What would you do?

The place for any Religious and/or Philosophical discussions, treatise, absolutions, ramblings, Aliens, UFO's, space exploration, mystical bullshit, astronomy, astrology, etc...
catch
Wankers Cramp - no - its from typing - HONEST
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:49 am

Post: # 21485Post catch
Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:29 am

I think...and you can correct me Debs...the reason you are adamant to keep this life regardless of the circumstances
Hahah well sheesh, now I feel like it may look as though I'm trying to talk her into an abortion. This couldn't be further from the truth... I am just attempting to present arguments for why making an active choice is so critical instead of just waiting to see.

cheers,

catch


Proud Nubian Princess

User avatar
Egaladeist
I am the Eg man : Coo Coo Ca Choo
Posts: 18908
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2005 1:02 am
Location: Canada

Post: # 21486Post Egaladeist
Fri Jun 23, 2006 1:40 am

Sorry catch...you know I wasn't trying to :D

I agree with you whole-heartedly...nothing should take precedence over the needs of the child...even if that means depriving the child of a life...

but at the same time...I see where Debs might be inclined to hold on under any circumstances thinking she and Mike may never get a second chance.

At any rate without the results and actually knowing what those results are...we are just speculating on worst case senerios...

it may very well be a best case situation...but unless she sees those results...which we both agree she should...for reasons of preparation...we can't really know.

Eg ;)

Sorry Debs...I know what you need the most right now is upbeat and positive influence...but me and catch seem to both come from the same school of thought...

hope for the best...but prepare for the worst. ;)

Knowing those results will be important in that preparation...and in making any rational decision.

User avatar
Debs
Mrs. Drunky McDrunkpants
Posts: 860
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:07 pm
Location: Florida

Post: # 21493Post Debs
Fri Jun 23, 2006 6:02 am

First off, catch, I've never once thought you were trying to talk me into an abortion. ;)

Eg - I have (which surprised me!) been able to keep this discussion separate from my own feelings to some extent. I'm discussing from my own point of view, but it's not "bringing me down" so to speak. Until I get the results from the tests, which I have no reason to think will be anything but normal based on my medical history, Mike's medical history, and our family's medical histories, it's a simple abstract discussion. It's bringing up points that I can apply to my own situation, but it's not causing me any emotional distress. Everyone wants the best for their child, I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

catch, I think I see where our opinions differ now! :D To me, life begins with a heartbeat and the need for nourishment. In my opinion and feelings, this little person inside of me is as alive as I am. I am familiar with the "baby is a parasite" argument, that without me baby wouldn't be able to survive. I just don't really agree with it. I mean I agree with the facts - if I were to give birth tonight, there is 0 chance of survival. I just don't agree with the idea that life begins at birth. I think that's a pretty big difference in perspective, and I think it explains a lot of the difference in philosophy that we have.

What would be an interesting concept to me is the discovery of how much we retain from inside the womb. Scientifically speaking, baby has had a brain for over 2 months now. (I'm almost 4 months pregnant). The brain is constantly growing and "learning" even in the womb. If, as you said earlier, "life is sentience, not a heartbeat", then when would that start? None of us has memories of our own births. Most of us have no memory at all of our first 2-3 years. Does that mean that life doesn't begin until we can remember it? Or does it begin with "feeling" and knowing things are going on around you? If that's the case, then baby is already aware. (Please excuse this, it borders on TMI, but is important to the discussion.) My first visit to the doctor, I had to have a trans-vaginal ultrasound, because it was too early to be able to see it trans-abdominally. We were watching on the monitor while the doctor poked my uterus with the ultrasound wand. Every single time he poked, baby moved away from it. It didn't know what it was doing, it didn't know why - but it was reacting to stimulus. A newborn has the same reactions - it doesn't know why or what, but it reacts to stimulus. Until approximately 6 months or so, that's about all they're capable of - hunger, discomfort, contentment - it's all stimulus that baby reacts to. So are they not sentient until past that age? Or does sentience begin with memory? Being able to remember your 3rd birthday party, but nothing before that - does that mean you weren't "alive" before then? It's pretty well accepted that even though we don't remember things before a specific age, the memories are still there - if you have a brain that is growing and developing, wouldn't it make sense that you have memories of inside your mothers womb, even if you can't remember them?

Lalala - this seems to have gone off topic a wee bit. I blame catch completely! :D
The post office just released a new stamp in the shape of a clitoris but it's not selling very well because only 3% of men know how to lick it.

catch
Wankers Cramp - no - its from typing - HONEST
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:49 am

Post: # 21512Post catch
Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:49 am

If, as you said earlier, "life is sentience, not a heartbeat", then when would that start?
At about 6 months.
None of us has memories of our own births. Most of us have no memory at all of our first 2-3 years. Does that mean that life doesn't begin until we can remember it?
You are talking about sapience, not sentience.
Every single time he poked, baby moved away from it.
Not to be difficult, but amoebas do the same thing. Stimulus-response is even seen in many things clearly not alive (like fire for example).
Until approximately 6 months
Exactly, before that type the sensory input functionality of the brain isn't even complete. It takes another 6-7 years before enough synapses are formed to escape "magical thinking" (the inability to differentiate internal and external stimuli).
So are they not sentient until past that age?
Sentience cannot begin until they organism at least has the ability to perceive their suroundings.
if you have a brain that is growing and developing, wouldn't it make sense that you have memories of inside your mothers womb, even if you can't remember them?
Unlikely... the body is very pragmatic, it only does what it determines is needed to aid survival... within the womb, all metabolic functionality is dedicated to growth and not data processing.

Yes yes... blame poor innocent catch... you know, where i work now i can find out where you live! ;)

cheers,

catch
Proud Nubian Princess

Post Reply