baby boy or girl? Just a few thoughts...
Nothing wrong with adoption although I think (and could be wrong) most adoption clinics are run like prisons. I've also think the process is purposely difficult, especially when it deals with people looking to adopt a baby. I do believe the adoption clinic and procssing needs to be fixxed.
I knew this thread was going to turn into a pro-life/pro-choice argument. Didn't take long either. Skull, I love ya but you're really trying to get one started, aren't ya? Can I make a humble and ernest request that we DON'T get into a pro-life/pro-choice thread here? I don't believe that was macabre's intention. I could be wrong though.
Quote from: Flick James on September 29, 2010, 10:08:25 AM
I knew this thread was going to turn into a pro-life/pro-choice argument. Didn't take long either. Skull, I love ya but you're really trying to get one started, aren't ya? Can I make a humble and ernest request that we DON'T get into a pro-life/pro-choice thread here? I don't believe that was macabre's intention. I could be wrong though.
Sorry... I believe sex is responsibility... and what
can happen after sex is Irreversible. (It's not the question of pro-life/pro-choice... )
I think the best way to teach sex to children is dropping food coloring in a glass of water, then tell the kids to return the water to its normal state without changing the volume of water.
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 10:52:38 AM
Quote from: Flick James on September 29, 2010, 10:08:25 AM
I knew this thread was going to turn into a pro-life/pro-choice argument. Didn't take long either. Skull, I love ya but you're really trying to get one started, aren't ya? Can I make a humble and ernest request that we DON'T get into a pro-life/pro-choice thread here? I don't believe that was macabre's intention. I could be wrong though.
Sorry... I believe sex is responsibility... and what can happen after sex is Irreversible. (It's not the question of pro-life/pro-choice... )
I think the best way to teach sex to children is dropping food coloring in a glass of water, then tell the kids to return the water to its normal state without changing the volume of water.
I'm not begrudging you your beliefs or opinions. I'm just making a request. I'm not going to even hint at my beliefs. I just don't want to see another episode like what happened with us on the drug prohibition thread. The hot buttons on this issue surpass the prohibition one to be sure, not the least of which are the cultural and religious ones. Best left alone in my humble opinion.
Quote from: macabre on September 28, 2010, 12:35:29 PM
I am not going to go into the debate regarding the rights of a foetus
Macabre included this in his original post. It was a wise choice.
Quote from: Flick James on September 29, 2010, 10:57:21 AM
I'm not begrudging you your beliefs or opinions.
You either believe in science or magic...
Science... Life starts when the sperm hits the egg.
Magic... after a number of day's, week's or after birth the baby receives a soul.
Those that are for abortion believes in magic.
I've also realized macabre attempt... although his question is about the moment of life.
Unlike othertopics I dont care if you are for abortions but I do want to point out its the destruction of life (no matter how anybody tries to justify the action)
I agree with Ulthar on this one: the day the baby becomes a separate entity is an easily defined way of determining the age of a baby. That and like mentioned: they may not want to hear the gruesome details of when their life started; I wouldn't want to hear some story about how I was born just as the chorus to "Rock you like a hurricane" came on.
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 10:52:38 AM
I think the best way to teach sex to children is dropping food coloring in a glass of water, then tell the kids to return the water to its normal state without changing the volume of water.
What if we had a 'magical' chemical that when added to the water, changed the colour back to its original clear-self? :teddyr: I'm just saying there's better ways of teaching that particular lesson is all.
As for the 'those who are for abortion believes in magic' comment - well...
[I'm sorry, I don't intend to stir up debate further, I'll go back in my hole now]
Quote from: dean on September 29, 2010, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 10:52:38 AM
I think the best way to teach sex to children is dropping food coloring in a glass of water, then tell the kids to return the water to its normal state without changing the volume of water.
What if we had a 'magical' chemical that when added to the water, changed the colour back to its original clear-self? :teddyr: I'm just saying there's better ways of teaching that particular lesson is all.
Lol... the intent on my suggestion is to show how change cannot be reversed.
I think it's more effective then keeping an egg for a week or putting a condom on a banana...
QuoteAs for the 'those who are for abortion believes in magic' comment - well...
[I'm sorry, I don't intend to stir up debate further, I'll go back in my hole now]
I'll explain my magic comment... A typical argument for justification abortion is to assume that the baby doesn't have a soul until the brain is fully developed. Therefore since the baby doesn't have a soul it seems reasonable to abort the baby at such and such time. The problem with this argument there is no science proof when, how or even if we do have souls. This is a religious faith and not science, therefore if anybody is using the justification to abort a baby at such and such stage because it doesn't have a soul hence its not actually alive... Do believe in magic.
As far as I know souls are created when the egg and the sperm clashes together.
The basic principle of life is the need for survival; once the sperm hits the egg it develops a need for survival. This is why I think life starts at conception.
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 12:54:10 PM
Lol... the intent on my suggestion is to show how change cannot be reversed.
I think it's more effective then keeping an egg for a week or putting a condom on a banana...
Yeah I got that, I was just being a goof! As for the debate about souls etc, well that's for another place.
Quote from: dean on September 29, 2010, 01:00:35 PM
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 12:54:10 PM
Lol... the intent on my suggestion is to show how change cannot be reversed.
I think it's more effective then keeping an egg for a week or putting a condom on a banana...
Yeah I got that, I was just being a goof! As for the debate about souls etc, well that's for another place.
Agree it's a hard argument to debate... that's why I point out science (aka the basic principles of life)...
lester, in an earlier reply, posted this:
Quotein the past people didn't know exactly how far along a baby was. you knew you were prgnant when you figured it out. you couldn't do like DNA tests or something to determine the exact moment of conception. so the earliest measurable date was the date of birth.
This is one of the few responses that attempted to answer the original question without trying to inject the abortion topic into it. It's a simple answer that makes sense. It's just the old way of doing things and it just hasn't changed. Period. At this stage of the science game it's kind of hard to deny that a new life exists when there is a distinct genetic identity, thus, at conception. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that. But, like lester said, the law recognizes birth as the beginning of life from a legal standpoint. The law likes to deal with tangibles whenever possible, and a baby that is outside and is tactile to more than just the mother appeals to legal concepts much more practically than a fetus in the womb. Look at things from a perspective of things 100 years ago. Much of what happened in the womb was a mystery. No way was the law going to touch that, so it stuck with the basics: "we've got a tangible life we can see, it's a boy/girl, stamp it as a life and move on." All the rhetoric over abortion rights and when a life begins didn't really matter to the mainstream until science began to be able to do and see more.
hi
Thank you rev! I seem to have this uncanny knack of being misunderstood.My original point was to explain a conversation i had with my five year old daughter.It is not my intention to create arguments between you guys on this site, I understand that this thread may bring up personal opinions and i accept that opinions may clash.I asked a question and i appreciate your reply,s and your honesty but please let us not divert from my original point.
Quote from: Flick James on September 29, 2010, 01:32:29 PM
lester, in an earlier reply, posted this:
Quotein the past people didn't know exactly how far along a baby was. you knew you were prgnant when you figured it out. you couldn't do like DNA tests or something to determine the exact moment of conception. so the earliest measurable date was the date of birth.
This is one of the few responses that attempted to answer the original question without trying to inject the abortion topic into it. It's a simple answer that makes sense. It's just the old way of doing things and it just hasn't changed. Period. At this stage of the science game it's kind of hard to deny that a new life exists when there is a distinct genetic identity, thus, at conception. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that. But, like lester said, the law recognizes birth as the beginning of life from a legal standpoint. The law likes to deal with tangibles whenever possible, and a baby that is outside and is tactile to more than just the mother appeals to legal concepts much more practically than a fetus in the womb. Look at things from a perspective of things 100 years ago. Much of what happened in the womb was a mystery. No way was the law going to touch that, so it stuck with the basics: "we've got a tangible life we can see, it's a boy/girl, stamp it as a life and move on." All the rhetoric over abortion rights and when a life begins didn't really matter to the mainstream until science began to be able to do and see more.
I think I need to repeat myself here...
The basic principle of life is the need for survival; once the sperm hits the egg it develops a need for survival. This is why I think life starts at conception. There is no middle ground, life has been set into motion and its Irreversible.
As for laws they do change... Currently speaking HEALTHCARE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.
I think you are bating yourself into this argument... I'm only pointing out that life starts at conception and if they teach that in schools maybe teenagers will think sex differently and understand its a pleasure that shouldnt be treated so lightly. (although that is a long shot)
Quote from: macabre on September 29, 2010, 01:47:08 PM
hi
Thank you rev! I seem to have this uncanny knack of being misunderstood.My original point was to explain a conversation i had with my five year old daughter.It is not my intention to create arguments between you guys on this site, I understand that this thread may bring up personal opinions and i accept that opinions may clash.I asked a question and i appreciate your reply,s and your honesty but please let us not divert from my original point.
Sorry but you already knew this was going to happen... I'm point out when life starts... many has opinions on this issue and for some oddball reason think talking is offensive.
I'm very sorry for saying life starts at conception is offensive... I just dont believe in magic.
hi
I shall not annoy you guys by repeatedly replying to comments so this shall be my last on this subject. Skull you do not need to apologise to me,i count you and all you guys as my friend,Your opinions on any subject are personal to you and mean as much as my or anyone else,s opinion. I just do not want any of you guys falling out over this thread.I acknowledge all your replies. My question as been answered so lets all move on and start another thread.
QuoteAs far as I know souls are created when the egg and the sperm clashes together.
Some theologies don't belive that you're born with a soul, but that you develop one as you begin to learn and make your own decissions.
QuoteI'll explain my magic comment... A typical argument for justification abortion is to assume that the baby doesn't have a soul until the brain is fully developed. Therefore since the baby doesn't have a soul it seems reasonable to abort the baby at such and such time. The problem with this argument there is no science proof when, how or even if we do have souls. This is a religious faith and not science, therefore if anybody is using the justification to abort a baby at such and such stage because it doesn't have a soul hence its not actually alive... Do believe in magic.
As far as I know souls are created when the egg and the sperm clashes together.
I'm genuinely curious. Where did you hear someone argue that the fetus gets a soul once the brain is fully developed? I've never heard this before, and I thought I'd heard just about every pro and anti abortion argument in the book. That's why I generally don't post too much in abortion threads anymore - eventually it just goes in circles. Anyway, the argument sounds like a variant of "they're not truly a person until X" arguments, but those people rarely bring religious ideas like the soul into the equation.
And by the way (just to be clear here), if you think babies get a soul when sperm and egg collides, or if you think they just get one later, those are exactly equivalent beliefs in 'magic'.
Quote from: Skull on September 29, 2010, 02:03:33 PM
Quote from: Flick James on September 29, 2010, 01:32:29 PM
lester, in an earlier reply, posted this:
Quotein the past people didn't know exactly how far along a baby was. you knew you were prgnant when you figured it out. you couldn't do like DNA tests or something to determine the exact moment of conception. so the earliest measurable date was the date of birth.
This is one of the few responses that attempted to answer the original question without trying to inject the abortion topic into it. It's a simple answer that makes sense. It's just the old way of doing things and it just hasn't changed. Period. At this stage of the science game it's kind of hard to deny that a new life exists when there is a distinct genetic identity, thus, at conception. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that. But, like lester said, the law recognizes birth as the beginning of life from a legal standpoint. The law likes to deal with tangibles whenever possible, and a baby that is outside and is tactile to more than just the mother appeals to legal concepts much more practically than a fetus in the womb. Look at things from a perspective of things 100 years ago. Much of what happened in the womb was a mystery. No way was the law going to touch that, so it stuck with the basics: "we've got a tangible life we can see, it's a boy/girl, stamp it as a life and move on." All the rhetoric over abortion rights and when a life begins didn't really matter to the mainstream until science began to be able to do and see more.
I think I need to repeat myself here...
The basic principle of life is the need for survival; once the sperm hits the egg it develops a need for survival. This is why I think life starts at conception. There is no middle ground, life has been set into motion and its Irreversible.
As for laws they do change... Currently speaking HEALTHCARE IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.
I think you are bating yourself into this argument... I'm only pointing out that life starts at conception and if they teach that in schools maybe teenagers will think sex differently and understand its a pleasure that shouldnt be treated so lightly. (although that is a long shot)
You crack me up, Skull. I'm convinced you will inject a debate into ANYTHING. :bouncegiggle:
If you looked at my post you would see that I essentially agreed with you almost exactly on when life begins. I was simply providing an amateur analysis of the traditional way a life has been identified according to the law, and not making any political statements of any kind. And yes, to a small degree, I was showing disapproval of people hijacking a topic and turning it into something the original poster didn't intend. While I understand that happens on online forums, and caveat emptor and all that, I'm still entitled to think it's rude. Gee whiz.
Seems appropriate that Skull mentioned about some things being irreversible. Such as a thread going way off track into a rampaging political/theological/philosophical/economical debate. Trying to get it back on topic can feel a little bit like trying to put the s**t back in the dog.
I will however, stick to the original question. I agree with Lester that people in the distant past didn't have enough of an idea of what was going on inside to put an exact beginning to a pregnancy. But I'd also add that in terms of significance, it's more appropriate to count someone's age from the day someone emerges into the world as a totally distinct individual, with a name and a face, and they begin to interact and gather experiences. And from their parents' point of view, the day of conception was probably fun, but the birth is the exciting time.
That is, of course, from a social point of view. Biologically, I agree that life begins at conception, when two half-sets of chromosomes come together to create a set of genes distinct from either parent. Well, really life began in the primordial soup, and everything since has been one continuous chain of life, but as far as when an individual human life begins, I say conception. A fetus is genetically distinct, making it a separate person, regardless of who it's attached to (which is why I get annoyed with women who make it all about "my body"). As for when a fetus develops awareness (which is probably where Skull got that bit about a soul developing with the brain), that's really irrelevant. What it is at the moment is not the point for me. I see it according to potential - what it would become if left alone.
And all science and philosophy aside, I think surgical procedures should be reserved for correcting medical problems, as prescribed by a qualified physician. They should not be available at the whim of anyone who wants to escape the consequences of their actions. Birth control should be proactive, not retroactive.
OK, that wasn't sticking to the original question. See what I mean about the dog? :teddyr: