When does life begin?

[PubliusInfinitum]

Golly... this is such a deep question and so common at that.

Of course life, like everything else, begins at it's beginning.

The fact is human life begins at the point of conception; arguments to the contrary are nothing more than specious rationalizations, born of the desperate need to escape responsibility for ones actions; and where those rationalizations have been adhere to by the US Supreme court in one of the most spurious decisions ever handed down, it remains nothing more than a rationalization.

Arguments regarding sentience were a function of a 1960s feminist position which sought to establish a basis for this rationalization. The fact is Human beings begin at the beginning; and where one strikes to destroy the beginning of a human life, they effectively strip that embryonic human of its right to that life…

A woman has a total right to determine her own reproductive future, this is an irrefutable fact, born of the principle that it is the woman that bears the responsibility of conception… and it is THAT RESPONSIBILITY on which her right solely rests; remove from her that responsibility and you remove the foundation of her reproductive rights, strip her of her reproductive rights and you strip her of her humanity, just as she stripped her unborn child of its humanity.

The fact is that the sentience argument, once accepted, must inevitably be embraced by succeeding generations, where the natural logical extension turns to ‘quality of life,’ which will determine that those realizing given physical or mental challenges will be stripped of their humanity… which must then recognize ‘viability of life’ wherein medical care, for those determined BY OTHERS to be un-viable due to a host of arbitrary determinations will be denied… stripping them of their humanity and so on...

Some may feel that these are new fields of thought, that previous generations have never faced such enlightened puzzles; but the fact is that feminism is a function of early Progressivism… which bore the long buried and often denied catastrophes of Eugenics… A species of thought which brought the world Dr. Joseph Mengele and the shadowy figures behind the Tuskegee Experiment where enlightened medical practitioners and bureaucrats determined that it was OK to strip one human of their rights because their suffering would bring relief to the collective of the species; stripping those human beings of their right to life, thus their humanity...

The point here, is that this is nothing new; only old, long discredited species of reasoning being reborn and dressed up to suit yet another specious rationalization. Life begins at the beginning, just like everything else and anyone who says otherwise says so with no basis in reality and is unable to rest that notion upon any valid principle; with their entire basis is reasoning set upon nothing more than their desire to escape responsibility; responsibility for their right to CHOOSE to engage in behavior which inherently bears enormous responsibility, which tends to rinse the fun right out of it and where the rubber of reason, meets the road of reality, that's all we're talking about here... people wanting to have sex without having to worry about the consequences...

 

[Silence]

so let me see if I understand this...

Every time I have my period and an egg is shed, I've lost a human being and therefore committed some form of murder by not having that egg fertilized?

and everytime a guy jacks off, he's killing more humans because his sperm is alive?

ummmm okie dokie

When life begins is a pointless debate because some people approach the subject from a scientific standpoint and others approach it from a religious standpoint.

Whenever YOU think life begins is what should matter to YOU. Go with that. Make YOUR decisions based on that belief and allow others to make their decisions based on what THEY believe.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Every time I have my period and an egg is shed, I've lost a human being and therefore committed some form of murder by not having that egg fertilized?

and everytime a guy jacks off, he's killing more humans because his sperm is alive?

See, it's this kind of myopic, narrow thinking that has taken and turned this nation into the biggest bunch of prudes on the planet. Do you think that Europeans have the same taboos and hang ups that we do over here? I can definitely tell you from being there, they most assuredly do NOT.

Sex is natural, fun and good to do, whether it be with someone or by yourself. It is only those conservative Christians who make it something else.

 

[sealybobo]

65 percent refuse to even consider banning abortion. 25 percent want it banned. That leaves 10 percent that aren't sure.

If Mccain wins, he will appoint conservative supreme court justices because the same people who told him to pick sarah palin will tell him who to appoint to the highest court in our land, and they are appointed for life.

The gop say they don't like judges legislating from th bench. Their job is to uphold the constitution, well the supreme court does make law. And th last two have proven they wil not follow starry decisis. Even sandra day o'conner, a reagan appointee agrees they don't. And they are both very young. If you want a fascist country, vote mccain. Nobles and pesants. Us being the pesants. If a corporation wrongs you, expect they side with the corporation. Look at what they did to the exxon mobile settlement. They cut it in half. Alaskans are pissed, but because they all get tax breaks from the oil companies in alaska, they ignored it, because that money would have gone to the victims, not their own pockets. Basically the gop own alaska.

 

[Navy1960]

The point is, that by taking tax dollars to compel people that don't believe as you do, to sponsor a service , be it education , the performance of, or the participation in is wrong. If you want abortion funded by the public then make it a line item donation on your 1040. Its really that simple. Those that wish to support it, can do so at will, those that do not, do not have to is the point. It's a complete fallicy to believe that everyone supports abortions without restrictions with of some kind. The point is, that if you want to support abortion then do so without compelling those that don't.

 

[Charles_Main]

I am saying that the egg is human and it is alive. It isn't a cabbage, and it isn't dead. The same logic holds for a skin cell.

Funny because no matter how long you wait, a skin cell will not grow into a person.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

so let me see if I understand this...

Every time I have my period and an egg is shed, I've lost a human being and therefore committed some form of murder by not having that egg fertilized?

Look... If you're not sufficiently familiar with the biological processes to understand that an unfertilized egg is not a human embryo AND if you’re not sufficiently familiar with the principles relevant to what is and is not the usurpation of a human right, then perhaps you need to avoid discussions which evolve from and revolve around those issues...

But towards educating you, females that have not CHOSEN to participate in sexual intercourse are not at risk of having the aforementioned egg fertilized, thus that egg does NOT possess the biological properties necessary for life TO BEGIN!~

Secondly, when a female DOES engage in sexual intercourse or other activity which WILL provide for conception, she is responsible for that human life, to the degree that she is capable... and just like anyone else, where the female has not engaged in behavior, either knowingly, with malice of forethought or through criminal negligence harmed another human being, thn she is not responsible for any harm which may come to that human being; meaning that if the biological processes conclude the life of the pre-born child, she is not responsible for the death of that child BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE ITS DEMISE...

and everytime a guy jacks off, he's killing more humans because his sperm is alive?

As with the female egg, male semen does not constitute human life... it constitutes an organism relevant to the human body, not unlike a human organ...

When life begins is a pointless debate because some people approach the subject from a scientific standpoint and others approach it from a religious standpoint.

Some people look at assault as a simple function that the assualtee did not freely hand over his wallet... Now some scientists may say that had the assualtee simply complied with the demands of the assailant, the knife would not have caused the incision through his carotid artery, causing a major leak in his arterial network, dramatically lowering his blood pressure, preventing critical oxygen from servicing his heart and brain and vital organs ultimately resulting in his death...

But that opinion would have absolutely NOTHING to do with the simple fact that the assailent had no right to demand the assaultee to hand over his property, causing the assualtee to defend his property and his human rights against an unjustified attack, through which he ultimately lost his life, and for which the assailant forfeited his own rights, thus is subject upon a judicial trying of the facts surrounding the assault and upon conviction, to be summarily executed; having given up the right to his own life, due to his usurpation of the rights of another.

Whenever YOU think life begins is what should matter to YOU. Go with that. Make YOUR decisions based on that belief and allow others to make their decisions based on what THEY believe.

Again... IF this position is valid, it could be applied to assailants... "Whether you believe that you're entitled to someone else’s property, YOU should make that decision based upon what YOU believe... " Of course the position is not logically valid, in that the decision we're discussing is NOT one where only YOU are being affected... YOUR DECISION AS TO WHEN LIFE BEGINS, WHEN THAT CONCLUSION IS THE BASIS FOR THE TAKING OF THE HUMAN LIFE WHOSE CONCEPTION OF WHICH, YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE, INVOLVES THE LIFE OF THAT OTHER HUMAN BEING.

Now again, the SCOTUS through the absurdity that is ROE has decided, on the most specious grounds that the woman has the right to end the life of their pre-born child... so women are not at risk prosecution for their causing the death of that human being which through THEIR CHOICE they conceived... but women are none the less responsible for that death and while the act of killing a pre-born child for the purposes of the convenience of the mother is NOT prosecutable; IF a person caused the death of that SAME pre-born child on the way to the Abortion clinic, THEY WOULD QUITE LIKELY BE PROSECUTED for LEGAL murder.

Thus the fatal flaw in the reasoning of the ROE decision; it's bad law because it sets aside bedrock principle and in every conceivable way conflicts with the legal principles on which legal murder is and has been considered and tried for centuries. Roe does not serve justice; it serves the twisted rationalization of FAIRNESS on which the ideological left stands.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Their {The Supreme Court of the United States} job is to uphold the constitution, well the supreme court does make law.

FALSE... Patently, utterly, fundamentally FALSE!

The Judiciary does NOT make law; the purpose of the judiciary is to try facts and determine if those facts reasonably lead to a sound conclusion that the law was violated; THE SCOTUS determines IF the law was violated and IF Law which was MADE BY THE LEGISLATURE; WHOSE JOB IT IS TO MAKE LAW... is valid with respect to the US Constitution.

Fellow board members, this post is yet another piece of evidence of the irrefutable FACT that leftists are not qualified to vote... They have absolutely NO UNDERSTANDING of what these United States are founded upon, how it's government works and the principles on which the entire system operates.


John McCain is in fact a fascist... and there is very little which can be sited in evidence that could possibly change the validity of that fact. I personally can't believe that the country has come to even discussing him as a candidate for President; BUT... with that said, McCain's Opponent is a MARXIST; and when the time comes that advocates of freedom are faced with a choice between a marxist and a fascist, there is no choice but to vote for the fascist.

At least the fascist has some sense of liberty... the proof of that resting in him NOT BEING A MARXIST.

The notion that McCain will appoint an American to the SCOTUS is absurd. McCain is as close to a centrist as is humanly possible; he is the very embodiment of a centrist... It is an absolute certainty that McCain will appoint moderate centrists to the court, who will as they always do, end up deciding for the vast majority of decisions they cast, with the left. Anyone who believes that McCain will do otherwise is a fool in the extreme... having witnessed McCain’s 26 years in the US Congress voting for leftwing policy, not the least of which is McCain/Feingold; absurd legislation which attacks the very principle on which the 1st amendment of the US Constitution rests... and pretending he is something OTHER than a populist Centrists.

The only distinction between a socialist and a fascists is that the fascist will tax industry to the extent that is humanly possible without killing it; using the taxes to fund their vote buying social programs. A socialist will do was Democrat US Rep. Maxine Waters has said she intends to do upon the election of Hussein Obama; to strip individuals of the ownership of their companies by legislative fiat and nationalize those industries, using their revenues to fund the social programs.


Both claim they're doing it all for "THE PEOPLE"... and BOTH are liars; they're doing it for their own power, to feather their own individual nests; they're BOTH to be avoided... but when one is placed where neither can be avoided...

It's just easier to clean up after the fascist...

 

[ABikerSailor]

Well, if you DON'T support abortion Navy, do you think it's fair for someone who wants to ban it to force it on everyone else?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, if you DON'T support abortion..., do you think it's fair for someone who wants to ban it to force it on everyone else?

What exactly is your question? The way its framed, you're asking if someone that doesn't belive in abortion should force abortion on someone else.

We'll assume you shot that off not intending it to be a syntactical train-wreck and are asking that if someone doesn't believe in murder, should they force their beliefs on others...

The first human right is the right to life and the right to pursue the fulfillment of that life; with that right comes to the responsibility to defend that right; and to defend it not only in themselves but in their neighbors (those around them) as well... thus the centuries old Western Jurisprudence wherein the act of taking the life of another human being without valid moral (thus legal, as if a law is not morally valid, it cannot possibly serve justice... which is why Roe is such a dispicable farce) justification is murder... valid moral justification is defined as defending against unjustified threat, where one reasonably believes that they're life or the life of another in their immediate presence is at risk... Beyond that there is no moral justification for taking a human life; and yes this would include the convenience of a woman who felt like getting laid, and in the process determined she'd risk pregnancy...

 

[WillowTree]

Don't eeeeeeeeeeven ask Barry, it's above his paygrade!

 

[Ravi]

Life begins when the kids move out and the dog dies. Least that's what my Daddy always says.

 

[Diuretic]

A fertilised human egg is a living thing. But it's at that point just a fertilised human egg. If and as it develops it will become other things and eventually it may become a fully birthed human being. A fertilised human egg isn't a human being.

 

[Isolde]

A fertilised human egg is a living thing. But it's at that point just a fertilised human egg. If and as it develops it will become other things and eventually it may become a fully birthed human being. A fertilised human egg isn't a human being.

I like the very scientifically founded idea that it must be born before it's human, that pretty much gives the abortionists carte blanche to kill them up to and including descent into the birth canal.

 

[Ravi]

I like the very scientifically founded idea that it must be born before it's human, that pretty much gives the abortionists carte blanche to kill them up to and including descent into the birth canal.

Nature is a bitch.

 

[Navy1960]

Well, if you DON'T support abortion Navy, do you think it's fair for someone who wants to ban it to force it on everyone else?

Nope I don't, I think I said that earlier too Sailor. what I have been saying though is that abortion should be something that is NOT paid for through tax dollars by those who do not support it is all. Further, I think too there is a happy medium someplace where abortion does not have to be unconditional, meaning, that it's an ALL types or nothing sort of thing. What I see is that the opposing forces in this are so steadfast in their opposition that it sometimes clouds rational thinking. For example, If a baby is born alive. then to not provide that baby with medical care is , plain and simple , just wrong. I fail to see the difference too in a child that is viable outside the mothers womb say on a Monday and able to be aborted on a Sunday. As I said, there has to be someplace here reasonable people can agree on. However, the decision to have an abortion , I believe within the boundries, that I believe are fair is something that is and always should be between a mother, her god and the father as well.

 

[PeterS]

The first human right is the right to life and the right to pursue the fulfillment of that life; with that right comes to the responsibility to defend that right; and to defend it not only in themselves but in their neighbors (those around them) as well... thus the centuries old Western Jurisprudence wherein the act of taking the life of another human being without valid moral (thus legal, as if a law is not morally valid, it cannot possibly serve justice... which is why Roe is such a dispicable farce) justification is murder... valid moral justification is defined as defending against unjustified threat, where one reasonably believes that they're life or the life of another in their immediate presence is at risk... Beyond that there is no moral justification for taking a human life; and yes this would include the convenience of a woman who felt like getting laid, and in the process determined she'd risk pregnancy...

First, having a right to life does not usurp other rights. Simply because I have a right to life does not mean I have a right to use your body against your will to make my viable. Second, what are the federal statutes concerning the killing of a child…lethal injection? Rule of Law has no meaning unless it is enforceable. Do you really think society would just stand by while you strapped little Suzie to a gurney and stuck needles in her arm? I don’t think so.

So even if you could piss all over the constitution it would seem society wouldn’t tolerate it. You have a dilemma don’t you….

 

[Silence]

nothing of importance really....just a bunch of hot air trying to sound intelligent

next time you decide to "school" someone perhaps it would be wise to read through the entire thread so you avoid making yourself look like a pompus asshole...

I was being sarcastic because someone said that the unfertilized egg and the sperm are ALIVE...

I'm sufficiently familiar with biology considering I'm a female who has been menstrating for over 25 years, I have a child and I'm experienced enough sexually to understand the principles of how sperm works.... thanks!

 

[PeterS]

next time you decide to "school" someone perhaps it would be wise to read through the entire thread so you avoid making yourself look like a pompus asshole...

I was being sarcastic because someone said that the unfertilized egg and the sperm are ALIVE...

I'm sufficiently familiar with biology considering I'm a female who has been menstrating for over 25 years, I have a child and I'm experienced enough sexually to understand the principles of how sperm works.... thanks!

Given that mockery and ridicule are central planks of the RNC it's ironic that conservatives wouldn't understand sarcasm isn't it.

 

[Silence]

Given that mockery and ridicule are central planks of the RNC it's ironic that conservatives wouldn't understand sarcasm isn't it.

apparently they only understand it when they deliver it... when it's from someone on the other side they assume it shows a lack of knowledge and understanding.