Zone1 Embryos and Personhood

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Embryos by natural right are not persons.

 

[ding]

I believe the rights of the person bearing that life supersedes the rights of the life in the womb. Since that is a person. The life in the womb isn't until it gets born.

Any other viewpoint brings stuff like this verdict.

You talk about competing interests?

Let me ask you. Are you comfortable with the idea of compelling woman or even teens and children to go through the mental, physical and financial consequences of pregnancy and bringing a life in this world?

If you are asking for my opinion on the matter of competing rights, as I work through it logically all parties' "concerns" can be resolved by making abortion a misdemeanor.

 

[ding]

Embryos by natural right are not persons.

Incorrect. Science says at conception a new genetically distinct human being has come into existence. It's the genetically distinct part that makes a human being a specific person.

 

[ding]

It's both. It's a fact, and an (in my view) intellectually dishonest argument.

I disagree. It is a fact that each state will decide for itself the legality of abortion.

 

[ding]

I said perceive after you argued they were synonyms.

That's you again, isn't it? Funny how we keep running into each other like this what with you denying things I can easily quote you as saying. It's almost like you quickly become ashamed of your own arguments.

States aren't autonomous entities are they? Aren't they simply vehicles for the will of voters and politicians?

You are playing silly word games and wasting my time.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Embryos and Personhood 240325 {post•116}

At conception a new person - as evidenced by their DNA - has come into existence.

Atheism; An Intellectual Dead End 240323 {post•113} ding Mar’24 Saaid:“Like human life begins at conception?” dvng 240323 Saaide00113

Women cannot be trusted with their own bodies (A) 230708 {post•1} lennypartiv Jul’24 SwcbtwA: “Once again women are complaining about laws (proposed or enacted) which make us a moral country.” lnnyprtv 230708 SwcbtwA00001

Gestation starts at conception and continues until birth. 25 to 50% are naturally aborted. What is harm to public under US Constitution? 231024 {post•58} ding Oct’23 Sgsaca: “Abortion should be a misdemeanor.” dvng 231024 Sgsaca00058

Embryos and Personhood 240325 {post•166} What does embryonic unique DNA have to do with your need to charge women with a misdemeanor Saint Ding when the get an abortion? How is it any of your business to shame anybody who gets pregnant and does not want to give birth?

nfbw 240325 Veapyz00166 to Seapyz00116

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Leave it to you to dismiss cause and effect.

Haha, you juts kind of craft an alternate reality, whenever it suits and soothes you.

Faithers are so skilled at deluding themselves.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Incorrect. Science says at conception a new genetically distinct human being has come into existence. It's the genetically distinct part that makes a human being a specific person.

ding, you are no expert, no scientist, no authority.

 

[ding]

ding, you are no expert, no scientist, no authority.

Which is why I relied on what was written in embryology textbooks.

It appears that you would like to treat human life in the womb as property. Is that correct?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Which is why I relied on what was written in embryology textbooks.

It appears that you would like to treat human life in the womb as property. Is that correct?

You rely on your supposed knowledge, which is not much, but go ahead. Correct?

 

[Coyote]

"After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...."

Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner, Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981

What gives it value or rights?

 

[ding]

You rely on your supposed knowledge, which is not much, but go ahead. Correct?

I'm relying on the authority of subject matter experts and common sense.

Why do you keep denying the humanity of life in the womb? For what purpose does that serve?

 

[ding]

What gives it value or rights?

The same natural rights all of us are granted; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Which is why I relied on what was written in embryology textbooks.

But the textbooks do not tell you that you need to shame pregnant women for Jesus when they decide not to give birth
to a new human being with unique DNA.

Is shaming people your hobby Saint Ding?

 

[ding]

But the textbooks do not tell you that you need to shame pregnant women for Jesus when they decide not to give birth
to a new human being with unique DNA.

Is shaming people your hobby Saint Ding?

Try to stay on point.

 

[Coyote]

The same natural rights all of us are granted; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Yet those rights you would give can only come at the expense of another’s.

 

[ding]

Yet those rights... ...can only come at the expense of another’s.

Which is why each state has to weigh the rights of the mother and the child.

 

[Coyote]

I believe natural rights only apply to those born.

Which is why each state has to weigh the rights of the mother and the child.

Why the State? What gives a POLITICAL entity that right over another? Seems off kilter. And, according to the state in this example, embryos in another’s body have these “rights” but embryos outside the body do not.

 

[ding]

I believe natural rights only apply to those born.


Why the State? What gives a POLITICSL entity that right over another? Seems off kilter. And, according to the state in this example, embryos in another’s body have these “rights” but embryos outside the body do not.

It's been said that if men were angels there would be no need for government. Alas men are not angels so we have the necessary evil of government. But to answer your question, that's the system that is in place. Did you have the same concern before Roe v Wade was overturned? Probably not.

As for your disagreement with some of their decisions, you have an avenue to address that; elect people that will change it.

 

[ding]

I believe natural rights only apply to those born.

That will be for each state to decide. All I know is that at conception a genetically distinct human being has come into existence. If you deny their humanness, you are effectively relegating them to property to be disposed of at the will of their owner.