Abortion

[Chuz Life]

A Scientific View of When Life Begins | Charlotte Lozier Institute

"...The conclusion that human life begins at sperm-egg fusion is uncontested, objective, based on the universally accepted scientific method of distinguishing different cell types from each other and on ample scientific evidence (thousands of independent, peer-reviewed publications)..."

Not a real science site, just a bunch of religious nuts.

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Embryo...atten/dp/0070131503&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

So you’re saying that that’s when the soul is in the body?

Can you prove that souls exist?

Look up reincarnation.

I have.

No proof of souls there, either.

If You claim that souls exist.

Prove it.

 

[Taz]

We can’t know those things yet.

You mean like reincarnation?

Yes. I think it’s a leading candidate, but not irrefutable proof yet.

Exactly. You have no proof.

Not no proof, just not enough.

None, zero, nada, zilch.

Present your evidence.

Look it up. You’ll just reject it anyways like you did with the NASA Link.

 

[Taz]

Not a real science site, just a bunch of religious nuts.

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Embryo...atten/dp/0070131503&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

So you’re saying that that’s when the soul is in the body?

Can you prove that souls exist?

Look up reincarnation.

I have.

No proof of souls there, either.

If You claim that souls exist.

Prove it.

Ok you win, you have no soul.

 

[ding]

What is not a hard concept is when human life begins.

Which is when according to you?

At conception. And it isn’t according to me. It is according to DNA.

Out-of-the-pulpit-and-into-the-womb zealots appear hypocritical from my perspective. Most folks do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood has developed, and few believe in the extremist "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State and/or religious zealots to impose their personal impression upon others is antithetical to what most Americans agree on.

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

The Developing Human - 10th Edition

Dr Keith Moore confirms embryology in Quran

What is not a hard concept is when human life begins.

Which is when according to you?

At conception. And it isn’t according to me. It is according to DNA.

Out-of-the-pulpit-and-into-the-womb zealots appear hypocritical from my perspective. Most folks do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood has developed, and few believe in the extremist "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State and/or religious zealots to impose their personal impression upon others is antithetical to what most Americans agree on.

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

The Developing Human - 10th Edition

Dr Keith Moore confirms embryology in Quran

RE: Abortion
⁜→ Taz, et al,

OH, is that true?

At conception. And it isn’t according to me. It is according to DNA.

(QUESTIONs)

Is DNA a lifeform?
Is a living, replicating cell from my hand a lifeform?
In my father's casket, there is DNA. Does that mean I buried him alive?

(COMMENT)

You use your definition of a "human" to suit your personal belief. But in reality, we do not know when our form becomes endowed with the lifeforce; when it becomes a "human being."

(EXPANDED THOUGHT)

When a human is born with a genetic defect (a genetic disorder caused by abnormality formed in the genome), is it a true - "genetically distinct human being" - or is it some alternative, a mutated lifeform?

View attachment 238629
​

Which one of these is genetically distinct from the others. Are all of these human? Are some of these human? Are any of these not human? Which one would be OK to kill?

Most Respectfully,
R

The DNA confirms it is a new genetically distinct human being.

My definition of HUMAN LIFE is not an arbitrary. Furthermore, it is not just any human life. It is a very specific human life. One that had never existed before and will never exist again. Therefore, it is a specific person in it's earliest stage of the human development cycle and has all of the appropriate attributes that it should for that stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death.

This is uncomfortable for you because you need to dehumanize its humanity.

 

[Hollie]

Out-of-the-pulpit-and-into-the-womb zealots appear hypocritical from my perspective. Most folks do not support State womb control before that stage of gestation where personhood has developed, and few believe in the extremist "instant baby" notion where conception produces a person instantaneously.

People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of the State and/or religious zealots to impose their personal impression upon others is antithetical to what most Americans agree on.

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

Yes, that is his opinion.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the prerogatives of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Development-Span-George-Kaluger/dp/0801626110&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

 

[Chuz Life]

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Embryo...atten/dp/0070131503&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

So you’re saying that that’s when the soul is in the body?

Can you prove that souls exist?

Look up reincarnation.

I have.

No proof of souls there, either.

If You claim that souls exist.

Prove it.

Ok you win, you have no soul.

I win on more than that.

So does Ding.

 

[ding]

You mean like reincarnation?

Yes. I think it’s a leading candidate, but not irrefutable proof yet.

Exactly. You have no proof.

Not no proof, just not enough.

None, zero, nada, zilch.

Present your evidence.

Look it up. You’ll just reject it anyways like you did with the NASA Link.

I didn't reject the NASA link. I explained that our present temperature is within the normal range for an interglacial cycle.

 

[Taz]

So you’re saying that that’s when the soul is in the body?

Can you prove that souls exist?

Look up reincarnation.

I have.

No proof of souls there, either.

If You claim that souls exist.

Prove it.

Ok you win, you have no soul.

I win on more than that.

So does Ding.

So you’re saying that there’s no such thing as a soul?

 

[playtime]

pro choice is not pro abortion.

Yes it is.

Look it up.

It's even in Webster's

pro choice means to have or not have an abortion.

pro abortion means that is the only choice.

 

[Chuz Life]

pro choice is not pro abortion.

Yes it is.

Look it up.

It's even in Webster's

pro choice means to have or not have an abortion.

pro abortion means that is the only choice.

Don't whine about it to me.

Tell Webster's

 

[ding]

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).”

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

Yes, that is his opinion.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the prerogatives of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Development-Span-George-Kaluger/dp/0801626110&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

 

[Taz]

Yes. I think it’s a leading candidate, but not irrefutable proof yet.

Exactly. You have no proof.

Not no proof, just not enough.

None, zero, nada, zilch.

Present your evidence.

Look it up. You’ll just reject it anyways like you did with the NASA Link.

I didn't reject the NASA link. I explained that our present temperature is within the normal range for an interglacial cycle.

Don’t start!

 

[ding]

RE: Abortion
⁜→ Taz, et al,

OH, is that true?

At conception. And it isn’t according to me. It is according to DNA.

(QUESTIONs)

Is DNA a lifeform?
Is a living, replicating cell from my hand a lifeform?
In my father's casket, there is DNA. Does that mean I buried him alive?

(COMMENT)

You use your definition of a "human" to suit your personal belief. But in reality, we do not know when our form becomes endowed with the lifeforce; when it becomes a "human being."

(EXPANDED THOUGHT)

When a human is born with a genetic defect (a genetic disorder caused by abnormality formed in the genome), is it a true - "genetically distinct human being" - or is it some alternative, a mutated lifeform?

View attachment 238629
​

Which one of these is genetically distinct from the others. Are all of these human? Are some of these human? Are any of these not human? Which one would be OK to kill?

Most Respectfully,
R

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

Human Life and Health Care Ethics - Vol. 2, 1985 | Online Research Library: Questia

 

[Chuz Life]

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Development-Span-George-Kaluger/dp/0801626110&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

I simply reject your koranic experts.

Embryology in the Quran - Professor Keith Moore

Is ignorance truly as blissful as they say it is?

 

[playtime]

pro choice is not pro abortion.

Yes it is.

Look it up.

It's even in Webster's

pro choice means to have or not have an abortion.

pro abortion means that is the only choice.

Don't whine about it to me.

Tell Webster's

the word 'ain't' is also in webster's.

 

[Taz]

Yes, that is his opinion.

Your extremist view and your desire to impose it upon others via state coercion is not the moral position of most Americans. If and when a fetus achieves a stage of development where it is sentient and viable, it is recognized as a person and entitled to legal protection. Before that stage, a person does not yet exist. and the State must respect the prerogatives of the individual upon whom the developing entity is dependent.

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Development-Span-George-Kaluger/dp/0801626110&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

If it’s fully human at conception, why don’t we have consciousness in the womb. It would appear not fully human.

 

[Hollie]

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

I simply reject your koranic experts.

Embryology in the Quran - Professor Keith Moore

Is ignorance truly as blissful as they say it is?

You're trying to persuade others?

 

[Chuz Life]

pro choice is not pro abortion.

Yes it is.

Look it up.

It's even in Webster's

pro choice means to have or not have an abortion.

pro abortion means that is the only choice.

Don't whine about it to me.

Tell Webster's

the word 'ain't' is also in webster's.

Interesting.

Ain't it.

 

[Taz]

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

I simply reject your koranic experts.

Embryology in the Quran - Professor Keith Moore

Is ignorance truly as blissful as they say it is?

You seem pretty happy.

 

[ding]

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974.

https://www.amazon.com/Human-Development-Span-George-Kaluger/dp/0801626110&tag=ff0d01-20?tag=usmb-20

Yes, you can cut and paste links to material you don't understand. However, that does nothing to support your extremist views.

My "extremist" view is that at conception a new genetically distinct human being has been created. One that has never existed before and will never exist again. Science confirms this because DNA confirms this.

Another of your "... because I say so" commandments. Your koranic wisdom on embryology promoted by Keith Moore is a farce.

Roe v. Wade is a consistent position regarding abortion held by most Americans. Most folks consider it essentially a private matter that should be protected from governmental intrusion to the extent that is reasonable. Roe vs. Wade has achieved that reasonability.

On the other hand, fundamentalist extremists like Osama bin bing would abrogate a woman's right to control her own womb.There are clearly controls in place to throttle you.

No. It is not my say so. Every embryology textbook states that human life begins at conception. Conception is the beginning of the human life cycle and death is the end of the human life cycle. At any point along the continuum it is fully human.

You need to dehumanize human life to rationalize it is moral to end human life.

I simply reject your koranic experts.

Embryology in the Quran - Professor Keith Moore

“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

THE REGION: IN SUMMARY; Experts Clash at Abortion Hearings