Planned parenthood leaves title x family programs because of abortion rule

...a zygote, an embryo, a fetus.....

 

All just various stages of the life of a baby, a child, a human being.

 

Yes I can call a zygote a zygote or a baby.
I can call a fetus a fetus or a baby.

Both just different stages of the life of a baby, of human development.

Is this really over your head or are you just trying and failing to be agrumentitive?

 

Yes not forget the last stage...a corpse.Neither a zygote nor a corpse or living

 

. Remove the zygote and tell me it’s a baby. I guess you just can’t grasp the concept of a potential baby. If I mix flour and water it might be a potential cake. Potential potential potential

 

I’m sitting under an acorn and still getting sunburnt

 

That's not necessary and I guess you can't grasp the concept, as does the US Government and the several medical websites I have post, that it's a baby from the get go your inane attempts at species analogies notwithstanding.

 

Yes, every human being that has every existed started their human life as at the zygote stage of life and continued until they were a corpse, was there a point you were trying to make?
Perhaps Princeton University can convince you


A. Basic human embryological facts

To begin with, scientifically something very radical occurs between the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization�the change from a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte�usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living human being (a single-cell embryonic human zygote). That is, upon fertilization, parts of human beings have actually been transformed into something very different from what they were before; they have been changed into a single, whole human being. During the process of fertilization, the sperm and the oocyte cease to exist as such, and a new human being is produced.

To understand this, it should be remembered that each kind of living organism has a specific number and quality of chromosomes that are characteristic for each member of a species. (The number can vary only slightly if the organism is to survive.) For example, the characteristic number of chromosomes for a member of the human species is 46 (plus or minus, e.g., in human beings with Down�s or Turner�s syndromes). Every somatic (or, body) cell in a human being has this characteristic number of chromosomes. Even the early germ cells contain 46 chromosomes; it is only their mature forms - the sex gametes, or sperms and oocytes - which will later contain only 23 chromosomes each..1 Sperms and oocytes are derived from primitive germ cells in the developing fetus by means of the process known as "gametogenesis." Because each germ cell normally has 46 chromosomes, the process of "fertilization" can not take place until the total number of chromosomes in each germ cell are cut in half. This is necessary so that after their fusion at fertilization the characteristic number of chromosomes in a single individual member of the human species (46) can be maintained�otherwise we would end up with a monster of some sort.

To accurately see why a sperm or an oocyte are considered as only possessing human life, and not as living human beings themselves, one needs to look at the basic scientific facts involved in the processes of gametogenesis and of fertilization. It may help to keep in mind that the products of gametogenesis and fertilization are very different. The products of gametogenesis are mature sex gametes with only 23 instead of 46 chromosomes. The product of fertilization is a living human being with 46 chromosomes. Gametogenesis refers to the maturation of germ cells, resulting in gametes. Fertilization refers to the initiation of a new human being.

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

 

Then why do they call it a zygote? Why don’t they call it a baby? Why did they call it an acorn? Why don’t they call it an oak tree. I guess analogies are wasted on you so I understand your contempt for them. No medical websites refer to a zygote as a baby. The government does not consider a zygote a baby. It would be nice if it did so we could get a tax deduction from the moment of conception

 

Pro life arguments may work with you. But what you were seeming to not understand is that no one disputes that a fertilized egg is the beginning of a person if allowed to develop. Since you hate analogies I’ll give you another one. Flour and water or the beginning of a cake if allowed to be baked

 

I quoted Princeton University, not some pro-life website. You have posted NOTHING to support your fallacious and unscientific claims.

I gave you scientific FACT. Humans beings and other living organisms are not flour, that you do not understand that basic premise is quite telling your specious attempts at analogies notwithstanding.

"The product of fertilization is a living human being"

 

More inane nonsense. I have quote website after website referring to the UNBORN BABY.

 

Right here:

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
...a zygote, an embryo, a fetus.....

Why are you denying that 'zygote, embryo, fetus" are stages in the life of human beings ?

 

HILARIOUS !!! Better go back and read that post …..#863...the one where ya talk to yourself

 

Then teenager and fetus should be interchangeable...….embryo and adult....


The doctor CAN tell a woman who just gave birth, " """It's a fine healthy teenager!"""



Keep up the insults... when posters HAVE to include insults in every post it shows clearly they don't really have an argument at all...…and they know it

 

I finally took the time to decipher that mess.

I never said the woman would be charged with performing an abortion....I said they would both be charged the same, "WITH MURDER".

It was YOU who brought in "providing an abortion" as a crime.....and clearly , to most, I didn't mean the woman.

You seem to squirm around a lot because I think you know you have no point.

 

Yes, as I have told you a dozen times, YOU may call it anything you like.....no matter if you're wrong or not. Good to finally see you admit it.


That STILL doesn't make it correct usage. It STILL does NOT affect law or science.

 

Talk to myself?

 

I finally took the time to decipher that mess. (Post 863)

I never said the woman would be charged with performing an abortion....I said they would both be charged the same, "WITH MURDER".

It was YOU who brought in "providing an abortion" as a crime.....and clearly , to most, I didn't mean the woman.

You seem to squirm around a lot because I think you know you have no point.

FoxHastings, Today at 7:37 AM Report

 

No I don't call it anything I like I call it according to proper and correct word usage as I have demonstrated over and over and over again. And you have never refuted other than your specious self-serving denials. YOU don't get to change the meanings of words to suit your argument and position which results in babies being killed in abortions.

 

Why, prove that would be proper word usage.

 

Too funny!

 

All just various stages of the life of a baby, a child, a human being.

 

How can you say what they would DEFINITELY be charged with? Abortion isn't even illegal yet, but you're saying what they would definitely be charged with in the future if it became illegal.