Life at Conception

[Steve Ja]

Please, spare us the hysterics and emotional crap. Try some rational arguments, maybe they will be a bit more relevant.

truth hurts don't it. those babies are no more guilty then you and I. Plus if you have been following instead of randomly quoting I have several arguments, which may, or may not make sense to you, but do to me and many others. Same with the woman's body woman's choice argument people use to justify abortion

 

[prometeus]

My life is not altered in any way if someone steals your car.

My life is not altered in any way if you or some other random person that isn't in my circle of friends and family gets violently assaulted or killed.

My life is not altered in any way if half the population of a nation on a continent half a world away is wiped out via genocide.

This is not a very good basis for law, this logical principle of yours...

you mean you can't rationalize it, but that does not mean it does not exist.

 

[Steve Ja]

Do you believe in the holy spirit? The invisible, magical "soul" that supposedly inhabits our bodies along with us? That is the only reason to believe that a human is created at conception. Humans have properties that are not consistent with an embryo, like a functioning higher brain.

Nope don't believe in any of that, but human life does indeed begin at fertilization, conception whatever you wanna call it

 

[prometeus]

egg and sperm come together, wham a baby is started...

You mean like when a hole is dug and construction material is delivered to a site and a house is started.
True, the operative word being "started." Noe the real question is when can you get a CO?

 

[prometeus]

My argument in support of my view is that its a human life from day 1 and deserves a chance at living just like you and I do.

No, that is your argument and not only it does not support anything it is not supported by anything rational, legal or scientific.

 

[iguanaman]

Nope don't believe in any of that, but human life does indeed begin at fertilization, conception whatever you wanna call it

How can an embryo be a human without a brain? What is human about it? Your snot has human DNA

 

[Steve Ja]

No, that is your argument and not only it does not support anything it is not supported by anything rational, legal or scientific.

It actually is supported by everything but legal, and unlawful laws do not take that away

 

[Steve Ja]

How can an embryo be a human without a brain? What is human about it? Your snot has human DNA

not the complete DNA, an embryo does have the complete human DNA.

 

[prometeus]

truth hurts don't it.

I wouldn't know it never bothered me, but you seem to avoid it at any cost relying instead on histrionics.

those babies are no more guilty then you and I.

See above.

Plus if you have been following instead of randomly quoting I have several arguments, which may, or may not make sense to you, but do to me and many others.

Actually they make no sense period.

 

[prometeus]

It actually is supported by everything but legal, and unlawful laws do not take that away

Like I said, not supported by anything rational intelligent, legal or scientific.

 

[Steve Ja]

Like I said, not supported by anything rational intelligent, legal or scientific.

Denying science doesn't make you right. You really have nothing to say, that would even trigger a real conversation

 

[iguanaman]

not the complete DNA, an embryo does have the complete human DNA.

Having human DNA does not make something human. You degrade what it is to be human by calling a clump of cells one.

 

[Steve Ja]

Having human DNA does not make something human. You degrade what it is to be human by calling a clump of cells one.

no I'm saying it contains the entire DNA that makes up a human being. Not degrading. It is in fact human. Its not horse, cow, anything else. Very much human.

 

[Removable Mind]

no I'm saying it contains the entire DNA that makes up a human being. Not degrading. It is in fact human. Its not horse, cow, anything else. Very much human.

Steve...it's the word "Being" that's throwing a wrench into your argument. "HUMAN"...yes, no question. But "Human Begin" is more complicated than just biological, philosophical, etc, etc. definitions.

But with regard to your claim about DNA. The following is how the DNA unfolds after conception from a geneticist's perspective.

At day 5 after fertilization, the new genome takes over as maternal transcripts are depleted. The inner cell mass separates from the hollow ball of cells and takes up residence on the interior surface. It will become the embryo proper, distinguishing itself from the remaining part of the ball fated to become the extra-embryonic membranes. The inner cell mass is what all the fuss about human embryonic stem cells is about — the stem cells aren't the inner cell mass cells, but are cultured from them.

It's complicated...and certainly beyond my scope of ability to understand it all.

I do believe that "Life" is a continuum. However, I believe that women who have conceived hold supreme rights over the unborn. And this point is nothing new to you.

 

[Removable Mind]

A scientific textbook called "Basics of Biology" gives five characteristics of living things; these five criteria are found in all modern elementary scientific textbooks:

1. Living things are highly organized.

2. All living things have an ability to acquire materials and energy.

3. All living things have an ability to respond to their environment.

4. All living things have an ability to reproduce.

5. All living things have an ability to adapt.

Given the above...this still doesn't make a zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus a person. Human in origin? Yes...if co-conceived by two humans.

A significant number of conceptions naturally abort or miscarriage. And the vast majority of medical abortions are preformed at a stage where it's impossible to know if a conception will or won't naturally abort.

What if a woman was legally condemned to spend a long time in jail...because she couldn't prove, nor a medical doctor prove, that a natural abortion or miscarriage occurred within weeks after conception?

 

[American]

Here's the key part. You believe.

That's fine that you believe this. It's a belief that many other people share, and that's OK too, even if I personally disagree with them. However, it's just that - a belief. And one that is far from unanimous around the world, or within a country like the US, or even within a certain community, like the scientific community, or the Christian community. You are perfectly free to act on your belief; or even to convince other people that your belief is correct. However, you are not free to force other people with different beliefs to act by your personal rules.

If you think abortion is wrong, that's fine. Don't have one. But don't try and force that decision onto anyone else.

That includes having other people pay for you abortions.

 

[choiceone]

I'm sure there are numerous other posts regarding this, but I decided to post mine anyways. I believe life begins at conception and abortion is unacceptable under any circumstances, except when the mothers life is in danger. I consider it murder of an innocent life, that had no say in how it was conceived. The argument about it being the woman's body and it should be her choice makes me giggle often. She gets to make the decision on whether the baby lives or dies? As if it is only her this is affecting. The entire world is affected by abortions. The next cure, the next big discovery etc etc might be killed with that abortion. some make it seem like the ability to bring life into this world is such a burden. I wish I had the capabilities to get pregnant. A wonderful gift that only women were given. But that does not mean they should also have the right to kill off babies before they are born. Nobody should be given that authority, except nature. Nature will determine if the baby is viable or not.

What are your thoughts on this touchy subject

1) I do not believe that life begins at conception. I believe that life is in the unfertilized ovum and the sperm, that life began millions of years ago. I believe that an embryo or fetus is not innocent in the sense of harmless because its presence in the woman's body damages that body, however temporarily, and that it is neither innocent nor guilty in the legal sense for the same reason that it is not of moral value, because it has no mind.

2) I do not believe the world is affected by abortions at all, because a woman could simply refuse to have heterosexual sexual intercourse for her whole life and there still would not be born babies.

3) I do not think that the next cure or big discovery in science is a genetic fate. Wallace made the same observations Darwin did, and within the same time range, because evolution was culturally "in the air." The only reason Darwin published his observations is because he found out that Wallace was going to publish them, and Darwin was the senior scientist. And Crick and Watson worked frantically in genetics to beat out all of their competitors and get credit first. Grad students in important research areas hide their very thesis topics from one another so that they will be able to get the credit for the discoveries.

4) Some women love pregnancy and some do not. If you do not want women to have abortions, then either make sure your sex partner wants to get pregnant before you have sex with her or stop having sex with women.

5) Nature does a bad job of quality control for embryos and fetuses. Nature is to blame for every ectopic pregnancy, every case of anencephaly, every gross fetal anomaly. Nature is to blame for rape pregnancy, and even rape, since if nature had not given rapists greater materialistic muscular force, woman would have been more able to prevent their being raped. Nature is value neutral. But the capacity of a human being to control its own body, in itself, is why we can walk, talk, reason, and have faith, so that capacity is not value neutral but inherently good.

 

[choiceone]

Where am I forcing anything? I'm expressing my views. Also if I should not force anyone to follow my beliefs, why am I forced to support abortion with my tax dollars and others that feel the same as me forced to as well? And if I can change one mind on the subject I will consider myself successful. I'm not a nut job looking to bash people. I merely want to express myself and have honest debates on the issues of today.
Appreciate your thoughts and views as well. I like to hear all sides.. I also have a blog that is longer then this on this subject and am creating more blogs on a wide range of subjects.

You are forced to support abortion with your tax dollars only when the woman's life is in danger, her major health functions are being seriously and imminently threatened, and in cases of rape (and if we did not have a social culture that supported rape, we would not have rape) because of the Hyde Amendment forbidding the use of federal tax dollars for abortion in any other cases. And you are forced to support abortion in those cases with your tax dollars the way I was forced to support with my tax dollars the military invasion of Iraq, and consequent killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, based on a Republican's lies.

 

[choiceone]

you twist the pro-life thing entirely don't you. Maybe I should have been more specific. I'm anti baby killing. I am not pro life when it comes to murderers and rapists. The mother matters yes, but she should have zero right to decide the future of the human race through abortion. Every life should get its fair chance as you and i have. And where do I run single mothers into the ground, or married ones for that matter. I simply say abortions should be illegal and you go off on some random tangent to take away from the real issue. MURDERING BABIES

As I said above, the woman has the right to decide the future of the human race because she has the right to refuse to have heterosexual sexual intercourse and have that right respected. Because she has the right to use deadly force if necessary to defend herself against being raped. Because she has the right to commit suicide, if she can manage to do it successfully. She has the right to keep her eggs from being fertilized at all, the right to opt out of genetic evolution.

 

[choiceone]

From the standpoint of biology, of course it is a life upon conception. A person would have to be a true idiot to try to claim otherwise. Cells are dividing, the embryo is starting to develop, and based upon all imaginable criteria, this is life.

The ethical and moral considerations revolving around the abortion debate are another matter, however. It would be better to focus on these issues rather than something that is an established fact.

It is not an individual life once it implants into the tissue of the woman's body. And there are several scientific views of when human life begins. See the section on scientific views, after the section on historical views, at: http://biology.franklincollege.edu/Bioweb/Biology/course_p/bioethics/When does human life begin.pdf

 

[choiceone]

they hate it when the anti baby killing people use words like child murder and baby killing to describe abortion, they even get highly angry about it. their best defense is nobody should tell her what to do with her body. nobody should, until another body is involved. A woman should not have the right to play executioner. I realize she currently does, but does not make it right. I will be a voice for those that have nothing to do with their existence and deserve a chance like all of us got. I will be the voice against abortion aka baby killing.
another one is it's not a baby until X weeks, or human being. Ok I'll give you that for about 5 seconds , but it's human cells and human embryos and human fetuses every step it's a human aka a baby.

We don't hate it when you use words like child murder and baby killing to describe abortion. We tell you that it's not murder, and when we're Christians or Jews, we tell you because you have just born false witness against the people who get and perform abortions, and we are warning you of that, because that is our duty and our self-protection. When you go to hell for it, we won't be responsible.

 

[choiceone]

Thank you for understanding that the unborn baby should not be murdered against its will.
Really? Comparing pregnancy to something like cancer is a really low argument. Giving life is different then taking it. you should know this. calling pregnancy a medical condition is also low. It is a procedure, a process if you will
If I could get pregnant I would def be all for it, but I can't. Women were designed to handle pregnancies, not men unfortunately/fortunately depending on your take.

An embryo or fetus has no will, since will is entirely dependent on mind, so how can an abortion be against its will?

FYI, there are quite a few women whose bodies were not designed to handle pregnancies, and when abortion was illegal, they just died or were permanently disabled in such serious ways that they were invalids for life.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

It doesn't matter whether life begins at conception, at birth, or somewhere in between-- as long as that child is growing in a woman's womb, that woman has the right to remove it. This is her right to self-defense, her right to life, and the most basic, fundamental human right possible.

If you are opposed to this, you are in favor of enslaving half of the human population.

 

[choiceone]

Actually happens all the time. I've been deployed, did i want to be? nope. Where there risks to my long term health and life. Yes. I understand I took the risk of deployment when I signed the dotted line. But in a vast majority of pregnancies the woman took the risk by having the sex. Abortion should never be birth control period. am I off my rocker here? I'm not trying to change your views, I know that wont happen, but can you even see mine? I am ot thinking so. I can see yours, even if I disagree. Yes I say murder and baby killing a lot, but it really is about more then the simple act of abortion isn't it?

Sorry, but unless you were deployed in Viet Nam or earlier, when there was an actual use of selective service for a draft of men who did not want to join the military, you volunteered to serve your country as a military man who took an official oath to protect the nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and who accepted officially the duty to have your life, health, and bodily integrity risked.

That is the same thing as a woman signing a formal agreement to get pregnant, in which she accepts fully the obligation to continue the pregnancy even if she has to die. But if a woman in the US had to sign such an agreement before having heterosexual sex, men in the US would probably never get any again.

 

[choiceone]

I've argued my point through out this thread. Not my body right but it's not just her life either. She should not be able to make the decision if the human race lives or dies. If every pregnancy was aborted that's what would happen. Where do you draw the line in your support?

Until the fetus reaches viability, it IS just her life, because the embryo or fetus is not capable of living without her life continuing its objective evidence of life. And as said before, a woman can decide if the human race lives or dies just by saying no to having sex with guys and using deadly force against would-be rapists or, if that doesn't work, committing suicide successfully.