Selective abortion.

[Hermes]

Not the same concept medically. When the body attacks its own organs, it is an autoimmune problem, not the result of a parasite.

Make the statement so it can become clear what you are saying. Are you saying its a natural behavior of fetus to act like parasite? Are you observing this outcome in most cases in nature (not in numbers, in percentage. Can you say that %90 of fetuses behaves like an alien parasite and injures the body)

Also are you sure an organism carries your very own DNA, created in you and growing in a place designed to support it in your own body can be called parasite?

-

 

[jillio]

Who said abortion is nice and easy? No harm done. Woman will just move on and not regret anything. everything's all forgotten.

It is, of course, a horrible experience and a horrible decision for woman to make. Point is - there is a choice available out there for a mother to decide regardless of reasons (because it's not our business). If she chooses it, I live with comfort knowing that that mother will have it done at the sterile clinic done by professionals. I live with comfort knowing that the mother does not have to pay excessive amount to some quack doctor or a vet in some dark back alley. Obviously she will have to live with this for rest of her life - something that we men can't intimately understand.

Well said. The assumption is too often made, and has been illustrated throughout this entire thread, that a woman who chooses to end a pregnancy has done so because she is selfishly thinking only of herself, is without conscience, and has made the decision based on convenience. That is an unfair and unfeeling assumption made by those that wll resort to any tactic in an attempt to impose their bekiefs on others. Obviously, in their unfounded defense of the fetus, they have totally disregarded any concern for the woman involved. That is why I say there is nothing humanitarian in anti-abortion rhetoric. It is nothing more than a personal need to control the lives of others.

 

[jillio]

Make the statement so it can become clear what you are saying. Are you saying its a natural behavior of fetus to act like parasite? Are you observing this outcome in most cases in nature (not in numbers, in percentage. Can you say that %90 of fetuses behaves like an alien parasite and injures the body)

Also are you sure an organism carries your very own DNA, created in you and growing in a place designed to support it in your own body can be called parasite?

-

I have stated in in a very clear and concise manner numerous times. The fetus is connected to the female by an umbilical cord through which it receives everything that allows it to develop. Without the physical connection to the female, it would not exist in even a elementary developmental level. It implants in the tissues of her womb. It burrows right into the lining. Therefore, its existence is parasitic. You are using a very limited definition of parasite. And, yes, this occurs in 100% of pregancies. If this parasitic behavior does not occur, a pregnancy has not occured. Again, please inform yourself of the facts.

 

[Hermes]

I have stated in in a very clear and concise manner numerous times. The fetus is connected to the female by an umbilical cord through which it receives everything that allows it to develop. Without the physical connection to the female, it would not exist in even a elementary developmental level. It implants in the tissues of her womb. It burrows right into the lining. Therefore, its existence is parasitic. You are using a very limited definition of parasite. And, yes, this occurs in 100% of pregancies. If this parasitic behavior does not occur, a pregnancy has not occured. Again, please inform yourself of the facts.

No. You are just looking at a dictionary, pick the line "organism that lives in or on another organism and takes its nourishment from another organism" and try applying it to this situation disregarding all other scientific ground.

First of all in order to a organism becoming a parasite it needs to be from a different species than host. If you want links I will provide you:

Parasite

an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment

parasite definition |Dictionary.com

Parasitism

an intimate association between organisms of two or more kinds ; especially : one in which a parasite obtains benefits from a host which it usually injures

parasitism - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Second of all, the parasite refers an alien organism that works for its own benefit, in most cases in the expense of the host. Human fetus is a natural part and creation of the body, it doesnt have such a hostile behavior . Fetus didnt come to body from outside and attached it. Fetus is created in the body by the very cells of the host organism. Fetus also has no ability to change hosts by itself, or reproduce by itself or with other fetuses together.

Here is another definition of parasite:

Because of its vague definition, the term parasite has been applied to a wide range of plant and animal taxa. One can even argue that parasites sensu lato greatly outnumber free-living organisms (Windsor 1998). The most widely accepted definition of a parasite is that it is an organism living in or on another organism, the host—feeding on it, showing some degree of structural adaptation to it, and causing it some harm (when the harm incurred by the host invariably leads to its death, the parasite is often referred to as a parasitoid).

Fetus do not show some degree of structural adoption like an alien parasit organism, because fetus doesnt need to adopt at the first point. It carries the same DNA its host carries, it grows and gets fed on the special place that host naturally have for it, and it grows out to be a copy (in sense of being a human, carrying human DNA) of its host. Fetus also doesnt naturally cause some harm , unless there is a medical problem. Human fetus is not designed to use sources of one host and then move to another when first host becomes useless.

As you see natural behavior and design of the fetus doesnt match the very concept of the parasite. The reason of existence of a fetus is not same with parasite organisms. There are no parasite organisms that exist for the purpose of creating a copy of their own host in parasitology . So the scientific reference of " the fetus acting like a parasite " is only limited to situations where fetus itself starts becoming malicious and harmful.

There are cases fetus acts parasitic. Its called parasitic because of its destructive behavior. Condition called Fetus in fetu is one of them. Here is a description of how it develops:

Teratoma theory
Fetus in fetu may be a very highly differentiated form of dermoid cyst, itself a highly differentiated form of mature teratoma.[3]

Parasitic twin theory
Fetus in fetu may be a parasitic twin fetus growing within its host twin. Very early in a monozygotic twin pregnancy, in which both fetuses share a common placenta, one fetus wraps around and envelops the other. The enveloped twin becomes a parasite, in that its survival depends on the survival of its host twin, by drawing on the host twin's blood supply. The parasitic twin is anencephalic (without a brain) and lacks some internal organs, and as such is almost always unable to survive on its own.

As you see the fetus itself is not considered being a parasite, but its twin which is harming the original fetus is called parasite for the very reason that it acts destructive for its own survival.

Seeing an organisms own productive system as its own parasite may have its political agenda but science doesnt categorize it as such. If you make a research you will see the concept of fetus being a parasite appears in abortion debates and sites where average internet user comments, but not in independent scientific researchers.

Its because science has no reason to categorize and study fetus in parasitology. It seems like "Fetus is a parasite" concept is created for political debate and doesnt serve a real scientific purpose.

Is this a limited way of looking at it? I hope you will not be as limited as I am. Perhaps you will bring more on the table than one single line of "fetus feeds on its own host , the mother" . Do you have any scientific reasons for studying fetus in parasitology with all other parasites?

-

 

[Byrdie714]

Thus the parasite does harm the host in terms of ejecting itself from the main host.

Why do you think women usually tear when giving birth?

That's bodily harm. Fits the definition buddy.

 

[Byrdie714]

Then he got a wrong woman!

What kind of logic is this? You can injure yourself too. Is this your scientific outcome? It doesnt mean the fetus functions in a way that injures the host. Its not fetuses natural behavior.

I asked you a question, you didnt answer. Let me repeat.. Are you sure an organism carries your very own DNA, created in you and growing in a place designed to support it in your own body can be called parasite?

Are you also sure the body treats the fetus as a parasite? Do you really have any scientific facts showing , human body consideres and reacts to its own fetus as a parasite?

-

I didn't answer because I was away from the keyboard. Had a nice morning/afternoon across the river.

Anyway I noticed everyone else has pretty much answered the above questions that Hades, I mean Hermes, has posed to me. Thanks you guys!

Apparently the pro-lifers aren't going to be satisfied until abortion is outlawed and myself, I'm going to continue to vote pro-choice until I die.

Keep abortion--safe and legal!

 

[Hermes]

Thus the parasite does harm the host in terms of ejecting itself from the main host.

Why do you think women usually tear when giving birth?

That's bodily harm. Fits the definition buddy.

This is very original


-

 

[Jolie77]

So Jillo, Jiro, Jolie, (I am calling your names because I know you, I am not doing it for targeting you) you are all saying this option should be given to mothers . But all these arguments sound like academic discussions. They are based on concepts, definitions, we make it sound like its about democracy, its about defending the freedom. Lets say you have this freedom (which you have), which one of you can really go through it if they were going to give you remainings of the baby after abortion , so you could bury? Jillo, Jolie, you both have kids. Look at these pictures. If they were your daughters, which one you could be there and see their body on the table? Look into their eyes. They have eyes , you see it? It is easy (well not really, but relatively) when a woman goes to clinic and sleeps for couple hours during the operation and comes back home with no baby inside. She doesnt think (or tries not to think) on what really happens there. But how many people can really face the reality. See it, touch it, carry it, bury it?

For a minute I'd have sworn you were targeting at us, haha but no, really, I know you were not targeting at us.

Anyway, Actually - It is not defined to the democracy itself. It is all about how to do it legally and safely for the mother. Don't get me wrong, I, in some way am against abortion but on the other hand, I am for abortion within reasons. If one is to abort just for no reason, then that would be different. I am for abortion only if it is life-threatening or if the disabled fetus is known to be grossly unsurvivable; and or within knowing that the disability is severe enough to complicate it's life down the road.

Nobody said abortion was ever easy and it isn't for women who goes through the abortion process. When a woman goes through it, she will always think about it for the rest of her life. With the suppression, it is sought to do it as safe as possible rather than living in fear knowing that if it was not legal, she could be very well rejected, looked down, to be stoned and her creditability would only be invalid.

Understandably, when a normal fetus is at 30 weeks gestation, it would have been a different story because it is not life threatening and doesn't cause any complications but however, with a disabled fetus at 30 weeks gestation to be recognized to know beyond it cannot live - then it would be like saying, the disabled fetus would be going through a lot of series of surgeries, pains, therapies, resources, so and on. I just don't find it fair when a disabled baby that is born to live through this when they very well can be trying to live a normal life if they were to be normal.

 

[Byrdie714]

This is very original


-

I'm original kind of a guy!

 

[Oceanbreeze]

For a minute I'd have sworn you were targeting at us, haha but no, really, I know you were not targeting at us.

Anyway, Actually - It is not defined to the democracy itself. It is all about how to do it legally and safely for the mother. Don't get me wrong, I, in some way am against abortion but on the other hand, I am for abortion within reasons. If one is to abort just for no reason, then that would be different. I am for abortion only if it is life-threatening or if the disabled fetus is known to be grossly unsurvivable; and or within knowing that the disability is severe enough to complicate it's life down the road.
Nobody said abortion was ever easy and it isn't for women who goes through the abortion process. When a woman goes through it, she will always think about it for the rest of her life. With the suppression, it is sought to do it as safe as possible rather than living in fear knowing that if it was not legal, she could be very well rejected, looked down, to be stoned and her creditability would only be invalid.

Understandably, when a normal fetus is at 30 weeks gestation, it would have been a different story because it is not life threatening and doesn't cause any complications but however, with a disabled fetus at 30 weeks gestation to be recognized to know beyond it cannot live - then it would be like saying, the disabled fetus would be going through a lot of series of surgeries, pains, therapies, resources, so and on. I just don't find it fair when a disabled baby that is born to live through this when they very well can be trying to live a normal life if they were to be normal.

I am ethically opposed to abortion as birth control. However, I also believe that abortion must remain legal and regardless of what I think, it's not my business to tell someone they can't have an abortion.

This country made a grave mistake when they started legislating what I believe is a medical decision. This is not a black and white issue. There are many reasons a woman will choose an abortion, and it's simply that she has the legal right to do so; even if her reasoning is ethically reprehensible to some ( even me).

 

[jillio]

No. You are just looking at a dictionary, pick the line "organism that lives in or on another organism and takes its nourishment from another organism" and try applying it to this situation disregarding all other scientific ground.

First of all in order to a organism becoming a parasite it needs to be from a different species than host. If you want links I will provide you:




Second of all, the parasite refers an alien organism that works for its own benefit, in most cases in the expense of the host. Human fetus is a natural part and creation of the body, it doesnt have such a hostile behavior . Fetus didnt come to body from outside and attached it. Fetus is created in the body by the very cells of the host organism. Fetus also has no ability to change hosts by itself, or reproduce by itself or with other fetuses together.

Here is another definition of parasite:



Fetus do not show some degree of structural adoption like an alien parasit organism, because fetus doesnt need to adopt at the first point. It carries the same DNA its host carries, it grows and gets fed on the special place that host naturally have for it, and it grows out to be a copy (in sense of being a human, carrying human DNA) of its host. Fetus also doesnt naturally cause some harm , unless there is a medical problem. Human fetus is not designed to use sources of one host and then move to another when first host becomes useless.

As you see natural behavior and design of the fetus doesnt match the very concept of the parasite. The reason of existence of a fetus is not same with parasite organisms. There are no parasite organisms that exist for the purpose of creating a copy of their own host in parasitology . So the scientific reference of " the fetus acting like a parasite " is only limited to situations where fetus itself starts becoming malicious and harmful.

There are cases fetus acts parasitic. Its called parasitic because of its destructive behavior. Condition called Fetus in fetu is one of them. Here is a description of how it develops:


As you see the fetus itself is not considered being a parasite, but its twin which is harming the original fetus is called parasite for the very reason that it acts destructive for its own survival.

Seeing an organisms own productive system as its own parasite may have its political agenda but science doesnt categorize it as such. If you make a research you will see the concept of fetus being a parasite appears in abortion debates and sites where average internet user comments, but not in independent scientific researchers.

Its because science has no reason to categorize and study fetus in parasitology. It seems like "Fetus is a parasite" concept is created for political debate and doesnt serve a real scientific purpose.

Is this a limited way of looking at it? I hope you will not be as limited as I am. Perhaps you will bring more on the table than one single line of "fetus feeds on its own host , the mother" . Do you have any scientific reasons for studying fetus in parasitology with all other parasites?

-

No, dear, I am not looking at a dictionary and picking a line. I am relying on years of education and experience, and apply critical thinking to the situation. Perhaps you should try it. Your definition of parasite is the one that is limited and restrictive.

Perhaps you should step outside the box, because you have just listed several ways in which a fetus does exhibit parasitic behavior.

 

[jillio]

Thus the parasite does harm the host in terms of ejecting itself from the main host.

Why do you think women usually tear when giving birth?

That's bodily harm. Fits the definition buddy.

Yep. You don't need to be told to step outside the box.

 

[jillio]

I didn't answer because I was away from the keyboard. Had a nice morning/afternoon across the river.

Anyway I noticed everyone else has pretty much answered the above questions that Hades, I mean Hermes, has posed to me. Thanks you guys!

Apparently the pro-lifers aren't going to be satisfied until abortion is outlawed and myself, I'm going to continue to vote pro-choice until I die.

Keep abortion--safe and legal!

Yay, Byrdie! A true friend to women every where.

 

[jillio]

I'm original kind of a guy!

To that, I very sincerely reply, "Yes, you are. Thank God!"

 

[jillio]

Should women be charged for involuntary manslaughter if they had a miscarriage?

Excellent question! And when a physician is doing an IVF procedure, and systematically implants several embryos, knowing that there is a strong probability that all but one will be miscarried, should he be charged with complicity to murder?

 

[jillio]

I am ethically opposed to abortion as birth control. However, I also believe that abortion must remain legal and regardless of what I think, it's not my business to tell someone they can't have an abortion.

This country made a grave mistake when they started legislating what I believe is a medical decision. This is not a black and white issue. There are many reasons a woman will choose an abortion, and it's simply that she has the legal right to do so; even if her reasoning is ethically reprehensible to some ( even me).

Well said!!

 

[Jolie77]

I am ethically opposed to abortion as birth control. However, I also believe that abortion must remain legal and regardless of what I think, it's not my business to tell someone they can't have an abortion.

This country made a grave mistake when they started legislating what I believe is a medical decision. This is not a black and white issue. There are many reasons a woman will choose an abortion, and it's simply that she has the legal right to do so; even if her reasoning is ethically reprehensible to some (even me).

Thank You. I'm the same way too.

I do believe that it should remain legal as well, regardless of how the procedures are when it comes to a mother to abort it for no reason or whatsoever. Even though, there will always be a loophole to get by that if it was only for a medical stance rather than saying it is for other reasons.

That is why I pointed out that if it is life-threatening then it'd be understandable but for other reasons, I don't see why it would be necessary. If the woman chose to have an abortion, that's their choice and they will have to live with that.

 

[jillio]

Thank You. I'm the same way too.

I do believe that it should remain legal as well, regardless of how the procedures are when it comes to a mother to abort it for no reason or whatsoever. Even though, there will always be a loophole to get by that if it was only for a medical stance rather than saying it is for other reasons.

That is why I pointed out that if it is life-threatening then it'd be understandable but for other reasons, I don't see why it would be necessary. If the woman chose to have an abortion, that's their choice and they will have to live with that.

Exactly. Whatever her decision, it is the woman's to live with. No one else lives her life, or carries her burdens, or the consequences of her decision. Therefore, they do not have the right to make her decisions. It is her choice.

 

[Jiro]

Oh I'm sorry Hermes.... but I actually ignored a major portion of your post after you first mentioned the definition of parasite from dictionary.com - I just ended it there. What you say past it is invalid. In this kind of debate and context - you need to refer to medical dictionary.

Since I do not have access to academic database... I referred to webmd.com which is almost close enough to medical scholarly grade.

Definition of Parasite from webmd.com:
1. An organism that lives on or in another and draws its nourishment therefrom.
2. In the case of a fetal inclusion or conjoined twins, the usually incomplete twin that derives its support from the more nearly normal autosite.

Definition of Parasite from dictionary.com:
1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.

a pretty f**kin' HUGE difference, huh?

 

[Hermes]

No, dear, I am not looking at a dictionary and picking a line. I am relying on years of education and experience, and apply critical thinking to the situation. Perhaps you should try it. Your definition of parasite is the one that is limited and restrictive.

Perhaps you should step outside the box, because you have just listed several ways in which a fetus does exhibit parasitic behavior.

Years of study, but still no hard evidence and scientific source claiming your conclusion which was only created for being used in abortion debates huh? You are still picking one line and using it for your benefit and ignoring the whole ground of parasitology. I already told you, your argument is a conclusion made by people debating abortion. I also posted an article in another thread , there she says fetus is parasite. It seems like your argument is coming from those kind of papers written on abortion , instead of science.

See I am coming with lots of examples, you are just making personal comments. I showed you a source discussing fetus is a parasite in the context of abortion. Please you show me a source a scientist classifying it such.

I also explained the other features of parasites that doesnt fit fetus. At the end you came back with the same line. This is like saying virus and bacteria are the same thing because they both make us ill. Not everything that feeds on you can be considered parasite.

Science doesnt work for your political arguments. If you understand how science works, you also should understand when you say fetus is a parasite, you should catagorize and study it with all other parasites in the nature. They are not related. When you go and study parasites , you will not find fetus there. But if you insist you do, why dont you bring hard evidence.


I am waiting from you any scientific evidence classifying fetus in parasitology with other parasites. If you cant do that, you have got no ground claiming its a scientific reality and you are just making personal comments about it.

-