When does life begin?

[Valerie]

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

For what it's worth, I realized you were being sarcastic.

 

[PeterS]

FALSE... Patently, utterly, fundamentally FALSE!

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.

I always thought that the constitution was founded on the principle that it is the individual who is their own sovereign and yet you seem to be saying that a woman has no right to be sovereign over her own body. Goody, goody, now can I take away your right to vote!

 

[Vintij]

I have a better idea, instead of debating when life begins we can quit playing grab ass with eachothers morality and focus on real issues. Let me make things very simple for you people. Here is what you conservatives can teach your children on morality....Follow the effing rules of the federal government, dont act stupid and you should be fine. See acting stupid is playing semantics, trying to find out when life begins....what are we gonna do interview a fetus? Nobody knows exactly when consciousness and cognitive activities begin. Why make legislation based on a hunch or a gut feeling? That is what got us into this mess. Nobody knows what happens after you die or who sees you when your jacking off to your neighbors myspace pictures. So why impose idealistic belief systems on other people by supporting legislation that is boarder line treason?! For christ sake they still want to teach children creationism in school? I thought we were passed this? Did we not pile up mountains of evidence disproving creationism? So why waste time with that? Might as well teach serious classes on the tooth fairy while we are at it. What are my kids going to major in, fucking wizardry?!?!?! Eff that shit our system is screwed up enough.

Why waste time (and money) with the debate over when "life" begins either. If life was so precious, 70% of this country would not have supported the invasion of Iraq in the first place.

I bet you right now china wishes they had a mandatory abortion law. You see every country is different, every person is different. We like to force women to have kids, other overpopulated countrys like to stop them from doing that. Does it make a difference at all to you personally? I mean, for the women....do you really really wish someone would force you to have a child? Is it a fetish or something? Do some women take pleasure in medeling in other womens lives by making sure a stranger has a baby? Does it effect their lives in any way? Does it get social conservatives off or something? I dont see how any women can actually be anti-choice. It really boggles the mind. But I am not a women so I guess I will never know.

I would rather be aborted a thousand times than get dropped into a fucked up life and a fucked up situation.

 

[PeterS]

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.

God, I even find irony there. I think the biggest problem is that they think ridicule and sarcasm is a form of logical argument. That's why when Ann Coulter in a brown wig and funky glasses stood before them to accept the VP nomination all while mocking and ridiculing half the population of this country they cheered so loudly saying, 'right on!'

 

[Silence]

Vintij

they also wouldn't support the death penalty (while opposing abortion) because taking one life doesn't bring the lost one back...it's "murder" for vengence sake...

who jacks off to a neighbors myspace pics? dillo?

 

[PeterS]

I have a better idea, instead of debating when life begins we can quit playing grab ass with eachothers morality and focus on real issues. Let me make things very simple for you people. Here is what you conservatives can teach your children on morality....Follow the effing rules of the federal government, dont act stupid and you should be fine. See acting stupid is playing semantics, trying to find out when life begins....what are we gonna do interview a fetus? Nobody knows exactly when consciousness and cognitive activities begin. Why make legislation based on a hunch or a gut feeling? That is what got us into this mess. Nobody knows what happens after you die or who sees you when your jacking off to your neighbors myspace pictures. So why impose idealistic belief systems on other people by supporting legislation that is boarder line treason?! For christ sake they still want to teach children creationism in school? I thought we were passed this? Did we not pile up mountains of evidence disproving creationism? So why waste time with that? Might as well teach serious classes on the tooth fairy while we are at it. What are my kids going to major in, fucking wizardry?!?!?! Eff that shit our system is screwed up enough.

Why waste time with the debate over when "life" begins either. If life was so precious, 70% of this country would not have supported the invasion of Iraq in the first place.

Snipped from post number 5:

"The initial beginning isn't important anymore than the final ending so why fixate on the question..."

So, I agree...

 

[Mad Scientist]

I would like everyone's opinion on when they think a human life begins and why they hold that position.

Anybody who has bought a pack of condoms knows exactly when life begins.

Conception.

That's why birth control is called "Contraception" right? It aint' called "Contrabirth", am I right? Huh? Yeah, gotcha' there didn't I? You know it!

 

[Isolde]

Of course you (liberal leftist you) can't admit the child at any stage is human unless the mother chooses life for the child. If you pinpointed the time at which a child had basic human rights, that might mean one less abortion to be performed. Ok, I got it, now we understand each other.

See, I am a reasonable person. I understand that Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, but there should be regulations and restrictions on this right due to the fact that you are snuffing out a basic right of another. Let's at least be honest about that fact.

 

[PeterS]

Of course you (liberal leftist you) can't admit the child at any stage is human

My children were and still are human and yet my wife, were it her choice, would have been within her rights to an abortion. Do you have a point?

 

[Isolde]

My children were and still are human and yet my wife, were it her choice, would have been within her rights to an abortion. Do you have a point?

That's exactly my point, thank you.

 

[PeterS]

That's exactly my point, thank you.

Well you are welcome but your point still escapes me. You act as if simply containing the DNA of a human constitutes something. Why?

 

[Isolde]

Well you are welcome but your point still escapes me. You act as if simply containing the DNA of a human constitutes something. Why?

Because.... you ask a pro-abort when an unborn child should have a basic right to life and you get as many different answers as you have pro-aborts.

That's not truth, that is opinion or as you call it "choice". My point is that at some point an unborn child's life should trump the choice of the mother.

Do you have a problem with elective third trimester abortions in which a fetus is dragged out of the womb by the legs, delivered to the head, only to have his/her brains sucked out?

If you do have an issue with that, then we have common ground. If not, then let's just agree to disagree and part ways.

 

[Ravi]

My point is that at some point an unborn child's life should trump the choice of the mother.

Unborn is unborn, but why do you feel that an unborn child's life trumps an actual living being, and why do you get to decide?

 

[Isolde]

Unborn is unborn, but why do you feel that an unborn child's life trumps an actual living being, and why do you get to decide?

Because we are a moral society.

 

[Ravi]

Because we are a moral society.

That's a cop out, as I'm sure you know. Way to chicken out and avoid explaining your reasoning.

 

[PeterS]

Because.... you ask a pro-abort when an unborn child should have a basic right to life and you get as many different answers as you have pro-aborts.

That's not truth, that is opinion or as you call it "choice". My point is that at some point an unborn child's life should trump the choice of the mother.

The answer is viability and always has been. You are the one trying to move the line to the instant sperm meets egg. Why though? Here is a question: there are about 400,000 little ‘snowflake’ embryos left unwanted in fertilization clinics. Do they have a right to life? If so does that mean that government can mandate they be implanted in the first receptive uterus they come across? No? So how can they have a right to life?

Stop moving the line and maybe you’ll be less confused by what the left means…

 

[Isolde]

That's a cop out, as I'm sure you know. Way to chicken out and avoid explaining your reasoning.

That's not a cop out, read my posts. My premise is and always has been that the unborn child is both living and human and therefore has a basic right to life. That said, I will always support abortion if mother's life is in danger.

In every case the right to life should trump any lesser right. It's the old yelling fire in a crowded theatre analogy. Moral clarity gives me that ability to balance rights.... later.

 

[SFC_TMC915]

At about 25 or 30.

You got that right!!!!!!!

 

[Isolde]

The answer is viability and always has been. You are the one trying to move the line to the instant sperm meets egg. Why though? Here is a question: there are about 400,000 little ‘snowflake’ embryos left unwanted in fertilization clinics. Do they have a right to life? If so does that mean that government can mandate they be implanted in the first receptive uterus they come across? No? So how can they have a right to life?

Stop moving the line and maybe you’ll be less confused by what the left means…

I have not moved the line one bit and have shown a willingness to compromise. All I want to know from your side is at what point will you afford an unborn child basic human rights?

 

[Ravi]

That's not a cop out, read my posts. My premise is and always has been that the unborn child is both living and human and therefore has a basic right to life. That said, I will always support abortion if mother's life is in danger.

In every case the right to life should trump any lesser right. It's the old yelling fire in a crowded theatre analogy. Moral clarity gives me that ability to balance rights.... later.

I haven't read your posts. I can play the game, also, and say we live in a moral society. What society doesn't have morals? You made the statement that an unborn has more rights than a living human. I've got news for you, in our society, that's simply not true and never has been. So, in our society, the moral choice is to value a living human's rights above a hypothetical human.

So, again, I ask you. Why do you value a unborn over a living human and what gives you the right to decide?