What is a person?

Question

This question is in line with abortion.
Ok, have you heard of natural law? No? Ok.
1.Do all you have agreed to do. 2.Do not encroach on others.
Now, we must answer the above question to know if abortion is encroachment, or murder. Discuss, be friendly ty.

To coragryph:
I dont care about (political) law, I care about what is right morally, and that is what natural, or common law is based on. If you dont know about common law then I suggest you read the book whatever happened to justice. Seriously, good book. Anyways, under that model abortion wouldnt necessarily be legal or illegal that is the question, and to go further, to answer that queston we must ask another one, "is it the responsibility of a women to be not get pregnant if she doesnt want to have a child?" Next, Your last paragraph is like saying that a criminal has the right to not be encroached upon by the law. The baby has no control in this situation, it cant help that its mother was irresponsible, but that doesnt mean it wont turn out to be a human being. Your last to sentences are the worste, ur saying she has the right to murder. If you really have an open mind read whatever happened to justice.

One other question we must ask is "Where do we draw the line?" None of you have supported your beliefs with facts.

Hey commander-Im a vegetarian! There goes your example!

Commander...thats the thing.....morals are simplistic, theres a right and a wrong. Its one of the most clear ideas that exist. Either something is right or wrong. Yes there are compassionate ways to deal with those who have done wrong unknowingly or if as in this situation they made a tough choice and have to live with it...but then again heres the thing, their kid doesnt get a chance to live at all.. Still your argument does not hold up...your premise equates us to cows basically, you say that hindu people worship cows and they are nearly perfect souls and bla bla bla....ok so tell me how that in any way applies to abortion? You are saying that just because hindus worship cows and we eat them, that by extension it is okay to abort a baby?

They were bred to the point that they couldnt survive on their own, in nature they could in the past. Anyways, I think the real argument here is right and wrong vs. relativism.

by your arguments here your mother can kill you anytime she wants.

Answer 1

In law, a sentient living independent being. Usually limited to members of the homo sapien species.

The key word in the abortion debate is "independent". While the unborn is entirely dependent on the mother for lif support, it wouldn't count as a separate person. Any more than a heart or lung or arm would count as a separate person.

And your reference to "natural law" is inexact. What you are talking about is a specific ethical philsophy by that name.

And under that model, abortion is completely allowed. Why?

Well, absent a specific promise to keep the unborn to full term, it doesn't violate the "do all you agreed" requirement.

And the unborn, if we assume it is a person, does not have the right to encroach upon the mother without the mother's consent. So, by forcing the mother to remain pregnant against her will, the unborn is violating the core principles. That makes the mother justified in terminating the connection.

Answer 2

Have you heard of Hinduism? Part of their deeply held religious beliefs is that killing a cow is killing a person who had a nearly perfect soul in a previous lifetime. Should we also legally ban that atrocity?
As long as abortions are not mandatory, I don't see where you have a "beef"
If you believe it is murder, don't have one.
And try to have a Christian attitude toward women who are making a difficult and often heartbreaking life decision that no one has the right to make for her and her future or present children.


If you think my answer was connected in any way to whether or not you eat meat, that explains a lot about why you are so morally simplistic.

I was trying to say that everyone's view of right and wrong is not the same. The cow thing was just an example. You believe absolutely that abortion is wrong in any situation. That's fine, you don't have to have one, no one will make you.

Many other conscientious, moral, spiritual people do not agree with you that a fetus is a person, or that an acorn is a tree.

As for your being a vegetarian, think of all the unborn farm animals that would never know life if everyone was a vegetarian. They can;t survive in the wild, you know. (wink,wink)

But thank you for responding to me, it shows you are a thoughtful and truly curious person. There aren't too many of those on these pages!!

Answer 3

ok from all your edits it seems like not many people were actually discussing law, but rather politics and emotions.

Legally it all depends on the definition of the start of life. Some states define the beginning of life is the moment of conception. Other states say it is when there is a heartbeat, and others define it as when the fetus can survive outside the womb on its own.

So depending on when life is defined to have begun. I would say that once you pass that stage, which ever definition you use, yes you are encroaching on the life...but if life had not legally begun, then I don't see how legally it could be encroachment....

I hope that is what you were looking for...

Answer 4

I don't think you've asked the proper question in regards to abortion. The question could just as easily be: "What is a parasite?"

Murder is a legal term with a legal definition and under current law in most states in the United States abortion under the correct legal circumstances is not murder. (Imagine that I've punctuated that correctly. I know I didn't.)

Is abortion killing? Absolutely. Giving your dog worm medicine is also killing.

Is abortion encroaching. Absolutely. So is asking or answering one of these questions.

The question of abortion being moral or immoral should never have to be asked, because an unwanted child should never be concieved. It is too easy to prevent pregnancy in the first place.

A woman should never take the chance of becoming a mother if she has no desire to be one. Even rape is not an excuse for abortion, because a woman who has no desire to become pregnant through rape has the ability to prevent that pregnancy even though she has no way of preventing the rape.

Even the rape of one's daughter by another should not be used as an excuse for abortion, because a parent has the responsibility to protect their child against that pregnancy by ensuring their daughter of child-bearing age is using some form of pregnancy prevention.

On the other hand, a fetus is a parasite and a mother whose ethics allow her to disregard other means of birth control ought to be able to kill it if she wishes to do so. It is, after all, her responsibility in the end. As a society we have no moral right to control her ability to bear children, nor her choice not to bear a particular child. The responsibility, and whatever real or imagined trangression or sin envolved, is entirely on her head.

I say this without meaning any sexism of any kind, because any person is 100% responsible for their own actions, and cannot control the actions of another. The woman bears the child, therefore she cannot shirk her share of the responsibility. A man can simply leave.

A man cannot take that responsibility from her because he cannot bear the child. He can choose to share that responsibility before the pregnancy by taking steps on his own to prevent the pregnancy, but he cannot make the decision to terminate it or not because the parasite is not feeding on him...yet.

And for those who consider that wasting any egg is immoral I have this to say. To be morally consistent within a theology that considers wasting an egg as immoral, every girl of child bearing age would have to be morally bound to a mate under the laws of that theology and trying several times a day to become pregnant by that mate. I don't believe abortion would ever enter into the argument under these circumstances, so I don't believe anyone with this theology need ever consider birth control of any kind to prevent an unwanted pregnancy.

And last, but not by any means least: If you want every child to be born, you have the moral obligation to pay for and support, financially and otherwise, every child concieved, and to do so.

Answer 5

A person is a physically functional human, no matter their source, their purpose, or their originality.

If abortion stops the development of the above stated person, then it is murder. Choice or not, abortion murders unborn people, who have just as many natural rights as those outside the womb.

Answer 6

I think a person is someone who can survive outside the womb. ie, without an umbilical cord. I think pro-life people should have the right to not have an abortion, but is it fair to force everyone to not have an abortion? This country is about rights, we all have equal rights and we all have as many rights as possible, so abortion should be a choice. For religious groups to push their views on the rest of us is unconstitutional.

Answer 7

A person is a person from the moment that the egg meets the sperm. What gives a woman the right to murder her own child?

Answer 8

Something above an asker

Answer 9

Homo sapiens

Answer 10

A person is God's creation.

Period....