On abortion, I say let's go with what we know.

yes, some believe God punishes babies that die before birth, not sure the majority do though

 

As I stated in #59, I came across this which brought me more light to the subject:

Science will no doubt agree that a fetus is a human being.

But, as this PHD explains...

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html

The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question.


Myth 1: "Prolifers claim that the abortion of a human embryo or a human fetus is wrong because it destroys human life. But human sperms and human ova are human life, too. So prolifers would also have to agree that the destruction of human sperms and human ova are no different from abortions and that is ridiculous!"

Is she right?

I don't know. But, I believe she is.

 

So then Mommies over the Millennium needed to ponder yer asinine philosophical
drivel about when a human being begins when carrying their baby to term.
Do you ever even stop to think how ridiculous you sound.
I know this kind of thinking is almost adored by the left.This kind of
thought was also adored by Tyrants.Meaning how best to take over a
society and reduce to childish nonsense.
Like the way the Global Warming crowd ended up relying almost
exclusively on some Teenaged Swede { Greta Thunberg }.
Truth is not a leftwing value !

 

Far and away the Greatest Pope in my lifetime was a Pole.
The first Non-Italian Pope.John Paul II { Karol Wojtyle }.
No human in American History has ever been applauded and
watched with bigger audiences when they visited the U.S.
But then that was a time when the American people were normal.
Not Indoctrinated by scummy Politics and classroom teachers
who control thought with The most Unamerican of ideas and Text.
" The chief rights are the rights of existence and self-determination. "
" When the sacredness of life before birth is attacked, we will stand up
and proclaim that no one ever has the authority to destroy unborn life. "
{ quoted in the Boston Globe sept.17, 1979 }
-- Pope John Paul II

 

Our belief systems are the basis of a large swath of our laws what are you talking about. You said killing a human being is OK because they would be born again so a "no harm no foul" argument. So can I kill you because you believe you will be born again?

It's not a potential life, it is a life, a living human being in the womb.

Why not you said you will be born again which was the basis of your statement.

As I said..........if it is true as you believe and you will just get another life.............

 

Why do you claim all women support abortion and they will not rest until they can all kill their unborn babies? PRO-abortion women my not rest but there are lots of women who do not support unfretted abortions any time and for any reason.

 

Um nope. To be born again is to be given faith by the holy spirit through the Grace of God. It is a spiritual rebirth not a physical one.

 

Would it help you understand if I put "many" in my comment (see above)?

There's no such thing as an unborn baby.

You show no respect for the idea of choice--as in "pro-CHOICE"--instead of your dismissive and inaccurate "pro-abortion" label.

The vast majority of American women support the standards of Roe v. Wade. First-term abortions are up to the woman and her physician.

 

When you take a dirt nap, that's the end of you. There's no "Soul" or "Spirit" that lives on. Your unique consciousness ceases to exist. It gets easier when you accept that.

 

" The chief rights are the rights of existence and self-determination. "


...except for women...

 

And reality has a well-known liberal bias. --Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Dinner

I'm with Stephen

 

Au contraire:

And reality has a well-known liberal bias. --Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Dinner

I'm with Stephen

 

You completely misunderstood my point. I was revealing my belief, and another conflicting belief, to illustrate the point that, because of conflicting belief systems, that laws and policies should not be based on religious beliefs. Hence, 'go with what we know'.

In no way was I suggesting that the law to be changed to conform to my belief.

Science will no doubt agree that a fetus is a human being.

But, as this PHD explains...

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/wdhbb.html

The question as to when the physical material dimension of a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and fundamentally should be answered by human embryologists not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars, or obstetricians and gynecologists. The question as to when a human person begins is a philosophical question.


Myth 1: "Prolifers claim that the abortion of a human embryo or a human fetus is wrong because it destroys human life. But human sperms and human ova are human life, too. So prolifers would also have to agree that the destruction of human sperms and human ova are no different from abortions and that is ridiculous!"

Is she right?

I believe she is.

Answered above.

However, stealing your car won't cause you to get another life, and that is illegal, so murder, though it isn't going to end my life ( per my belief system) it still is taking away my present life (achieved once personhood manifests ), and by the same measure, it is illegal.

If one is born, then you are committing murder because you are taking way a manifested person, you are taking away his or her present life..

At the fetus stage, there is no manifest person, one is merely redirecting a soul to another womb.

Once born, it would be murder.

I especially brought out my belief to illustrate why we cannot base laws on religious beliefs, including mine.

However, I believe the author of the essay linked to, above, explains it more eloquently.

 

It's not explicitly stated that way.

therefore, there is room for interpretation.

To be reincarnated still is being born from 'water and spirit' as the verse states.

'Water' could be the amniotic fluid, and 'born of spirit' is the soul entering the womb.

Could be.

Ya never know.

 

Look up the word Stillborn ... Padre.
If you need a powerful example ... then check out the Bio of the
Great Lon Chaney.Or son Lon Chaney Jr. who explained being born
" black and dead ".A Premature birth { less than 3 lbs. } Lon Sr. Raced out
to an icy lake in front of their home,broke the ice and managed to Revive
the infants breathing.If not then there would never have been such a
Universal Horror character known as
- The Wolf Man - { 1941 }

 

Well then why do you pretend as if You Always know.
Say it ain't so.This Passion to always be in the know.
That is No way to build character.If you were my age and attended
Parochial School run by the Nuns ... They woulda beat that tendency
out of ya.The Tendency to always act as if Knowing.
Explain what you know about the word ... Infinity
What it means and give an example.

 

I got your point quite clearly, killing an unborn human being is OK because of reincarnation they become another perons, well that applies to you as well.

But under your stated principal why not?

So follow the science.

Phd in biology specializing embryology? I cite the TEXTBOOKS, refute them with science and medicine.

No she is FACTUALLY totally wrong as I explained to you.

Why? Science and medicine say that is absolute hogwash, she knows nothing about biology and reproduction.

Refuted above.

This is not about cars, stick with human beings.

Yes it is a manifest person at that stage of a manifested persons life, that doesn't begin at some future arbitrary point you declare in order to justify killing that person.

Is it you religious belief one should not steal? Hmmm we have a law against that don't we.

It may be eloquent in your view but it is not the science or medicine. Don't you believe we should follow the science?

 

No emotional pleas or semantic arguments about what constitutes a human being and what doesn't can override the right of a woman to have control over her own body.

 

I don't pretend anything of the sort.
Just saying it's subject to more than one interpretation.

In my opinion.

 

To muddy the waters even further even a fertilised egg cannot survive if implantation does not occur - so doe life begin at fertilisation or implantation?

 

I just LOVE the fact you are falling back on “science” without giving any citations to back your stance

 

Yep! About 25% and most of THEM aware supremely ignorant of the true facts

 

Here ya go how do you LOVE these beans? Now how about YOU posting the science that says refutes it?

"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]



"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."

[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]



"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]



"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."

[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]

"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."

[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M?ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]

http://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/ar...yoquotes2.html



"Recently, Dr. Robert George wrote an article outlining this whole topic in more detail. And if you want to really learn your stuff, pick up his excellent book entitled Embryo (I’m in the middle of reading it right now).

In his words:

“That is, in human reproduction, when sperm joins ovum, these two individual cells cease to be, and their union generates a new and distinct organism. This organism is a whole, though in the beginning developmentally immature, member of the human species. Readers need not take our word for this: They can consult any of the standard human-embryology texts, such as Moore and Persaud’s The Developing Human, Larsen’s Human Embryology, Carlson’s Human Embryology & Developmental Biology, and O’Rahilly and Mueller’s Human Embryology & Teratology.” – Dr. Robert George



“Human embryos, whether they are formed by fertilization (natural or in vitro) or by successful somatic-cell nuclear transfer (SCNT — i.e., cloning), do have the internal resources and active disposition to develop themselves to the mature stage of a human organism, requiring only a suitable environment and nutrition. In fact, scientists distinguish embryos from other cells or clusters of cells precisely by their self-directed, integral functioning — their organismal behavior. Thus, human embryos are what the embryology textbooks say they are, namely, human organisms — living individuals of the human species — at the earliest developmental stage.” – Dr. Robert George

- See more at: http://fallibleblogma.com/index.php/....n2q46hNU.dpuf



A New, Distinct Human Organism Comes into Being at Fertilization
It is undisputed that a new, distinct human organism comes into existence during the process of fertilization.[1] Scientific literature states the following:

• “The fusion of sperm and egg membranes initiates the life of a sexually reproducing organism.”[2]

• “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”[3]

• “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”[4]

• “The oviduct or Fallopian tube is the anatomical region where every new life begins in mammalian species. After a long journey, the spermatozoa meet the oocyte in the specific site of the oviduct named ampulla, and fertilization takes place.”[5]

• “Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.”[6]

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”[7] Thus, in the context of human life, a new individual human organism is initiated at the union of ovum and sperm. One textbook similarly explains: Human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to produce a single cell – a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.[8]


Thus, a new human organism is created before the developing embryo implants in the uterus – i.e., before that time at which some people consider a woman “pregnant.”



[1] See, e.g., Condic, When Does Human Life Begin? A Scientific Perspective (The Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person Oct. 200, http://bdfund.org/wordpress/wpconten...ife_print.pdf; George & Tollefsen, EMBRYO 39 (200.



[2] Marsden et al., Model systems for membrane fusion, CHEM. SOC. REV. 40(3):1572 (Mar. 2011) (emphasis added).



[3] Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010) (emphasis added).



[4] Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012) (emphasis added).



[5] Coy et al., Roles of the oviduct in mammalian fertilization, REPRODUCTION 144(6):649 (Oct. 1, 2012) (emphasis added).



[6] Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013) (emphasis added).



[7] National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/medlineplus/fertilization (emphasis added).

 

Perhaps they know them better than you as you didn't seem to know much about the science as I have proven.

 

No one knows. It's a philosophical debate when it becomes 'a person'.