Magical times where Pro-Life and Anti-abortion efforts intersect

[Ame®icano]

Since abortions are on pause due to COVID-19, if we take look at number of abortions performed in US per day, some ~1700, COVID-19 is actually saving lives.

 

[satrebil]

snuffing out a life before it has a chance to prove itself

Prove itself what? Alive? I think you look at the potential of that fertilized egg, not what it actually is. If you held one in your hand you would not be able to distinguish a human egg from a mouse egg. In fact it would have to develop for quite awhile before you could tell without decoding its DNA.

Now the validity of a human life should be based upon what it LOOKS like? Are we back to the shortsighted qualifications again?

 

[alang1216]

Now the validity of a human life should be based upon what it LOOKS like? Are we back to the shortsighted qualifications again?

So you prefer to base it on what you can't see for yourself?

 

[satrebil]

Now the validity of a human life should be based upon what it LOOKS like? Are we back to the shortsighted qualifications again?

So you prefer to base it on what you can't see for yourself?

WTF are you talking about? What exactly can't I see?

 

[Chuz Life]

I think you and I have been around this merry-go-round of 'human' vs 'person' so I see no reason to buy another ticket on that ride.

LOL.

But then you do exactly that.

You seem to feel the answer is simple, I don't agree.

I'm curious.

Do you even know what the reasons are?

You never address them.

If I take one of my cells out of my body and put it into a petri dish and keep it alive is that cell now a human being?

No.

Do you know why?

Here is a hint. It is the difference between a cell that is an "organism" (like an amoeba) and a cell that is of or FROM an organism. If you paid more attention in middle school biology class, you would already know that.

If I introduce chemicals that cause that cell to begin dividing, are those cells now a human being?

Possibly.

If you chemically achieve what takes place in an actual fertilization and conception. . . you might chemically force it or trick it into behaving like an organism. But, even if you do, you just proved what we already KNOW about how children's lives are normally and naturally being originated all the time.

Again, biology 101.

If I transplant those cells into a woman's uterus, is that now a human being?

See above.

Also see our nations many "fetal homicide" laws and their definitions.

If those cells develop and the woman gives birth to a fully functioning 'baby' is that now a human being?

See above. Derp.

I believe all these steps are possible and have been done for cloned animals.

And you still don't see how that only reinforces the fact that a child's life begins at and by conception.

The exception that YOU just gave (cloning) actually "proves the rule."

 

[Chuz Life]

That said, there is a rational argument for the right to kill fertilized human eggs.

The Constitution says that "all persons" (all natural human beings) are entitled to the "equal protections of our laws."

Agree?

That is a pretty damn inclusive statement.

Agree?

That would seemingly include "all persons" of any age, stage of development, level of development, any race, sex, creed or color, etc.

That would include any persons (natural human beings) who are in a coma, or facing a life of pain and misery.

Agree?

So, please share what it is that you think is a "rational argument" for the killing of and the denial of "ANY person" in "any" stage of their life.

I'm asking sincerely. This is your chance to change my view on the above.

 

[alang1216]

Now the validity of a human life should be based upon what it LOOKS like? Are we back to the shortsighted qualifications again?

So you prefer to base it on what you can't see for yourself?

WTF are you talking about? What exactly can't I see?

If you held a fertilized egg in your hand you'd be hard-pressed to say if it was human or not.

 

[alang1216]

I think you and I have been around this merry-go-round of 'human' vs 'person' so I see no reason to buy another ticket on that ride.

LOL.

But then you do exactly that.

You're right, I'm weak. We'll never agree since you see a fertilized egg as part of a larger continuous chain of human life whereas I see it as a discrete entity. To me, it is what it is, it is not a person any more than a cloneable skin cell is a person. Given the right environment and conditions they both have the potential to become a person. Potential. We differ in our values, not in the science. I weigh the rights of that fertilized egg against the rights of an adult woman and I side with the woman, those are my values. You side with the rights of that egg. Your values are neither right nor wrong, just as mine are neither right nor wrong, only different. There is no scientific answer to a difference in values.

 

[Nia88]

Ummm..."Pro-Life" and "Anti-abortion" are the same thing.

Close. But not the same. Terri Schiavo ring a bell?

Its true that the pro-abortion crowd also wanted Terri to be killed, but there is a distinction.

"Pro-life" has always meant anti-abortion. If someone says they are "pro-life", you know it means they are against abortion.

Agreed 100 %. Pro life folks are never pro life. Otherwise they would support universal Healthcare and free. They are anti abortion and women's rights.

"Otherwise they would support universal Healthcare and free."

You don't have the right to someone else's labor, dingus.

And you don't have a right to tell me what to do with my body. But here we are.

You can't claim to be pro life, but support laws that insure every baby born has a decent life.

It is not the governments responsibility to ensure that "every baby has a decent life". That is YOUR responsibility as a parent. Grow the fuck up.

And your bodily autonomy argument is a failed argument. Government has always regulated your body. Want proof? Go try and sell a kidney. Come back and let us know how that works out for you.

It's also not the goverments business to tell me what to do with my body.

If the government wants to police a woman's reproductive options then they should be willing to pay for the consequences of limiting a woman's options..

 

[Aletheia4u]

 

[jasonnfree]

Carlin on these 'pro life' republicans. Obsess over the unborn and only the unborn without exception, but no mercy in kicking the least of us off any programs with viciousness and delight.

 

[satrebil]

It's also not the goverments business to tell me what to do with my body.

So why can't you sell a kidney?

If the government wants to police a woman's reproductive options then they should be willing to pay for the consequences of limiting a woman's options..

Why is everyone else responsible for YOUR choices? Babies are 100% avoidable - don't have sex. Mind blowing, I know. Personal responsibility is kryptonite to lefty loons like you.

 

[satrebil]

Now the validity of a human life should be based upon what it LOOKS like? Are we back to the shortsighted qualifications again?

So you prefer to base it on what you can't see for yourself?

WTF are you talking about? What exactly can't I see?

If you held a fertilized egg in your hand you'd be hard-pressed to say if it was human or not.

So what? What the fuck does this have to do with anything?

 

[Chuz Life]

It is pretty fucking sad that leftards can't or won't see Carlin's comedy skit for the sarcasm that it is. You leftist tards invest more in his twisted play on words for comic entertainment than you do on any lind of a real OBJECTIVE understanding of the facts that would help you see where he is wrong.

In the end, you make him even less funny and yourselves more pathetic than you already were.

 

[Chuz Life]

It is pretty fucking sad that leftards can't or won't see Carlin's comedy skit for the sarcasm that it is. You leftist tards invest more in his twisted play on words for comic entertainment than you do on any Kind of a real OBJECTIVE understanding of the facts that would help you see where he is wrong.

In the end, you make him even less funny and yourselves more pathetic than you already were.

Corrections.

That was a reply to "JasonFree" not to Alang

 

[whitehall]

It's kind of strange but they swab the arms of condemned prisoners with alcohol just before they insert the needle. I wonder why masks and gloves are actually necessary in the execution of an unborn baby.

 

[Chuz Life]

You're right, I'm weak. We'll never agree since you see a fertilized egg as part of a larger continuous chain of human life whereas I see it as a discrete entity.

Dafuq?

How is it that you see my recognition of the biological fact that a "child's life begins at conception" as anything other than a recognition of the fact that the "child" is a "distinct entity?"

To me, it is what it is, it is not a person any more than a cloneable skin cell is a person.

To
You. . .

I will continue to show how YOU are wrong in your denials.

Given the right environment and conditions they both have the potential to become a person. Potential.

And here, you are wrong again.

It is a biological fact that an un-united human sperm and egg only have a "potential" to unite and form a new human organism and thus "begin" that new "distinct entity's" life. The same goes for any cell that has the "potential" to be manipulated in a process like cloning.

You are quite obviously incapable of recognizing the difference between the mere potential for a new organism to be created and the actual existence of that organism in the first days AFTER it has already been created.

We differ in our values, not in the science.

Bullshit.

I just refuted that claim, above.

I weigh the rights of that fertilized egg against the rights of an adult woman and I side with the woman, those are my values.

When that (human) fertilized egg is a person (a natural human being) . . . the Constitution says they have a right to the equal protections of our laws. Our personal values are irrelevant. The Constitution is the law of the land.

You side with the rights of that egg. Your values are neither right nor wrong, just as mine are neither right nor wrong, only different. There is no scientific answer to a difference in values.

See above. Our individual values are irrelevant.

The biology proves that a child's life and existence begins at conception (when the sperm and eggs "potential" to create a child is first realized.)

The Constitution says that all human beings (persons) are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

Your values, lack thereof or denials will not change those facts.

 

[alang1216]

It is pretty fucking sad that leftards can't or won't see Carlin's comedy skit for the sarcasm that it is. You leftist tards invest more in his twisted play on words for comic entertainment than you do on any Kind of a real OBJECTIVE understanding of the facts that would help you see where he is wrong.

In the end, you make him even less funny and yourselves more pathetic than you already were.

Corrections.

That was a reply to "JasonFree" not to Alang

Not a problem. I'm a big GC fan and detected no sarcasm. I think he meant every word he said.

 

[Chuz Life]

It is pretty fucking sad that leftards can't or won't see Carlin's comedy skit for the sarcasm that it is. You leftist tards invest more in his twisted play on words for comic entertainment than you do on any Kind of a real OBJECTIVE understanding of the facts that would help you see where he is wrong.

In the end, you make him even less funny and yourselves more pathetic than you already were.

Corrections.

That was a reply to "JasonFree" not to Alang

Not a problem. I'm a big GC fan and detected no sarcasm. I think he meant every word he said.

That explains a lot.

 

[alang1216]

You're right, I'm weak. We'll never agree since you see a fertilized egg as part of a larger continuous chain of human life whereas I see it as a discrete entity.

Dafuq?

How is it that you see my recognition of the biological fact that a "child's life begins at conception" as anything other than a recognition of the fact that the "child" is a "distinct entity?"

To me, it is what it is, it is not a person any more than a cloneable skin cell is a person.

To
You. . .

I will continue to show how YOU are wrong in your denials.

Given the right environment and conditions they both have the potential to become a person. Potential.

And here, you are wrong again.

It is a biological fact that an un-united human sperm and egg only have a "potential" to unite and form a new human organism and thus "begin" that new "distinct entity's" life. The same goes for any cell that has the "potential" to be manipulated in a process like cloning.

You are quite obviously incapable of recognizing the difference between the mere potential for a new organism to be created and the actual existence of that organism in the first days AFTER it has already been created.

We differ in our values, not in the science.

Bullshit.

I just refuted that claim, above.

I weigh the rights of that fertilized egg against the rights of an adult woman and I side with the woman, those are my values.

When that (human) fertilized egg is a person (a natural human being) . . . the Constitution says they have a right to the equal protections of our laws. Our personal values are irrelevant. The Constitution is the law of the land.

You side with the rights of that egg. Your values are neither right nor wrong, just as mine are neither right nor wrong, only different. There is no scientific answer to a difference in values.

See above. Our individual values are irrelevant.

The biology proves that a child's life and existence begins at conception (when the sperm and eggs "potential" to create a child is first realized.)

The Constitution says that all human beings (persons) are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

Your values, lack thereof or denials will not change those facts.

Humans are just another species of animal. What makes us unique and priceless is not our DNA or our bipedalism or anything but our brains. You don't have a working brain, you're just another piece of protoplasm with no more right to exist than any other piece of protoplasm. If you don't know you're alive, you're not (does not apply to sleep or comas). IMHO.

You may interpret the Constitution any way you choose but you must know you are in the minority in this country and the trend line is not in your favor.