Hippocratic Oath 196 replies

Please wait...

Joe Bonham

Quetron's alt account

50 XP

10th December 2005

0 Uploads

6,894 Posts

0 Threads

#1 12 years ago

An article about a 5 month pregnancy. The baby survived, and developed more or less normally. http://www.rd.com/content/openContent.do?contentId=26938 Puts a very different perspective on second trimester abortions, doesn't it?;)




EON_MagicMan

Lumpy

50 XP

27th September 2005

0 Uploads

1,042 Posts

0 Threads

#2 12 years ago

I was 2 months premature myself. I am definitely against late abortions.




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago

Here we go again. :rolleyes: Not that I mind, I've revised my 6 page abortion argument many times since I last used it and I'm not afraid to use it again! BTW, I assume the title choice concerns the bit in the oath: "I will not give a woman an abortive remedy." Not a completely accurate translation, though it's more or less the same.

Originally posted by EON_MagicMan Fight the Crusade!

Charming! :lol:




EON_MagicMan

Lumpy

50 XP

27th September 2005

0 Uploads

1,042 Posts

0 Threads

#4 12 years ago
Locomotor Charming! :lol:

I try :p. The abortion issue, while a good issue to debate (argue?), has been exhausted. Something on a similar topic, also controversial, is stem cell research (which I am definitely before considering it's possible future uses). Also, with stem cells, the embryonic stem cell called the blastocyst is an embryo consisting of between only 50 and 150 cells. In other words, not very advanced at all as a life form (though still human). Yes. We should argue that instead.




Tas

Serious business brigade

50 XP

4th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,275 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago

Dont bother, the same argument will be used by the people that post here alot. :P




Locomotor

in spite of erosion

50 XP

13th May 2004

0 Uploads

3,490 Posts

0 Threads

#6 12 years ago
Originally posted by EON_MagicMan Yes. We should argue that instead.

Aight.

I believe the creation of human life in order to destroy it is wrong, regardless of the benefits it may provide.




EON_MagicMan

Lumpy

50 XP

27th September 2005

0 Uploads

1,042 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago

Is it because you believe that the blastocyst has a soul and it is a crime to take that away? I would accept that, I'm not trying to belittle anyone. I think that spirituality aside (as this is quite literally a lump of cells), it is a crime to deny the funding for this sort of thing. America could be a powerhouse for this sort of research, but it is held back and so South Korea is at the frontlines of this science. blastocyst.JPG This is an SEM image of a blastocyst, by the way. I would definitely sacrifice that to allow a quadriplegic to walk again. Interestingly enough, too, is that the blastocyst can be seperated and used without any cells dying, so that in itself poses a mystery.




Joe Bonham

Quetron's alt account

50 XP

10th December 2005

0 Uploads

6,894 Posts

0 Threads

#8 12 years ago
EON_MagicManIs it because you believe that the blastocyst has a soul and it is a crime to take that away? I would accept that, I'm not trying to belittle anyone. I think that spirituality aside (as this is quite literally a lump of cells), it is a crime to deny the funding for this sort of thing. America could be a powerhouse for this sort of research, but it is held back and so South Korea is at the frontlines of this science. blastocyst.JPG This is an SEM image of a blastocyst, by the way.

I really see no problem with this. As long as this kind of exploitation of human organisms is rigidly controlled... but there is practically no restriction on this at all. In many American states, you can kill a week old embryo, a 5 month fetus, or a 9 month fetus just emerging from the womb without restriction - the system is clearly out of control. http://www.abortioninfo.net/facts/pba.shtml

I would definitely sacrifice that to allow a quadriplegic to walk again.

Overrated. Mostly media hype.

Interestingly enough, too, is that the blastocyst can be seperated and used without any cells dying, so that in itself poses a mystery.

Interesting. That would remove all doubt from the process, wouldn't it?:)

Fight the Crusade!

Um, explain how this is relevant?




EON_MagicMan

Lumpy

50 XP

27th September 2005

0 Uploads

1,042 Posts

0 Threads

#9 12 years ago
Machiavelli's ApprenticeUm, explain how this is relevant?

Look at my avatar, location and 'sub-title'. I wanted to make the rivalry more official :). By the way, you aren't supposed to agree with me, remember? The blastocyst only works in early stages before the cells actually start developping (so they're still stem cells, and not one of the 200 cells they could possibly turn into). Either way, whether reparing spinal cords or other things, the potential of this kind of science can't be ignored. There will possibly be all sorts of damage that you can repair, including cancer damage. It could also do wounded military veterans a serious favour.




Angel_Mommy

Angel of death

50 XP

17th February 2006

0 Uploads

8,331 Posts

0 Threads

#10 12 years ago
Machiavelli's ApprenticeAn article about a 5 month pregnancy. The baby survived, and developed more or less normally. http://www.rd.com/content/openContent.do?contentId=26938 Puts a very different perspective on second trimester abortions, doesn't it?;)

my friend was born 4 months premie (in other words at five months like this one i suppose..) and shes perfectly fine.. ne neiphew was a few months premie. and i personaly am against abortion ,..BUT i still think its the mothers choice...