The Pseudo-Logic of Heartbeat Bills

[IMPress Polly]

Several state legislatures are taking it upon themselves to define "personhood" as something that begins at one's first heartbeat, i.e. which is defined by the presence of a natural heartbeat. Okay well what about children, or any other people, with artificial hearts? I guess they're...not people then...right?

You see, people, personhood is so much more than just having a heartbeat, human DNA, or "potential". (Any egg cell or sperm has the "potential" to become a person, but that obviously doesn't mean it deserves legal rights, and we can all recognize that much.) Everything of value to human beings -- from our ability to perceive the world around us to our ability to form relationships -- is made possible by birth. Without these sorts of capacities, our's is but a shell of a life in comparison; a life only in a technical sense, not in a recognizable one.

[Lummy]

Several state legislatures are taking it upon themselves to define "personhood" as something that begins at one's first heartbeat, i.e. which is defined by the presence of a natural heartbeat. Okay well what about children, or any other people, with artificial hearts? I guess they're...not people then...right?

There has never existed an embryo with an artificial heart.

[Lummy]

I object to legal meddling on "moral" grounds in the morals of others but also reject a body parts industry, where Democrats apparently want to take this issue.

[Captdon]

Several state legislatures are taking it upon themselves to define "personhood" as something that begins at one's first heartbeat, i.e. which is defined by the presence of a natural heartbeat. Okay well what about children, or any other people, with artificial hearts? I guess they're...not people then...right?

You see, people, personhood is so much more than just having a heartbeat, human DNA, or "potential". (Any egg cell or sperm has the "potential" to become a person, but that obviously doesn't mean it deserves legal rights, and we can all recognize that much.) Everything of value to human beings -- from our ability to perceive the world around us to our ability to form relationships -- is made possible by birth. Without these sorts of capacities, our's is but a shell of a life in comparison; a life only in a technical sense, not in a recognizable one.

You are a pitiful excuse for a human being. Your arguments make no sense.

Personhood is a idiotic excuse for killing a human being. It is too make you feel better about the killing. When a woman doesn't abort the baby, she doesn't deliver a giraffe. I'm glad I don't know you personally.

[Chris]

Several state legislatures are taking it upon themselves to define "personhood" as something that begins at one's first heartbeat, i.e. which is defined by the presence of a natural heartbeat. Okay well what about children, or any other people, with artificial hearts? I guess they're...not people then...right?

You see, people, personhood is so much more than just having a heartbeat, human DNA, or "potential". (Any egg cell or sperm has the "potential" to become a person, but that obviously doesn't mean it deserves legal rights, and we can all recognize that much.) Everything of value to human beings -- from our ability to perceive the world around us to our ability to form relationships -- is made possible by birth. Without these sorts of capacities, our's is but a shell of a life in comparison; a life only in a technical sense, not in a recognizable one.

I agree, personhood arguments are illogically subjective. We can see even you do not know how to objectively define when a living human being becomes/is a person. I'll stick to medical/biological definitions of life and when it begins at conception.

BTW, an artificial heart beats or the person is dead.

[Lummy]

I agree, personhood arguments are illogically subjective. We can see even you do not know how to objectively define when a living human being becomes/is a person. I'll stick to medical/biological definitions of life and when it begins at conception.

BTW, an artificial heart beats or the person is dead.

Ultimately, that determination is the mother's -- or if I had my way, the parents'. Her morality is no one else's business, and society is not impacted by her decision except that they insist on meddling in all things that have nothing to do with them, only then making it to do with them.

[Chris]

Ultimately, that determination is the mother's -- or if I had my way, the parents'. Her morality is no one else's business, and society is not impacted by her decision except that they insist on meddling in all things that have nothing to do with them, making it to do with them.

Why's that? "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

Even you start to extend the matter beyond the mere individual woman to her parents and we should add the husband, if married, and a doctor, and people around her...no man is an island.

[Sergeant Gleed]

Ultimately, that determination is the mother's -- or if I had my way, the parents'. Her morality is no one else's business, and society is not impacted by her decision except that they insist on meddling in all things that have nothing to do with them, only then making it to do with them.

So you are arguing that the Morality of murder is best defined by the murderer, it's nobody else's business, not even the victim.

[Captdon]

Ultimately, that determination is the mother's -- or if I had my way, the parents'. Her morality is no one else's business, and society is not impacted by her decision except that they insist on meddling in all things that have nothing to do with them, only then making it to do with them.

You argue for legalized murder. I do not.

[Lummy]

You argue for legalized murder. I do not.

No, I argue for allowing others make their own choices. It's a stretch, IMO, to call abortion murder until such time as a the fetus is able to tell you how $#@!ing sick and tired this $#@!ing issue has grown. Yet one can't get out of the swamp because both sides want to impose their own sins on everyone else as a matter of accepted morality and behavior when neither are right. It isn't going to stop, so you can probably kiss your soul goodbye because at some point you're going to have to impose one or the other will on everyone else.

My position is that it's none of my business, it's hers -- or rather, it's hers and her mates. But hey, we won't bring dad into this, eh?