Quote:
Originally Posted by joeydb
Thanks for the article.
I wonder if the author thinks that "climate change" is settled science, even though he won't acknowledge that the idea that life begins at conception is a hell of a lot more settled.
...so, did you read the article? if so...how can you just repeat what you said above?
sperm and egg meeting is just one of many steps involved in what will ultimately, possibly, create a new human being. them doing the tango doesn't mean squat if the new combo doesn't get attached to the uterine wall...and then develop, etc, etc and remain til it gets far enough along to survive delivery.
His opinion, yours, and mine are all irrelevant to the truth of whether life begins at conception or not. But an answer to that question must exist. This debate was short-circuited by the Supreme Court in 1973, resulting in the deaths of 50 million human beings and counting. it didn't 'short circuit' anything. abortion had been legal in part of the united states from the time even before it was united..or anything was a 'state'
The reality is that at conception:
1. A DNA series that does not match the mother or father is formed, resulting in the blueprint for a third human being.
2. The cells immediately begin to divide and grow, continually becoming more complex in structure and capability.
3. What was formerly two cells, the sperm and egg, is now one continuous living mass. It is obvious that no one individual exists in two completely different pieces on the macroscopic level, so this is earliest possible beginning of the individual.
The conservative approach is to not interfere with life after conception. Not political conservatism - but just sound judgment, since presumably none of us want to hurt an innocent human being.
Personally, I think most of the pro-abortion people just don't care whether life has begun or not at that point. Why should they question the gift that the inept Supreme Court gave them through their decision? They are interested in defending sexual irresponsibility. They do not wish to accept that there are risks and no form of birth control is 100% effective.
way more involved than 'irresponsibility'. but, like the post above, and what i'm writing here...it probably won't matter. i suggest you get all the facts about who gets abortions and why, and how many were on bc when they got pregnant. or circumstances changed, etc. and there's the pesky biological thing to begin with. i'm 48 now. guess what, i still haven't hit menopause. so, were tony and i to do all to prevent, and something failed, i'm to be forced to maintain a risky pregnancy with risks for the fetus as well? were it not for bc, god knows how many kids i'd have. three we had came along pretty damn easy.
i'm to take risks, for you to sleep well? we have overloaded this planet, and you think we should keep doing so? to what end?
The matter at hand was not centered on the general case of abortion but that "Planned Parenthood", a misnomer if ever there was one, is selling body parts from aborted babies, and even alters their methods to obtain those valuable parts. They are caught red handed in the many videos that have been filmed. The "procedures" discussed are more suitable for comparison to the practices of Nazi "doctor" Joseph Mengele than they are for submission to the New England Medical Journal.
The Democrats are in a panic. And they should be. This has brought to light the macabre day-to-day operation of their slaughterhouse.
So yeah, the bad news for those of us who are pro-life is that currently the law lines up against us. But this event, along with the endless march of science showing the development of babies at earlier and earlier stages with more detail (like in digital ultrasound), the understanding of DNA and what it means, etc., is leading to a gradual change such that our momentum will eventually overturn the legality of in-utero murder.
|
try again on the last, regarding 'selling' body parts. and just where do you suppose the various labs, scientists, colleges, universities, etc, etc, get all the various and sundry cures for various and sundry diseases? how they glean info about the human body? how they know how long a body has been dead? how they know how they'll go about fixing my herniated disc i just found out i have? trial and error? operating on folks and saying 'ooops, that didn't work. bring in the next and we'll try plan c'?
as for earlier and earlier detail, ultrasound...that doesn't mean much, since the line of viability remains 24 weeks. when it does, or they come up with artificial wombs, abortion will remain-it's been around as long as women have gotten pregnant.
but, at least for people like you, you can rest easier knowing that pregnancy rates are down across all segments of the populace, as are births, as are abortion rates.
so, thank goodness for getting more and better bc available to a lot more people-because that is why the above paragraph is true. not because of people saying don't have sex, but if you do, you have to 'pay' the consequences. always liked that, pay. my kids aren't punishment to us, they were wanted and are loved.
my two grandmothers had 21 kids between them. would be more, but my grandfather died shortly after my maternal grand had her 7th. left her alone with seven to raise.
so, yeah, in utopia, all kids would be wanted, all pregnancies happy and healthy.
but we live in the real world.