Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Black women are more likely to die during childbirth than white women. So you hate black women after they’ve been born is that it?But if you hate Blacks,,,this is the most effective weapon in history
THen you are either a stupid jerk who has not SEEN what it isNo fetus is a child.
Just the opposite, the great dignity of it means you can't just treat it like a chemistry experimentIt seems now that Alabama is against people having kids.
Nonsense - Christian belief reflects onto a life beginning upon conception. Thus Christian hardliners even objecting towards contraception means.You are in the Saving Baby Fetus Cult which has pure right wing Catholic origins. The cult it Christian.
Thomas Aquinas back on the day did not believe such a thing.Christian belief reflects onto a life beginning upon conception.
It is the scientific community that has established the FACT - that life kicks in from week 8-12.
Christian belief reflects onto a life beginning upon conception.
Unkess you were found to be taking the step to prevent one’s own demise.And ending a life forcefully is defined by law as MURDER.
It doesn't move the debate one speck.Most on here are ignorant of Civics and American History not to mention LAWThe recent ruling by an Alabama judge has ignited a firestorm in both sides of the reproductive rights community: frozen embryos have full legal personhood rights. This has split Republican lawmakers who are, on the one hand applauding the decision while simultaneously scrambling to enact legislation to carve out a niche for IVF by redefining when an embryo is considered a person.
Florida proposed an amendment to a legislative bill being considered:Republican lawmakers in Florida had proposed an amendment to the bill, the same week as the Alabama ruling, to define “unborn child” as a human “at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.” The change would likely protect IVF patients and doctors, but it remains uncertain whether it would be in any final version the full Legislature were to vote on.
That raises questions too.
The issue of abortion is one of competing rights: weighing a woman’s right to bodily autonomy against a fetus’ right to life. But with frozen embryos, there are no competing rights.
So what exactly does this mean?
- With abortion does ”full personhood” mean that unless a woman is at death’s door, she cannot act to save her life?
- Does it mean every miscarriage is a potential crime scene?
- Will embryos be claimed as dependents on taxes? Will they get child support?
- Will they even be US citizens? Isn’t birth/born a stipulation there?
With frozen embryos it is even more tricky:
How can you ethically have a “carve out” for IVF embryos but not implanted embryos?
- How can an embryo, implanted in a uterus be given “personhood” rights while an identical embryo, that is frozen, not be?
- Will fathers of frozen embryos be liable for child support for each one?
- If they must remain stored into perpetuity…who pays?
- Can you claim them as dependents?
- If something happens that accidently destroys hundreds of stored embryos…should the person responsible face hundreds of counts of homicide charges?
Note: I put this in CDZ to hopefully have a real discussion as this latest ruling moves the debate beyond abortion.
I must respond to this lie about what is common knowledge in the scientific communitySo which is the one true fact?
a human’s life begins at fertilization,
I must respond
Link?It doesn't move the debate one speck.Most on here are ignorant of Civics and American History not to mention LAW
"When the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, the states widely recognized unborn children as persons. Twenty-three states and six territories referred to the fetus as a “child” in their laws prohibiting abortion. Twenty-eight classified abortion as an “offense against the person,” or a functionally equivalent classification. These statutes were enacted in recognition of unborn human beings’ full and equal membership in the human family. In Ohio, the same legislature that ratified the Fourteenth Amendment in January 1867 passed legislation criminalizing abortion at all stages just three months later. Several senators who voted for the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification sat on the committee that reviewed the anti-abortion bill. They acknowledged in their report that “physicians have now arrived at the unanimous opinion that the foetus in utero is alive from the very moment of conception,” and declared on that basis that abortion “at any stage of existence” is “child-murder.” In light of the historical evidence, there can be little doubt that the original public meaning of the term “person” in 1868 included unborn children."
What anti-choicers fail to understand is it isn’t a question of “human life” but of clashing rights and when those rights should begin…particularly when they take away from the rights of another.I must respond to this lie about what is common knowledge in the scientific community
Someone did a PhD on "what is the scientific evidene for the beginning of human life according to LIFE SCIENTISTS"
A U Chicago Ph.D. student, Steven Andrew Jacobs, did a dissertation on the topic of abortion that involved asking biology professors about “when life begins.”The results of Jacobs’ work would eventually reveal a stunning fact about American academia in the field of biology: professors overwhelmingly agree with the pro-life position that human lives begin at conception.
The research by Steve Jacobs, PhD, found that 5,337 biologists (96%) who responded to a questionnaire affirmed that a human’s life begins at fertilization, with 240 (4%) rejecting that view. The majority of the sample identified as liberal (89%), pro-choice (85%) and non-religious (63%). In the case of Americans who expressed party preference, the majority identified as Democrats (92%).
Now the huge question I've pondered over the years when the inevitable pro-abortion reply comes in about it isn't human life: HAVE YOU EVER EXAMINED YOURSELF TO FIND OUT WHAT MOTIVATES YOU TO WANT THAT???
What are your thoughts on IVF?your excuses for abortion will never wipe the blood of children off your hands,,
and this personhood crap is the same thing you dems say about black people to justify slavery and other ways you use blacks,,
why are you changing the subject??What are your thoughts on IVF?
It is part of the OP.why are you changing the subject??
Are all your fingers in a cast?Link?
It is your job to provide link to your cut and paste, it is in the rules. Don’t plagiarize.Are all your fingers in a cast?
Harvard Law Review. you can find it. Joshua Craddock
Plagiarize would be to NOT use quote marks. I don't quotel myself, do you !!!!It is your job to provide link to your cut and paste, it is in the rules. Don’t plagiarize.
So does that mean that in 1868 women did not have legal rights to their bodies?It doesn't move the debate one speck.Most on here are ignorant of Civics and American History not to mention LAW
"When the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, the states widely recognized unborn children as persons. Twenty-three states and six territories referred to the fetus as a “child” in their laws prohibiting abortion. Twenty-eight classified abortion as an “offense against the person,” or a functionally equivalent classification. These statutes were enacted in recognition of unborn human beings’ full and equal membership in the human family. In Ohio, the same legislature that ratified the Fourteenth Amendment in January 1867 passed legislation criminalizing abortion at all stages just three months later. Several senators who voted for the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification sat on the committee that reviewed the anti-abortion bill. They acknowledged in their report that “physicians have now arrived at the unanimous opinion that the foetus in utero is alive from the very moment of conception,” and declared on that basis that abortion “at any stage of existence” is “child-murder.” In light of the historical evidence, there can be little doubt that the original public meaning of the term “person” in 1868 included unborn children."
