Punishment for Abortion?

[AllieBaba]

?
That has got to be one of the lamest rhetorical questions I have ever see posed on this topic. and there have been some lame ones.

 

[Anguille]

I've dealt with these women. I have yet to meet a woman who's had an abortion who doesn't regret or suffer the same loss as they would over any death over it. Generally they justify for a while, often for years or even decades. But they ALWAYS regret it. Always. And it's sad, because at the same time they encourage other women to follow their example...until they come to a realization that shit, they regret it, and shit, they shouldn't have encouraged others to make the same mistake.

And I've yet to meet a woman whose had an abortion and who does regret it. All were grateful to be living in a country where the choice was left up to them. I have met a woman who was talked out of having one by a Catholic priest and who regretted not having one to the point that it affected her for many years afterwards. I'm not saying no woman has ever regretted having an abortion but many women never do regret it. To claim otherwise just shows bias and ignorance.

Allie Bubblehead, you really know nothing about abortion if you claim women "ALWAYS regret it. Always."

 

[Anguille]

Yes, I am aware of that. What you are ignoring is how the fetus got there. Which, as I said, is usually through invitation by the woman of the sperm and/or the woman not taking proper steps to prevent conception from taking place.

Are you trying to say the fetus just grew on its own and that no choices were made or actions taken by the woman to allow the fetus to grow in her body in the first place?

It doesn't matter if a woman is the biggest slut on earth, she has a right to abort if she wants to.
You people aren't about protecting life. You're about controlling woman's bodies and restricting thier freedom.

You did not answer my question, which likely means you can no longer defend your position. So, you have created a false premise, pretending to know my position. All I am trying to do is find out your position and why you believe fetuses are “squatters”. Was it the fetus that made a conscious choice to invade the woman’s body?

I do not want control over women’s bodies. They can have all the sex they want to; my point still is that they should take the proper steps to prevent an unwanted pregnancy from occurring and not use abortion as a birth control method because it terminates an innocent human life which had no choice in the matter whether it started development or not. That choice was, as I said, typically made by the woman when the woman chose to have sex without properly protecting herself from becoming pregnant. I happen to be pro-choice as well as pro-accountability.

What I do want is for people to be responsible for the human life they create and that they do everything within their power to protect human life regardless of the development stage that human life is in. Just so you know, a human life begins development at fertilization/conception.

How about you stop deflecting and answer my question in post #217?

Your question was:
"Are you trying to say the fetus just grew on its own and that no choices were made or actions taken by the woman to allow the fetus to grow in her body in the first place?"

My answer is no. My opinion remains that regardless of any actions or non actions a woman has made prior to getting pregnant, she has every right to abort if she chooses.

You say :
"What I do want is for people to be responsible"
So do I Sometimes having an abortion is doing the responsible thing.

You still don't understand my point about women owning their own bodies if you are continuing to harp about human life beginning at conception.
I've explained it as well as I can. I can't help you with it any further.

 

[Anguille]

I may be mistaken but it seems that Anguille believes a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy at anytime they see fit.

You are not mistaken and I'm glad to see that at least someone is understanding my posts even if we totally disagree on the topic.

 

[Anguille]

I believe that the parents have the right to terminate the child at anytime they are taking care of it.


That includes pregnacy, infancy, childhood/pre-adolesence, adolesence and adulthood if the offspring refuse to take care of itself!

What right does the parent have to do this--the right of blood and birthing that neither religion nor government has the rights to infringe upon.

In other words its ok to murder your own children. Too bad your parents don't follow that reasoning.

Sounds like you are advocating for an abortion.

 

[Anguille]

This is what they do. They dehumanize children so they can feel justified in killing them, abusing them, and eliminating the groups of people they find inconvenient or unappealing.

What are you talking about? You dehumanize everyone.

 

[Christopher]

It doesn't matter if a woman is the biggest slut on earth, she has a right to abort if she wants to.
You people aren't about protecting life. You're about controlling woman's bodies and restricting thier freedom.

You did not answer my question, which likely means you can no longer defend your position. So, you have created a false premise, pretending to know my position. All I am trying to do is find out your position and why you believe fetuses are “squatters”. Was it the fetus that made a conscious choice to invade the woman’s body?

I do not want control over women’s bodies. They can have all the sex they want to; my point still is that they should take the proper steps to prevent an unwanted pregnancy from occurring and not use abortion as a birth control method because it terminates an innocent human life which had no choice in the matter whether it started development or not. That choice was, as I said, typically made by the woman when the woman chose to have sex without properly protecting herself from becoming pregnant. I happen to be pro-choice as well as pro-accountability.

What I do want is for people to be responsible for the human life they create and that they do everything within their power to protect human life regardless of the development stage that human life is in. Just so you know, a human life begins development at fertilization/conception.

How about you stop deflecting and answer my question in post #217?

Your question was:
"Are you trying to say the fetus just grew on its own and that no choices were made or actions taken by the woman to allow the fetus to grow in her body in the first place?"

My answer is no. My opinion remains that regardless of any actions or non actions a woman has made prior to getting pregnant, she has every right to abort if she chooses.

You say :
"What I do want is for people to be responsible"
So do I Sometimes having an abortion is doing the responsible thing.

You still don't understand my point about women owning their own bodies if you are continuing to harp about human life beginning at conception.
I've explained it as well as I can. I can't help you with it any further.

Thank you for answering the question. The problem is that you cannot give the fetus a “squatter” or “trespasser” status to support your argument (which is what you did) when you answer the question “no”. You have to admit that it was the woman that invited the sperm which created the fetus. That in most cases it was the woman’s choice to have sex and not protect herself from becoming pregnant.

You are taking what I said out of context. The whole sentence was: “What I do want is for people to be responsible for the human life they create and that they do everything within their power to protect human life regardless of the development stage that human life is in.”

Why would you take that out of context to try and make your point?

I was talking about people being responsible for the human life that depends on them for existence. Women do own their own bodies, I understand your point, but their bodies are also the means by which new human life is formed and developed. It becomes more than about just the woman and her body when there is another human life inside her.

When I said that a human life begins development at conception/fertilization in the previous post, it was the first time I have said that in this thread, so I would hardly consider it “harping”. If you can prove a human life begins development at another stage, then go right ahead. Every human biology textbook will disagree with you, though.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I too, have no pos rep to spread around but suffice it to say that I am in agreement with Allie and Christopher. I think a woman has the right to her body, however that right does not mean the right to take another human life no matter where that life may be. I may be mistaken but it seems that Anguille believes a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy at anytime they see fit. Life begins at conception, "An embryo is an individual, no matter how small. While the embryo receives cells from the mother and the father,
it is neither the mother nor the father." --Evangelium Vitae, 1995

The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:

"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]

"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]

"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]

"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]

"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]

"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]

"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]

"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]

"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]

"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]

"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 Müller, 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}]

"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

"[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization....
"[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo....
"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.
"The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'"
[Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]

The only problem with all that Star is that a tumor also fits into that catagory? Are we murdering something when a tumor is removed?

Some of the statements made by your quotes are out right rediculous..

"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

That one for instance?? Did this guy actually graduate?? All mamals start their lives in that manner.. Would you call a ground hog a higher life form? What about a rat? All single celled organisms start and end their lives as a single cell..

The agruement you are attempting to make is when is a life a life?? I don't consider a group of cells an individual life form..

In my opinion.. A baby is alive the moment it has independent action away from the mother.. IE. a heart beat.. The embrionic brain stem has began managing it's own organs.. At that moment.. Life has started.. It is no longer just a group of cells that have no specific purpose and totally dependent on the mother.. The baby has begun nurishing itself and the organs have began working with a purpose..

A tumor is the product of procreation? Please explain. Oh and the babies heart starts beating at 18 days after conception and by 21 days it is pumping blood through a closed circulatory system.

The quote you have a problem with stated "animals" not mammals but nevertheless not all mammals start their lives in this manner i.e. platypus and not all animals are mammals such as insects, reptiles, spiders, sponges and slugs. Mammals have a back-bone, but so do Fish and Frogs and they are not mammals. Mammals are warm-blooded, but so are birds, and birds are not mammals either.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Lonestar, I can't find where you say you answered this question. Could you point it out to me?

Suppose a woman gives birth to a baby girl who eventually becomes a woman who has an abortion. Wouldn't it have been better than, for the first woman to have aborted?

Perhaps the mother's mother should have been aborted by her mother or they should have sterilized her great great great great grandmother at birth.

Seriously your question makes no sense, hence the reason it wasn't addressed the first time around, it doesn't matter which woman engaged in murdering, it's still murder and it's still wrong.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I believe that the parents have the right to terminate the child at anytime they are taking care of it.


That includes pregnacy, infancy, childhood/pre-adolesence, adolesence and adulthood if the offspring refuse to take care of itself!

What right does the parent have to do this--the right of blood and birthing that neither religion nor government has the rights to infringe upon.

In other words its ok to murder your own children. Too bad your parents don't follow that reasoning.

Sounds like you are advocating for an abortion.

If you had been paying attention you would have seen that murdering children from infancy to adulthood is what the poster condones. I'm pretty sure my position on abortion is perfectly clear.

 

[MajikMyst]

I too, have no pos rep to spread around but suffice it to say that I am in agreement with Allie and Christopher. I think a woman has the right to her body, however that right does not mean the right to take another human life no matter where that life may be. I may be mistaken but it seems that Anguille believes a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy at anytime they see fit. Life begins at conception, "An embryo is an individual, no matter how small. While the embryo receives cells from the mother and the father,
it is neither the mother nor the father." --Evangelium Vitae, 1995

The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:

"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]

"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]

"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]

"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]

"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]

"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]

"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]

"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]

"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]

"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]

"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 Müller, 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}]

"Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

"[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization....
"[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo....
"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.
"The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'"
[Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]

The only problem with all that Star is that a tumor also fits into that catagory? Are we murdering something when a tumor is removed?

Fits into WHAT category, precisely? And I'm boggling at the idea that you actually need to have the differences between a tumor and a fetus explained to you.



Well, I admire the confidence needed to declare quotes from scientists "rediculous", but I have to wonder if you would just say, "Ooh, scientists, they MUST be right" and swallow it whole if the topic were, say, global warming.



Um, he didn't say "mamals"[sic]. He said, "higher animals". You DO know that there are many animals which are not mammals, right? And he's not simply saying that almost all of them start from a single cell. Read the whole sentence. He's saying almost all of them start from a SPECIFIC single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote). (That whole grammar for comprehension thing is so handy sometimes, I tell you.)

The agruement you are attempting to make is when is a life a life?? I don't consider a group of cells an individual life form..

You do know it's not a matter of opinion or personal preference, don't you? It is what it is whether you agree or want to vote it off the island.

In my opinion.. A baby is alive the moment it has independent action away from the mother.. IE. a heart beat.. The embrionic brain stem has began managing it's own organs.. At that moment.. Life has started.. It is no longer just a group of cells that have no specific purpose and totally dependent on the mother.. The baby has begun nurishing itself and the organs have began working with a purpose..

See above re: not a matter of opinion or personal preference. We're not voting on what the scientific definition of life is or when something meets that definition. That issue has been settled, and will remain settled until contradictory EVIDENCE becomes available. Your opinion does not constitute "evidence".

It is ok Cecilie.. I don't expect you to understand science.. Good try though.. try taking a biology course...

 

[Cecilie1200]

The only problem with all that Star is that a tumor also fits into that catagory? Are we murdering something when a tumor is removed?

Fits into WHAT category, precisely? And I'm boggling at the idea that you actually need to have the differences between a tumor and a fetus explained to you.



Well, I admire the confidence needed to declare quotes from scientists "rediculous", but I have to wonder if you would just say, "Ooh, scientists, they MUST be right" and swallow it whole if the topic were, say, global warming.



Um, he didn't say "mamals"[sic]. He said, "higher animals". You DO know that there are many animals which are not mammals, right? And he's not simply saying that almost all of them start from a single cell. Read the whole sentence. He's saying almost all of them start from a SPECIFIC single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote). (That whole grammar for comprehension thing is so handy sometimes, I tell you.)



You do know it's not a matter of opinion or personal preference, don't you? It is what it is whether you agree or want to vote it off the island.

In my opinion.. A baby is alive the moment it has independent action away from the mother.. IE. a heart beat.. The embrionic brain stem has began managing it's own organs.. At that moment.. Life has started.. It is no longer just a group of cells that have no specific purpose and totally dependent on the mother.. The baby has begun nurishing itself and the organs have began working with a purpose..

See above re: not a matter of opinion or personal preference. We're not voting on what the scientific definition of life is or when something meets that definition. That issue has been settled, and will remain settled until contradictory EVIDENCE becomes available. Your opinion does not constitute "evidence".

It is ok Cecilie.. I don't expect you to understand science.. Good try though.. try taking a biology course...

In other words, you have no real answers, and thus must make a desperate stab for pseudo-loftiness and run for the horizon with your tail between your legs.

I'd like to say it's okay for you to be an ignoramus AND a coward, but it really isn't. When you have something more than, "Take a course" and can actually explain how any biology course is going to support your illiterate take on the world, come back. Until then, I accept your surrender, and mourn for the decrease in community IQ that your presence represents.

 

[MajikMyst]

Fits into WHAT category, precisely? And I'm boggling at the idea that you actually need to have the differences between a tumor and a fetus explained to you.



Well, I admire the confidence needed to declare quotes from scientists "rediculous", but I have to wonder if you would just say, "Ooh, scientists, they MUST be right" and swallow it whole if the topic were, say, global warming.



Um, he didn't say "mamals"[sic]. He said, "higher animals". You DO know that there are many animals which are not mammals, right? And he's not simply saying that almost all of them start from a single cell. Read the whole sentence. He's saying almost all of them start from a SPECIFIC single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote). (That whole grammar for comprehension thing is so handy sometimes, I tell you.)



You do know it's not a matter of opinion or personal preference, don't you? It is what it is whether you agree or want to vote it off the island.



See above re: not a matter of opinion or personal preference. We're not voting on what the scientific definition of life is or when something meets that definition. That issue has been settled, and will remain settled until contradictory EVIDENCE becomes available. Your opinion does not constitute "evidence".

It is ok Cecilie.. I don't expect you to understand science.. Good try though.. try taking a biology course...

In other words, you have no real answers, and thus must make a desperate stab for pseudo-loftiness and run for the horizon with your tail between your legs.

I'd like to say it's okay for you to be an ignoramus AND a coward, but it really isn't. When you have something more than, "Take a course" and can actually explain how any biology course is going to support your illiterate take on the world, come back. Until then, I accept your surrender, and mourn for the decrease in community IQ that your presence represents.

In other words.. I have already responded and you didn't understand it.. That is your problem.. It isn't my fault that you are an ignorant fool that doesn't understand science.. I tried to explain it once, that is more than enough.. If you can't get it then that is your problem..

No be a good moron and stop spinning things in a vain attempt to make yourself look smart.. We all know otherwise..

 

[AllieBaba]

I've dealt with these women. I have yet to meet a woman who's had an abortion who doesn't regret or suffer the same loss as they would over any death over it. Generally they justify for a while, often for years or even decades. But they ALWAYS regret it. Always. And it's sad, because at the same time they encourage other women to follow their example...until they come to a realization that shit, they regret it, and shit, they shouldn't have encouraged others to make the same mistake.

And I've yet to meet a woman whose had an abortion and who does regret it. All were grateful to be living in a country where the choice was left up to them. I have met a woman who was talked out of having one by a Catholic priest and who regretted not having one to the point that it affected her for many years afterwards. I'm not saying no woman has ever regretted having an abortion but many women never do regret it. To claim otherwise just shows bias and ignorance.

Allie Bubblehead, you really know nothing about abortion if you claim women "ALWAYS regret it. Always."

You travel with the crowd who does it selfishly. I work with the crowd, the ones your people would like to deplete, who are heartbroken over it for the rest of their lives.

 

[JW Frogen]

I don’t have a problem with the current abortion laws, some times killing is necessary for the greater good.

I do have a problem with those women who define life away into a nonsensical definition to make their killing easier on their own conscience.

Killing may be necessary, but it should never be easy on the conscience.

 

[Christopher]

It is ok Cecilie.. I don't expect you to understand science.. Good try though.. try taking a biology course...

In other words, you have no real answers, and thus must make a desperate stab for pseudo-loftiness and run for the horizon with your tail between your legs.

I'd like to say it's okay for you to be an ignoramus AND a coward, but it really isn't. When you have something more than, "Take a course" and can actually explain how any biology course is going to support your illiterate take on the world, come back. Until then, I accept your surrender, and mourn for the decrease in community IQ that your presence represents.

In other words.. I have already responded and you didn't understand it.. That is your problem.. It isn't my fault that you are an ignorant fool that doesn't understand science.. I tried to explain it once, that is more than enough.. If you can't get it then that is your problem..

No be a good moron and stop spinning things in a vain attempt to make yourself look smart.. We all know otherwise..

You cannot expect people to understand nonsense and that is what you have provided. According to science, a new human life begins development at conception/fertilization. Just look at any human biology textbook.

I would suggest that only reason you see “spinning” in what Cecilie said is that it is you who is doing the “spinning”.

 

[froggy]

Want to bring these back?

[/IMG]

 

[AllieBaba]

I may be mistaken but it seems that Anguille believes a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy at anytime they see fit.

You are not mistaken and I'm glad to see that at least someone is understanding my posts even if we totally disagree on the topic.

Everyone understands your posts, Anguille. When they make sense. That's why you're universally despised, I think.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is ok Cecilie.. I don't expect you to understand science.. Good try though.. try taking a biology course...

In other words, you have no real answers, and thus must make a desperate stab for pseudo-loftiness and run for the horizon with your tail between your legs.

I'd like to say it's okay for you to be an ignoramus AND a coward, but it really isn't. When you have something more than, "Take a course" and can actually explain how any biology course is going to support your illiterate take on the world, come back. Until then, I accept your surrender, and mourn for the decrease in community IQ that your presence represents.

In other words.. I have already responded and you didn't understand it.. That is your problem.. It isn't my fault that you are an ignorant fool that doesn't understand science.. I tried to explain it once, that is more than enough.. If you can't get it then that is your problem..

No be a good moron and stop spinning things in a vain attempt to make yourself look smart.. We all know otherwise..

On the contrary, poltroon. I understood it perfectly. You got your ass handed to you, and are now turning it around in your hands, saying, "Duhhh. What's this thing?"