Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children.

The question is if the frozen embryos are children.
Eggs are not chicken, seed of tree is not a tree and frozen embryos are not children, unless you live in Alabama.

 

I still say the scientists know more than what the Republicans say on the matter. Governments should not need to decide on embryos or family planning.

 

So if all those frozen eggs which aren't used are kept on ice till they're 18 does that mean they're legally considered adults? And is the state going to pay for their care and 'housing'?

 

so we all know human embryos are human beings, so why does where they are change what they are?

Explain how this is the case! Without name calling and childishness please!

 

No rational scientist says a human embryo is not a human being. In fact all science textbooks covering human development say the opposite!

 

Some vaccinations have benefitted society, but the latest was billed as being like those prior ones while not actually preventing either contraction or the spreading of the virus. It has; however, been proven to have severely injured many people.
So much for your broad sweeping irrational generalization!

 

So that couples who want to be parents can be.

Human lives that wouldn't get born without these types of things.

Such a bond won't occur unless they are born. There is no brain in an embryo capable of forming a bond. At that stage, they are the same as a brain dead born person. However if they are born, then likely there will be such a bond because there will be parents if they are going to the trouble of putting the embryo into an AW.

 

Hey, if you have to pay for their storage, then yeah, they should be a tax break.

 

That comes under medical care, and not dependant exemption. If they are human beings and thus children, then they should be allowed as an exemption on the taxes, and the medical procedures as medical expenses.

 

If you are talking about where some states don't allow abortion, I will grant that, being relatively new, that such slips my mind sometimes. Do you have anything else, more long standing? Because I am putting that as the law violating rights as much a legal slavery violated rights.

 

Yes, I agree that a higher court should throw out the ruling given the referencing to religion basis. But that's an aside issue at the moment. There is plenty out there where the religious and secular overlap, such as laws against murder and theft. We don't throw those laws out simply because a judge states that the actions are against the bible.

The use of the word "would" in the ending of all legal abortion is quite frankly scare mongering. And again, I am not denying that abortion opponents won't try to use it for such, but then they tried to use something as simple as a heartbeat to end abortion. That wasn't as universal as they hoped. Simply because Alabama declares embryos as human beings, does not mean that the rest of the country will follow suit. After all, a few states declaring human beings as property didn't force all states to adapt to the thinking. Nor does the legal fact (where it applies) of an unborn being a person automatically mean that abortion if off the books.Ive already shown how we don't allow a born to violate bodily autonomy, so there is no reason to allow the unborn to do so.

 

Do provide that evidence. I can't think of a science or biology textbook that addresses the concept of "being" in the context of "human being" as opposed to just human. Is a Collie a canine being? Or are they not developed enough to be considered a "being"?Quite honestly, the concept of "being" is all over the place and there is no consensus.

 

A distinct human organism is a human being. Read a human development textbook.

 

Biology and medical texts refer to sperm, ovum, zygote, embryo, fetus, and the characteristics and diseases they may have.

The condition of an embryo or fetus and the woman's health factors can be known to present a serious health risk to the woman.

It is a major misconception to assume an embryo or fetus will result in a live birth.

 

Holy "Biological Fail" he says - a Zygote .. does not have the requisite characteristics to be classified as Homo Sapiens .. and being a stage in the life of a homo sapiens does not make that entity a Homo Sapiens. Sorry .. .. a huge fail on your part. .. also an English language usage fail .. still not understanding the difference between a descriptive adjective and a noun.

Just because something can be described as Human .. doesn't make that something a Human. Sorry .. a human turd is not a Human .. as much as you would like us to believe otherwise .. a human cell .. nor clump of human cells such as a heart .. is not necessarily a human friend.. not a question of biology but of English language usage in this case.

Big fail .. the proffered support for the claim a zygote is a human .. not even an argument .. a fallacy of language usage .. a descriptive adjective is not a noun .. a human turd .. is not a human.

 

I have read such textbooks .. but that is not going to help your English language usage mistake / fallacy. Just because something is a human organism .. does not make it "A Human" friend .. nor the compound noun form of the word "human being" .

So not just a biology fail .. but not understanding the difference between the noun and descriptive adjective form of the word "Human" .. nor understanding biological definition of a human cell - as opposed to a Human.

 

Don't know what is holy about your total misstatement, where did I say a human in their zygote stage of life is not a human? And if you are not a homo sapien then you were never in a homo sapien stage of life you would obviously be some other form of life like a dog or a cat but then I don't think we'd be having this discussion. Biological fact, you do not transform from one species to another species during the various stages of your homo sapien, human being, life.

A heart cell is PART of a human being do you not understand the difference? A heart cell will never become anything other than a heart cell. There is this thing in biology that is call cellular specialization. As we grow through our various stages of life our cells specialize into specific functions. And guess what, this all starts AT CONCEPTION and by the second week already three specialized types have differentiated and by three weeks our tissues and organs begin to form. And yes old buddy that zygote that is created at the moment of conception is as much a human as you are now, size and quantity of cells has nothing to do with it.

So what genus and species were you at your moment of conception and when did you turn into a human organism? What was the marker?

 

Yes, you can write off the expenses are you REALLY asserting it is our tax code that defines who is a human being or not? THAT is your best shot here?

 

They can be parents without artificial wombs I don't think most IVF procedures are because the woman does not have a womb. I think we will become more and more advanced an neo-natal care which of course puts the pro-abortion side in a fix with the specious viable argument.

Well I don't think building factories to make new humans is a necessary area we need to go at this time.

Actually studies have shown children in the womb do form bonds and recognize the voices of their parents and others who have been around them while they were still in the womb. But this more sophisticated bond doesn't start for months later. So if a week after birth and the mother and child have not bonded like this and she decides she doesn't want the baby to live any more should she be able to kill it?

Do you believe medicine should be a everything and anything that is "possible" should be something we should strive to achieve?

 

Do you believe the government has a role on protecting our lives.

Do you believe that a couple going through the process and paying the money to do so and the clinic through some negligence causes the deaths of any embryo's they have produce should have some recourse under the law for those wrongful deaths?

This entire matter was not some attempt to outlaw IVF or abortion as the left has tried to portray it. It was shameful and deceitful how Biden presented it in his SOTUS especially when the night before the governor signed the legislation to clear up the law and the clinics all announced they were back in business.

 

And I keep asking what do you do in your country, how do your laws deal with IVF?

NO........................again NO....................this had NOTHING to do with ABORTION. This thread is about IVF and the resulting human embryo's who were killed due to negligence by the clinic and how the law as had existed for over a century applied.

 

If the organism, the being, is human then it is a human organism, a human being. There is no distinction, no matter how strained, here.

 

And I have cited and quoted them over and over but they reject the science and instead inject these specious statements like just because it is a human organism doesn't make it human and that there is some other arbitrary point in development when one becomes A human. Utter nonsense.

 

And they also teach the distinctions between them all, have you ever studied them? If you had then you would know some of those organisms are not human beings and some are.

Pregnancy is not a serious health risk else we would never have survived as a species. It is a perfectly natural function of the female of a species. If pregnancy is such a serious health risk then should we not ban surrogate motherhood because this serious risk to the surrogate? Can complications occur? Yes and we are very good at handling such complications and abortion is the extremely RARE if ever requirement.

Is it the proper one to assume they will not or should we give the assumption TO life not AGAINST it?

 

The question was did the law concerning abuse on minor children as written and passed over 100 years ago in conjunction with the state Constitution and recent amendments exempted embryo's outside womb. When a clinic through negligence killed the embryo's of a couple they sued under that law. The state supreme court said that in fact there was no exemption or distinction under the law AS IT WAS WRITTEN vis-a-vis the state constitution. It said the legislature would have to clear it up, they did and the governor signed the new legislation two days ago and the clinics are back in full operation.

Ovums are not human beings. Human EMBRYO's, which are not eggs, are HUMAN beings. And there is a HUGE difference between plants and animals which everyone learns in Biology 101 if not in elementary school.