Do you support the “Life at Conception Act”? Human Being = the moment of fertilization.

[blueskies2018]

Unique?

Does Each Sperm Have Different DNA: Unveiling the Genetic Variation - Sperm.Blog

Short answer: Does each sperm have different DNA? Yes, each sperm carries a unique combination of genetic information. During meiosis, DNA segments are randomly reshuffled and swapped, resulting in distinct genetic variations among sperm cells. This diversity contributes to the wide range of...

sperm.blog

Yes, you are referring to the various sequences of the fathers dna. It’s all part of that man’s dna just in various orders and the one that fertilizes the egg will then combine with the mothers to make a unique dna that will show various characteristics of both or often more of one parent due to recessive genes etc. the males sperm and the females egg are their own dna, the fertilized egg is a unique dna in that it doesn’t belong to just the mother or the father but is a combination. It’s a whole new human, you cannot create a new person with unique DNA in any circumstance using just an egg or just sperm. You know this though. That’s why we can use dna in sperm to identify the rapist…it all belongs to that guys dna.

 

[Lursa]

I’m just wondering where the line would be for the left. The only one I’ve seen in this thread is at birth but I think most people would agree that by the third trimester and if it is viable outside the womb, then it’s a life right? I could be totally wrong but I am curious where everyone is drawing the line then. I realize what the constitution says but I want to hear what each person believes. When is it a life and what makes something a life?

Why do you post as if you dont already know that women dont abort healthy, viable fetuses (after 24 weeks)? Unless there's some medical reason.

So what's the big deal? It doesnt happen...so who cares?

And you've also been told 'when' it's a life and how that doesnt factor into it having rights or not...being a person does...and that's a legal designation recognized at birth. So why are you going on about 'when it's a life' again?

It's an individual living human, with Homo sapiens DNA, at fertilization/implantation. Anyone denying that needs a 5th grade biology book.

 

[roguenuke]

I’m just wondering where the line would be for the left. The only one I’ve seen in this thread is at birth but I think most people would agree that by the third trimester and if it is viable outside the womb, then it’s a life right? I could be totally wrong but I am curious where everyone is drawing the line then. I realize what the constitution says but I want to hear what each person believes. When is it a life and what makes something a life?

It doesn't matter when it's "life". It matters when we recognize that life as having rights, especially if we are discussing giving that life exceptional, special rights, which making abortion at any stage illegal does, as it gives unborn life the "right" to use another's life's body without their ongoing consent.

 

[trixare4kids]

well that makes zero sense since this is specifically about the GOVERNMENT bill in the op, how hilarious, next time maybe read it and understand it, thanks

My response makes perfect sense because your thread premise, as well as your subsequent replies presumes that you truly believe there is some vast right wing religious conspiracy that would want the government to support the life at conception act, human beings' lives begin the moment of conception. It might be that way in a few southern states, but the minority is not the rule.

Don't twist my words either like you are known to do, if you should decide to refute the above.

​

 

[Lursa]

Neither can grow on their own.

Cant grow on its own once joined in fertilization/implantation either.

 

[roguenuke]

Yes, you are referring to the various sequences of the fathers dna. It’s all part of that man’s dna just in various orders and the one that fertilizes the egg will then combine with the mothers to make a unique dna that will show various characteristics of both or often more of one parent due to recessive genes etc. the males sperm and the females egg are their own dna, the fertilized egg is a unique dna in that it doesn’t belong to just the mother or the father but is a combination. It’s a whole new human, you cannot create a new person with unique DNA in any circumstance using just an egg or just sperm. You know this though. That’s why we can use dna in sperm to identify the rapist…it all belongs to that guys dna.

Technically, a person can have two unique sets of DNA in their body, making it a little harder in some cases in fact to identify the rapist, if their sample point and sperm are from the 2 different sets.

 

[blueskies2018]

It doesn't matter when it's "life". It matters when we recognize that life as having rights, especially if we are discussing giving that life exceptional, special rights, which making abortion at any stage illegal does, as it gives unborn life the "right" to use another's life's body without their ongoing consent.

If it doesn’t matter when it’s a life then why wont you just answer the question? It is important because when it becomes a life then the action becomes the taking of a life and I think that matters in the conversation.

 

[AGENT J]

My response makes perfect sense

no it factually doesnt the op is about a government bill, period
your feelings about what you wish it to be are meaningless

as well as your subsequent replies presumes that you truly believe there is some vast right wing religious conspiracy

please quote my replies saying anythng about vast right wing religious conspiracy, you wont cause you cant cause you just posted a lie and made that up
thanks for proving me right on two fronts now, your post made no sense and you obviously didnt read the op/my replies

Don't twist my words either like you are known to do,

didnt twist anything, thread history is here for all to see proving your claims factually wrong

if you should refute the above.

factually done

FACTS
- your post made no sense because the OP is about a government bill
- your posts got caught lying again and claimed my responses are about vast right wing religious conspiracy
please let me know if you have anything else, preferably on topic and honest, thanks!

 

[blueskies2018]

Technically, a person can have two unique sets of DNA in their body, making it a little harder in some cases in fact to identify the rapist, if their sample point and sperm are from the 2 different sets.

I assume you are talking about chimeras? Pretty rare and I’d rather talk more about the general rule than the rare exceptions. Also, this wouldn’t change the fact that their sperm cannot on its own combine to make a new human.

 

[weaver2]

I would be on your side on this, but it took many years before the NO means NO concept took precedence.There were many men saying a woman in high heels a mini skirt and boobs bouncing around was just asking for it.

Bouncing boobs, mini-skirts and high heels are just an excuse. The men in Muslim countries with completely covered women

still justify rape saying "they were asking for it."

 

[Lursa]

If it doesn’t matter when it’s a life then why wont you just answer the question? It is important because when it becomes a life then the action becomes the taking of a life and I think that matters in the conversation.

Who says killing the unborn life s wrong? What authority? AL state but not SCOTUS, not the Const, and not federal law.

 

[AGENT J]

If it doesn’t matter when it’s a life then why wont you just answer the question? It is important because when it becomes a life then the action becomes the taking of a life and I think that matters in the conversation.

but it doesnt since that life is inside another and it existence is a risk to that life

you still never answer my questions when you asked where the left draws the line
1.) why the left? there are millions of rights that are prochoice and some lefties that are prolife
2.) its ALWAYS life, hell sperm and egg are alive
this is about declaring it a legal person, which is vastly different

 

[BabaVoss]

Neither can grow on their own.

So? They ARE alive.

 

[trixare4kids]

no it factually doesnt the op is about a government bill, period
your feelings about what you wish it to be are meaningless

please quote my replies saying anythng about vast right wing religious conspiracy, you wont cause you cant cause you just posted a lie and made that up
thanks for proving me right on two fronts now, your post made no sense and you obviously didnt read the op/my replies

didnt twist anything, thread history is here for all to see proving your claims factually wrong

factually done

FACTS
- your post made no sense because the OP is about a government bill
- your posts got caught lying again and claimed my responses are about vast right wing religious conspiracy
please let me know if you have anything else, preferably on topic and honest, thanks!

Bye

Enjoy your pretzel twists. Mustard sauce would go nicely.

 

[AGENT J]

Bye

Enjoy your pretzel twists. Mustard sauce would go nicely.

thats what i thought!
please let me know if you have anything else, preferably on topic and honest, thanks!

 

[BabaVoss]

Fun fact;

The proportion of fertilized eggs that produce a live full-term baby (in the absence of contraceptive measures) is not known precisely, but is probably only 40%.
The other 60% all die, at all stages from fertilization to late pregnancy.

 

[trixare4kids]

thats what i thought!
please let me know if you have anything else, preferably on topic and honest, thanks!

If you're really interested in honesty that addresses the thread topic, reread Post 96.

Instead, you'll probably dismiss that post and this post because a conservative happened to breakdown the stereotype you wished to promote on this thread. Don't ever preach to me about staying on topic and honesty. I'll get you every time.

 

[AGENT J]

If you're really interested in honesty that addresses the thread topic, reread Post 96.

Instead, you'll probably dismiss that post because a conservative happened to breakdown the stereotype you wished to promote on this thread. Don't ever preach to me about staying on topic and honesty. I'll get you every time.

didnt you say bye already?
nothing there changes the fact your post didnt make since and i exposed the lie you got caught posting and yu just posted another factual lie, i posted no stereotype, if you disagree quote the factual stereotype

in the future simply dont post lies and they wont be exposed
so now you can make a post based on honesty and integrity and admit your post didnt make and since and you also posted a lie
or if you disagree feel free to show us the OP is not about a government bill and that i made posts here about a vast right wing conspiracy theory
lets see what you do, we'll be waiting, thanks!

 

[Individual]

Is any human life the property of the govt? Are you? Are any posters here?

IMO that is not a valid question and also not related to the IVF embryo issue.

We are all under the control of one government or another.

I didn't see IVF mentioned in the OP.

Should miscarriages be required to be reported and investigated as a misdemeanor or a felony?

 

[Lursa]

We are all under the control of one government or another.

Sorry...that's not 'property.' Or are you saying we're slaves?

I didn't see IVF mentioned in the OP.

Just a predicted and current extension of the OP question.

Should miscarriages be required to be reported and investigated as a misdemeanor or a felony?

Of course not, why do you ask?

 

[blueskies2018]

but it doesnt since that life is inside another and it existence is a risk to that life

you still never answer my questions when you asked where the left draws the line
1.) why the left? there are millions of rights that are prochoice and some lefties that are prolife
2.) its ALWAYS life, hell sperm and egg are alive
this is about declaring it a legal person, which is vastly different

Maternal death is relatively low and the factors contributing to those deaths is a whole other topic I won’t get into. Also, no one I know is saying that if the mother’s life is at risk they have to just let her die. Rather, treatment should always be given to save the mother. You’re saying we should definitely kill an innocent life because there is a very small chance the mother may be killed.
1) okay, not the left, anyone pro choice
2) sperm and egg are alive, trees are alive, lots of things are alive, that does not make them A LIFE. As in a human life with its own unique DNA sequence that has already determined hair color, eye color, personality etc. You can call it declaring it a legal person but again, when do you think that is? I’m aware of what the law says but I want a clear answer from the pro choice people. What is the limit if any that you guys want or should there be?

 

[HonestJoe]

Do you support the “Life at Conception Act”? Human Being = the moment of fertilization.

I think that wording demonstrates the oversimplification that is at the basis of all of this. I think the idea that concepts like "life" and "human being" can be so easily defined and delineated is fundamentally flawed.

The word "life" means different things in different contexts, and often has a limited and indistinct definition. In one way, life doesn't really apply at all to individual beings, but only to species as a whole. After all, one of the common elements of the definition is the ability to reproduce, and no human being can do that alone (naturally at least). Similarly "Human Being" describes a species, and while individuals (including individual fetuses) can generally be identified as being part of that species or not, so can things which clearly aren't distinct beings (in this context, human sperm and eggs being the key examples). So, using these broad and complex terms to try to determine the best answers to the differently complex questions around abortion and the like is destined to fail.

Of course, legislation like this, and the wider politics surrounding it, aren't about actually solving any problems or addressing any difficult questions, let alone protecting any real lives, they're entirely about politics.

 

[molten_dragon]

No, I don't support that. There are huge practical issues with it.

 

[roguenuke]

I assume you are talking about chimeras? Pretty rare and I’d rather talk more about the general rule than the rare exceptions. Also, this wouldn’t change the fact that their sperm cannot on its own combine to make a new human.

Being rare doesn't change it's existence (and we actually don't know how rare it is since that would require far more testing of genes in so many body parts than we do).

It also doesn't change the fact that it doesn't matter. We place value on life based on subjective values we hold, as groups and individuals, and this is true regardless of the type of life. But we don't force others to use their body, put their body at risk for another "life" to live.

But "person" is also based on birth, as that is when we count them on the census, start the clock on their age, given them legal identity.

 

[roguenuke]

Maternal death is relatively low and the factors contributing to those deaths is a whole other topic I won’t get into. Also, no one I know is saying that if the mother’s life is at risk they have to just let her die. Rather, treatment should always be given to save the mother. You’re saying we should definitely kill an innocent life because there is a very small chance the mother may be killed.
1) okay, not the left, anyone pro choice
2) sperm and egg are alive, trees are alive, lots of things are alive, that does not make them A LIFE. As in a human life with its own unique DNA sequence that has already determined hair color, eye color, personality etc. You can call it declaring it a legal person but again, when do you think that is? I’m aware of what the law says but I want a clear answer from the pro choice people. What is the limit if any that you guys want or should there be?

No. They're saying that it should be up to the person who is at risk, even if that risk is lower than some other people's risk, because it is their body.

You don't get to define what is "a life", which you are definitely trying to do here, for everyone, objectively, when it is clear that the context is subjective.

The limit is birth and not being able to force any doctor or medical person to perform one. That isn't at all an unreasonable limit. Less than 200 abortions were being performed past 28 weeks in the US even under Roe. Out of millions of pregnancies, it is quite reasonable to say that the vast majority of those, even with 10 weeks to go, were for life or health of the woman. And I'm willing to bet you can't show any that were performed other than emergency situations in the 9th month of pregnancy.