Pro-Life Bill......

[jon_forward]

we are talking about life here..not a mound of play dough...get a clue..

 

[USA90210]

I'm just posting an arguement I found.

 

[jon_forward]

cant come up with one by yourself???? sucks to be on the losing team dont it....

 

[USA90210]

Originally posted by jon_forward
cant come up with one by yourself???? sucks to be on the losing team dont it....

No one's losing yet...

 

[jon_forward]

read the link at the start of this thread ...and weep,loser

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
Actually biological and Medical science dicates that if cells are dividing its alive. Only living things have cells that divide.

Might be able to argue about whether its human or not, but whether its alive? come on.

It is living matter, but does it constitute a living being? In a word...No. Nor is there argument as to whether the blastocyst is a human...It is not.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
It is living matter, but does it constitute a living being? In a word...No. Nor is there argument as to whether the blastocyst is a human...It is not.

And legislation says it is. I guess you are wrong again.

 

[jon_forward]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And legislation says it is. I guess you are wrong again.

you are wrong here bully...wouldnt it be easier to admit it and move on...

 

[Bullypulpit]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And legislation says it is. I guess you are wrong again.

The legislation is wrong. We agree to disagree.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
The legislation is wrong. We agree to disagree.

That's fine. I had no intent on changing your mind. I can agree that I am right and you are wrong.

 

[Zhukov]

You're all wrong. Life does not begin at birth nor does it begin at conception. Life began about 3.5 billion years ago and never stopped. But that's irrelevant as the question shouldn't be a matter of life or non-life. It should be one of the characterisitic that seperates us from the other animals: Our sentience.

Once a foetus develops enough neural diversity to become sentient, destroying it is, in my opinion, murder. For clarification, we are not entirely sure at what point during gestation this occurs. However, there is evidence to suggest a foetus is aware of pain at roughly 4 and a half months, if not slightly before. Further, the "blob of cells", as some people are fond of referring to it, begins to develop a brain at about 18 days, though the 'thinking' portions of the brain do not start developing till around 2 months. It is suspected that sometime between the 8th and 18th week after conception the foetus develops self-awareness. Deliberately exterminating a sentient human being can't be construed as anything but murder, again, in my opinion.

This is why I can only, in good faith, support aborting pregnancies within the first two months of conception, and even then it is something to be avoided.

 

[eric]

Well said !!

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Bullypulpit
I know you aren't, but the sub rosa political agenda is, ultimately, about retricting a woman's right to choice.

I have no idea why you insist on putting words in the mouths of others. There is nothing in this law which in any way suggests that. The words are pretty clear that they are excepting abortion and medical treatments which result in harm to a fetus. In fact, this law excepts ANYTHING a mother could do to her unborn fetus- including fetal alcohol poisoning and drug related miscarriages.

Where you get off telling me what the law means is beyond me. It's pretty damn straight forward. That whole snowball thing is stupid. There are some things that are wrong no matter what someone COULD possible claim tomorrow.