I am an atheist.

[ding]

“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.”

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005

Sounds like a very specific person to me.

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

 

[ding]

Does murdering an unborn person "inhibit their ability to enjoy life freely"?

There's no such thing as an "unborn person" so your question is moot.

DNA says otherwise.

No, it doesn't. Being genetically human is not enough to dictate a person. A cancer cluster is genetically human. I'm relatively certain that anyone calling a cancer cluster a "person" would be laughed at for the absurdity.

Yes it is. 100%.

It is a very very specific person.

Well, you're certainly entitled your opinion, however ill-informed. Nice to know you think cancer is a person.

It's not an opinion. It's called science. DNA. Maybe you've heard of it before. Cops use it to identify persons.

 

[Czernobog]

“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.”

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005

Sounds like a very specific person to me.

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

 

[ding]

“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.”

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005

Sounds like a very specific person to me.

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

 

[Czernobog]

“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.”

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005

Sounds like a very specific person to me.

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

 

[ding]

“The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual’s unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated.”

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005

Sounds like a very specific person to me.

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

 

[K9Buck]

If there is no "God", then why is it "immoral" for one to murder their neighbor and steal their wealth?

It's because there is no God that it is immoral. Contrary to fairy tales, there is no "blissful hereafter", no heaven, no paradise where we all float off to. There is this life, and only this life. As such there is nothing that is more precious than life. The number of one's days is the rarest, therefore the most valuable, commodity that one has. How vile to steal that commodity from another!

It's "immoral" to kill another human being because there is no "God"? So if there WAS a "God", it wouldn't be immoral?

 

[Czernobog]

Lovely poetry. No less wrong.

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

Don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Czernobog]

If there is no "God", then why is it "immoral" for one to murder their neighbor and steal their wealth?

It's because there is no God that it is immoral. Contrary to fairy tales, there is no "blissful hereafter", no heaven, no paradise where we all float off to. There is this life, and only this life. As such there is nothing that is more precious than life. The number of one's days is the rarest, therefore the most valuable, commodity that one has. How vile to steal that commodity from another!

It's "immoral" to kill another human being because there is no "God"? So if there WAS a "God", it wouldn't be immoral?

Why would it be? All you would be doing is sending a person to their paradise. One would think that would be a favour.

 

[K9Buck]

If there is no God then it is NOT immoral for one man to kill his neighbor in order to steal his food, wealth and women in order to advance his genetics and his prodigy, just like in the animal world. Or is it "immoral" when one male lion kills another male lion in order to take over a pride?

 

[ding]

No poetry. Science. Although life is very poetic.

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

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

Don't know what you're talking about.

All the steps you just passed over to reach an irrational and emotional conclusion.

 

[K9Buck]

If there is no "God", then why is it "immoral" for one to murder their neighbor and steal their wealth?

It's because there is no God that it is immoral. Contrary to fairy tales, there is no "blissful hereafter", no heaven, no paradise where we all float off to. There is this life, and only this life. As such there is nothing that is more precious than life. The number of one's days is the rarest, therefore the most valuable, commodity that one has. How vile to steal that commodity from another!

It's "immoral" to kill another human being because there is no "God"? So if there WAS a "God", it wouldn't be immoral?

Why would it be? All you would be doing is sending a person to their paradise. One would think that would be a favour.

Except that your concept is not preached nor practiced anywhere in Christendom.

 

[Czernobog]

If there is no God then it is NOT immoral for one man to kill his neighbor in order to steal his food, wealth and women in order to advance his genetics and his prodigy, just like in the animal world. Or is it "immoral" when one male lion kills another male lion in order to take over a pride?

 

[Czernobog]

No one is denying that a no-viable fetus is alive, or genetically human. But is it an individual? If so, then remove it from the womb of the unwilling woman, and let it grow on its own. The state can nourish it, and it can live, or die, without the participation of the unwilling woman.

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

Don't know what you're talking about.

All the steps you just passed over to reach an irrational and emotional conclusion.

What steps?

 

[ding]

Viability has nothing to do with it. It is specific human. It is alive. It has rights.

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

Don't know what you're talking about.

All the steps you just passed over to reach an irrational and emotional conclusion.

What steps?

Exactly. You can't even think of what they could possibly be or the reasoning behind them.

 

[Czernobog]

If there is no "God", then why is it "immoral" for one to murder their neighbor and steal their wealth?

It's because there is no God that it is immoral. Contrary to fairy tales, there is no "blissful hereafter", no heaven, no paradise where we all float off to. There is this life, and only this life. As such there is nothing that is more precious than life. The number of one's days is the rarest, therefore the most valuable, commodity that one has. How vile to steal that commodity from another!

It's "immoral" to kill another human being because there is no "God"? So if there WAS a "God", it wouldn't be immoral?

Why would it be? All you would be doing is sending a person to their paradise. One would think that would be a favour.

Except that your concept is not preached nor practiced anywhere in Christendom.

When you die, you don't go to heaven? Then why spend all that time genuflecting to Jesus?

 

[Czernobog]

Fine. Then you're right. Let's stop doing abortion. If a woman doesn't want to be pregnant, just remove the fetus. Then, if, with medical care it lives, it lives. If it dies, it dies. Problem solved.

You can't seem to stop skipping steps can you?

Don't know what you're talking about.

All the steps you just passed over to reach an irrational and emotional conclusion.

What steps?

Exactly. You can't even think of what they could possibly be or the reasoning behind them.

Actually, I'm proving a point. You won't say what "steps", because you don't dare. It would destroy your argument.

 

[K9Buck]

When you die, you don't go to heaven? Then why spend all that time genuflecting to Jesus?

There is a reason we have our lives and it is immoral for us to murder one another. Murdering another is a horrific sin and is done for selfish, evil reasons.

 

[K9Buck]

If there is no God then it is NOT immoral for one man to kill his neighbor in order to steal his food, wealth and women in order to advance his genetics and his prodigy, just like in the animal world. Or is it "immoral" when one male lion kills another male lion in order to take over a pride?

 

[Czernobog]

When you die, you don't go to heaven? Then why spend all that time genuflecting to Jesus?

There is a reason we have our lives and it is immoral for us to murder one another. Murdering another is a horrific sin and is done for selfish, evil reasons.

That wasn't what I asked. Lets' try this again. When you die, you do not expect to go to Heaven? Then why spend all your life genuflecting to Jesus?