Rudy, is IVF 'fetus killing'?

If we say that individual human life begins at conception, then do we confer individual human rights to that individual life immediately post-conception?

If not, then how do we describe the difference between the stages at which we do or do not allow the mother to kill the immature human?

*People, STOP trying to pretend that a fetus is not human.*

Rudy, you continue to create your own strawman arguments, then
land up arguing with yourself.

I have seen no poster claim that a fetus or a zygote does not
contain human dna. So indeed a zygote is a human organism.

But it is not a person!

Abortion is an accurate and descriptive term about what happens.
Killing is a far more general term and could imply lots of
things. The very idea of language is to use the most appropriate
term. So that is what people use. Just ask your English teacher
at school, he/she will explain it to you.

Rhian,
By definition, one cannot say that the author is not engaging the issue. The author sets the issue, and others post comments in response to what he has written.

You say this is not what you call a pretty good discussion, but you are willing to take part yourself. So it can't be too bad. I think that it's been pretty good for an open forum on a controversial topic. There has been a few loose canons firing, but not too many; most people are trying to be constructive. (I notice Rudy has been censured for abuse a couple of times recently on a concurrent thread.)

The author gave his opinion from the angle of what he thinks is important. You say that he doesn't adequately establish the status or otherwise of the fetus. I would suspect he would claim much of that is obvious to all. 

However, he is not totally silent even here. He refers to the fetus' beating heart. He also speaks of what would happen in normal circumstances if nature was allowed to proceed unhindered (if the baby was left alive): namely, a healthy growing child. 

Here a distinction can be made between those born brain dead and would not survive without life support, and the one whose brain is about to about to grow and develop normally given that we allow nature to proceed without interference.     

So what are our religious zealots up to? With the Catholic church
right in the forefront, they try to make women feel guilty about
abortion, with their placard waving, emotive language etc. Next
they claim that women are traumatised by guilt. Its a bit
like they do with religion. Brainwash the kiddies that their
story is true, make them feel guilty, then sell them a ticket to
heaven, which only they can seemingly provide.

Its extremely clever marketing, but it does keep the Vatican
coffers overflowing, as they live it up in Rome.

Not all 'Religious Zealots' or 'Catholic Church' participants are 'anti-abortion' and/or 'try to make women feel guilty about abortion, with their placards waving using emotive language' Yabby.

Q: Guess who is exhibiting 'emotive behaviour' on this thread, using, surprise surprise, yet again, the Catholic Church [generalising] and 'religious zealots' [generalising] to emotionally respond to another's post? The 'very' point you have accused Rudy of, yet hypocritically exhibited yourself Yabby.

I guess the questions you should ask yourself are the following: why am I overly emotional regarding 'religious zealots' and the Catholic Church, re-introducing them into many threads you post, along with, (b) why do I generalise about both religious people and Catholic Church people?

A question from myself to yourself: why not target another Church such as the Anglican or Baptist Churches? Why always the Catholic Church Yabby?

Totally brainwashed by the media?

Take a look around, there are many more 'religions and churches'expanding within Australia that will, in time, make the Catholic Church goers' look like Saints!

Heal your brainwashed mind and heart.

In relation to abortion directly: there are Catholics [whom I know personally] that are not 'anti-abortionists' nor are they 'religious zealots' blindly following every commandment in the Bible. Therefore, one cannot generalise about the 'Catholic Church' and all of its participants attending Mass and following the basic Commandments.

Many catholic church goers have experienced an abortion or had a member of their family endure an abortion for personal reasons.

Are you in touch with the real world? Or do you just believe all of the media hype and literature blogs on the net? Do you know many catholics personally Yabby?

No religion is 'right', no religious zealot is 'right', in their beliefs, nor is a person who blindly generalises about people with their own faiths or faith systems.

Every person, regardless of a religious belief or not, should not be placed into one basket and have aspersions and generalisations caste upon them.

Dan

I accuse the author of circular reasoning, which is a perfectly legitimate criticism of anyone’s argument, whether they’re initiating the discussion or not.

Indeed, when you say that the author “would claim much of [his opinion of the status of the foetus] … is obvious to all” you’re pretty much making the same point. It is precisely this assumption of what is “obvious to all” which I say is NOT obvious to all, and is why his argument is circular. He assumes away the main point of contention.

My comments on argument being not a “pretty good discussion” were quoting your own words back at you and addressed specifically at Rudy’s contribution, in particular his contention that advocates of choice are “fascist style ideologues”. This is not what I hold to be “pretty good discussion.” I agree that the rest of the forum has not been too bad for the subject matter.

I’m intrigued by your argument about brain death. This puts you in a somewhat different space from others who have argued here that anything that is alive and genetically human has the rights and status of a person. You seem to be arguing here not from what something is, but what it has the potential to be. Interesting, but again here do you draw the line – especially in these days of cloning when many types of cells are potentially the basis for new life.