Stacey Abrams says 'no such thing' as 6-week fetal heartbeat: 'Manufactured sound'

[Chris]

I see he continues to struggle with the fact that harm and the perception of harm are not the same thing. He keeps recycling the same failed arguments and asking the same stupid questions.

Right, for as @Cletus explained above, the tree falling creates a sound whether anyone is there to perceive it.

Besides, society is there to perceive the taking of a life.

[carolina73]

Oh no we're back to a tree falling and no one hearing it as justification for taking life.

Perfect justification for killing the homeless, single illegals, old people or anyone else that will not be noticed missing.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Uh, no, it isn't.

"What is Sound?

A sound is a vibration that propagates through a medium in the form of a mechanical wave. The medium in which it propagates can either be a solid, a liquid or a gas. Sound travels fastest in solids, relatively slower in liquids and slowest in gases.

In physics, the sound is defined as a vibration that propagates as an audible wave of pressure, through a medium such as a gas, liquid or solid. "

Cherry picking definitions now? How long did you have to look to dig that one up?

As usual, I will take the first three definitions I find on google.

Google: sound def

Go check them out. They agree with my point that sound is connected to perception.

In any case, sound definitions don't matter. You seem more interested in contradicting me than understanding the point I am making.

The person you are killing is losing. You keep forgetting that you are killing a human being.

The term "Human being" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for you. A whole lot.

Yes its a human being. I will even call it a "helpless innocent baby" if it pleases you. I don't care what name you assign to it. The fact remains that there is no subjective experience for it. There is no mind. I dont know how many more times you can ignore that problem before addressing it. Why do you care about a thing that cannot even care about itself? Cletus, there is no person in there. Until a certain point, its alive in the sense that a house plant is alive.

...The being you kill certainly experiences the consequences...

No, I am talking about a subjective experience. The fetus does not cognitively experience any harm. There is no suffering, loss, pain, or knowledge of the event.

The mother doesn't care
The "baby" doesn't care
The doctor doesn't care
Nobody cares. Only you.

You won't convince any sane, rational person.

A majority of Americans are already convinced. And the portion of pro-lifers who agree to exceptions for rape/incest also agree with no harm no foul. If they didn't, they wouldn't allow any exceptions.

Refresh my memory, do you approve of exceptions for rape/incest?

I guess you don't consider killing an innocent to be "harm".

That's correct. A rock is innocent. Yet I have no reservations about smashing one, because it is not capable of conscious experience.

[carolina73]

Cherry picking definitions now? How long did you have to look to dig that one up?

As usual, I will take the first three definitions I find on google.

Google: sound def

Go check them out. They agree with my point that sound is connected to perception.

In any case, sound definitions don't matter. You seem more interested in contradicting me than understanding the point I am making.



The term "Human being" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for you. A whole lot.

Yes its a human being. I will even call it a "helpless innocent baby" if it pleases you. I don't care what name you assign to it. The fact remains that there is no subjective experience for it. There is no mind. I dont know how many more times you can ignore that problem before addressing it. Why do you care about a thing that cannot even care about itself? Cletus, there is no person in there. Until a certain point, its alive in the sense that a house plant is alive.



No, I am talking about a subjective experience. The fetus does not cognitively experience any harm. There is no suffering, loss, pain, or knowledge of the event.

The mother doesn't care
The "baby" doesn't care
The doctor doesn't care
Nobody cares. Only you.


A majority of Americans are already convinced. And the portion of pro-lifers who agree to exceptions for rape/incest also agree with no harm no foul. If they didn't, they wouldn't allow any exceptions.

Refresh my memory, do you approve of exceptions for rape/incest?


That's correct. A rock is innocent. Yet I have no reservations about smashing one, because it is not capable of conscious experience.

Okay. Just like any murder.

The murderer doesn't care
The "victim" doesn't care (they are dead)
Nobody cares. Only people with morals.


You are one sick person.

[Cletus]

Cherry picking definitions now? How long did you have to look to dig that one up?

The amount of time it took me to type it and hit "Enter". I already knew the answer, but I wanted to see how it was stated in scientific literature. A dozen different sources immediately all stated it with the exact same language.

I didn't "cherry pick" anything.

As usual, I will take the first three definitions I find on google.

Google: sound def

Ah, there's your problem. You search like a child. Try "What is sound" and see what you get.

Go check them out. They agree with my point that sound is connected to perception.

You are kind of being dishonest again. They say sound is connected to perception when used in a psychological or human physiological context. They don't define what sound actually is. For that, you need to look at the actual physics behind the generation of sound. Without that, there would be no sound to perceive.

You in fact, are the one who was "cherry picking".

In any case, sound definitions don't matter. You seem more interested in contradicting me than understanding the point I am making.

I am interested in facts, You are interested only in justifying the killing of a human being in the early stages of his development.

The term "Human being" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for you. A whole lot.

That is what we are talking about, isn't it... terminating a human life?

Yes its a human being. I will even call it a "helpless innocent baby" if it pleases you. I don't care what name you assign to it. The fact remains that there is no subjective experience for it. There is no mind. I dont know how many more times you can ignore that problem before addressing it.

What you refuse to address is that what you are talking about is a living human being. You want to justify killing it just because it is in an early stage of its development. YOU went through that sage. Your PARENTS went through that stage. If the world is ever unfortunate enough for you to reproduce, your children will go through that stage. It is not a THING. It is a person and you would justify killing it just because you want to.

Why do you care about a thing that cannot even care about itself? Cletus, there is no person in there.

That is EXACTLY what is in there. If you can't grasp that, there is something very, very wrong with you.

No, I am talking about a subjective experience. The fetus does not cognitively experience any harm. There is no suffering, loss, pain, or knowledge of the event.

So now, you are saying if you are unaware of something, it didn't happen. If someone comes up behind you and blows your head apart with a shotgun, you would experience no pain, no suffering, no loss, or knowledge of the event.

Would that make it okay?

The rest of your post was just bull$#@! and didn't warrant the use of the time it would take to respond to it.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Yeah, I explained to him that,by his logic, taking a baseball bat to him in his sleep would not result in harm.

And I explained to you —more than twice— that consciousness is only one of many conditions that merit protection for a person. Few or none of the other conditions are present during pregnancy. that is why I mainly speak of sentience during abortion debates.

[TheLiquidGuy]

Right, for as @Cletus explained above, the tree falling creates a sound whether anyone is there to perceive it.

Besides, society is there to perceive the taking of a life.

Society has no standing.

And not that it matters, but the first three definitions of sound in google are consistent with my explanation. Not the cherry picked one that Cletus dug up.

[Mister D]

And I explained to you —more than twice— that consciousness is only one of many conditions that merit protection for a person. Few or none of the other conditions are present during pregnancy. that is why I mainly speak of sentience during abortion debates.

And I explained to you that this is irrelevant. This is what? The fourth time? Lol You keep making the argument that if there is no harm then there is no problem. It's a bad argument. Harm and the perception of harm are not the same. Do better. Or don't. I don't mind reminding you that you say dumb $#@!.

[Mister D]

Society has no standing.

And not that it matters, but the first three definitions of sound in google are consistent with my explanation. Not the cherry picked one that Cletus dug up.

Your explanation is deeply flawed. Harm and the perception of harm are not the same thing.

[Chris]

Perfect justification for killing the homeless, single illegals, old people or anyone else that will not be noticed missing.

Indeed, the implications of such claims are monstrous and history is replete with examples.