So, we find out Jane Roe was paid to lie about her pro-life stance

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

 

[theHawk]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

Nobody ever attempted to control a man’s body? Ever hear of something called slavery? Men have been slaves to other men since the dawn of time. Republicans outlawed that, much to the disdain of Democrats.

Dems liked to dehumanize humans for their own agenda. They did it with slavery, and now they do it with unborn children, claiming they aren’t “real people” or even humans (denying science as usual).

Then show us the science. No one has done it yet.

The fetus has its own unique DNA, human DNA. Unless you are going to argue it is a different species.

An undeveloped fetus is not a fully developed human being. Science already knows this. A unique DNA, is not a fully developed organism. That's the bottom line. You can spin yourself around until the end of time, and that reality will never change.

A newborn baby isn’t a fully developed human being. Does that mean it’s okay to kill one?

Really? How do you know? It responds to stimulus. It responds to breast milk.It responds to spanking. It didn't do that in the womb. So there you go. You cannot argue the science, because you have no argument.

If you think a fetus doesn’t respond to stimuli then you are an idiot.

And by this new standard of yours, a comatose person can be killed?

Keep moving those goal posts, it’s quite entertaining.

 

[BWK]

Clearly Jane Roe couldn't afford to take a case clear to the Supreme Court. Who paid for her legal costs, Planned Parenthood?

What we do know, is that the pro-life paid her to start with to lie. And since your question has no answer, it's worth nothing. Next!

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

Nobody ever attempted to control a man’s body? Ever hear of something called slavery? Men have been slaves to other men since the dawn of time. Republicans outlawed that, much to the disdain of Democrats.

Dems liked to dehumanize humans for their own agenda. They did it with slavery, and now they do it with unborn children, claiming they aren’t “real people” or even humans (denying science as usual).

Then show us the science. No one has done it yet.

The fetus has its own unique DNA, human DNA. Unless you are going to argue it is a different species.

An undeveloped fetus is not a fully developed human being. Science already knows this. A unique DNA, is not a fully developed organism. That's the bottom line. You can spin yourself around until the end of time, and that reality will never change.

A newborn baby isn’t a fully developed human being. Does that mean it’s okay to kill one?

Really? How do you know? It responds to stimulus. It responds to breast milk.It responds to spanking. It didn't do that in the womb. So there you go. You cannot argue the science, because you have no argument.

If you think a fetus doesn’t respond to stimuli then you are an idiot.

And by this new standard of yours, a comatose person can be killed?

Keep moving those goal posts, it’s quite entertaining.

Science will set you free. BS just gets you in more trouble. Please continue. The forum loves every minute.

 

[theHawk]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

I recorded the movie and watched it today.

Wow.

Even the anti choice jerk admitted that it was all a scam. He admitted that he used her. He even said a woman has the right to choose.

She lied the whole time.

They used her and she used them.

Wow.

All of the anti choice people have been scammed and manipulated. Just as I've been saying all these years.

They aren't pro life. They have never been pro life.

They have always hated women and always wanted to punish women for having sex. While having no problem with men having sex, making a woman pregnant then walking away without even looking back to see what he has done.

We see it on this board all the time. The woman is a slut or whore. Yet they have no problem with what they consider a slut or whore raising a child.

The fact that they do all they can to prevent women from having contraceptives, from having any health care, no living wage, no reliable child care and no job security screams it's not about life to those people. They don't give one damn about any life. It's all about making themselves feel superior and punishing women for having sex.

Remember when he said the gig was up? That was priceless. The pro-life folks boxed themselves in with payoffs, ignorance of science, and their false claims about the sanctity of life. They're pro-birth. They could give two shits about life. Look at how they are so eager to sacrifice others to Corona. They make you want to puke.

Yes I remember. I was floored. How he could say that so casually.

All the people who are hurt. All the people they murdered. All the people they scammed money from. All the lives they destroyed.

All the lies and deceptions.

It's all sickening. They are seriously disgusting human beings.

And that is why this anti-abortion crowd stay in the gutter with the same nonsensical arguments. They go round and round like the chickens with the head cut off. Science is not on their side. They cannot determine intelligently, and scientifically when life begins. They just can't. So what do they do? They invent a time table in their heads.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

What we do know, is that the pro-life paid her to start with to lie.

I'll axe again for evidence. Where is it? Until then, you got nothing.

 

[buttercup]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

I recorded the movie and watched it today.

Wow.

Even the anti choice jerk admitted that it was all a scam. He admitted that he used her. He even said a woman has the right to choose.

She lied the whole time.

They used her and she used them.

Wow.

All of the anti choice people have been scammed and manipulated. Just as I've been saying all these years.

They aren't pro life. They have never been pro life.

They have always hated women and always wanted to punish women for having sex. While having no problem with men having sex, making a woman pregnant then walking away without even looking back to see what he has done.

We see it on this board all the time. The woman is a slut or whore. Yet they have no problem with what they consider a slut or whore raising a child.

The fact that they do all they can to prevent women from having contraceptives, from having any health care, no living wage, no reliable child care and no job security screams it's not about life to those people. They don't give one damn about any life. It's all about making themselves feel superior and punishing women for having sex.

Remember when he said the gig was up? That was priceless. The pro-life folks boxed themselves in with payoffs, ignorance of science, and their false claims about the sanctity of life. They're pro-birth. They could give two shits about life. Look at how they are so eager to sacrifice others to Corona. They make you want to puke.

Yes I remember. I was floored. How he could say that so casually.

All the people who are hurt. All the people they murdered. All the people they scammed money from. All the lives they destroyed.

All the lies and deceptions.

It's all sickening. They are seriously disgusting human beings.

And that is why this anti-abortion crowd stay in the gutter with the same nonsensical arguments. They go round and round like the chickens with the head cut off. Science is not on their side. They cannot determine intelligently, and scientifically when life begins. They just can't. So what do they do? They invent a time table in their heads.

You are really, really ignorant.

 

[buttercup]

I'm going to post what someone else said on a different site.


Two possibilities here.

1) she was a pro choice liar this whole time, which indicates that pro choice advocates are dishonest

or

2) she was pro life this whole time and pro choice advocates deceptively quoted her and lied.

Both make their side the liars. Again.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

The pro-life argument was BS from the beginning?

The entire premise of the decision on Roe v Wade was this purely invented “right to privacy”.

Rehnquist said it best:
To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. As early as 1821, the first state law dealing directly with abortion was enacted by the Connecticut Legislature. By the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, there were at least 36 laws enacted by state or territorial legislatures limiting abortion. While many States have amended or updated their laws, 21 of the laws on the books in 1868 remain in effect today.

Obviously you've never read the 4th amendment.

It very clearly says we have the right to our person or body. Which is what Roe V Wade was decided on. The right to privacy with our body.

The part of the 4th amendment that it was decided on:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated


So what you're saying is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to women.

Men do get the right to privacy with their body. I have never seen anyone try to pass legislation that prohibits any man from having any medical procedure they want. Nor do they have to go through a waiting period or have to sit through propaganda they don't believe that it's only purpose is to convince them to not have the procedure. Nor do they have to have a totally medically unnecessary probe test which neither he or the doctor wants which he has to pay 100%. I don't see clinics for men being bombed or harassed or people screaming for the man to not go in. I don't see legislatures writing regulations specifically designed to close medical facilities for men.

I have never seen anyone protest to protect a man's right to privacy with their body. Or any thing else for that matter.

Who do you think you are? What makes you think you have any right to say you can take someone's rights from them and violate the constitution?

You don't. Plus, no one gives a rat's ass what you think and want.

If you work and pay taxes, work hard. Pay those taxes. Women need that money to pay for their contraception and for abortions. If you pay federal or state taxes, you're paying for abortions and contraception for women. I hope I that totally pisses you off.

Yup. Nobody ever attempted to violate a male's right to sovereignty over his body. But the anti-choice folks seem to think that women are public property, not people with rights under the Constitution. They also never protest the funding of "ED" medications for men who are not attempting to conceive a child and maybe are having sex with women who are too old to conceive. The sex that they want to have is purely recreational. Where is the scrutiny of this?

A right to privacy doesn’t give someone the right to kill an unborn child.

If men were “controlling” women’s bodies then they could force her to have an abortion when she doesn’t want one. When has that been put into law? Oh it hasn’t, so all this talk about “controlling women’s bodies” is BS.

Ignorant nonsense.

Murder concerns criminal law; the right to privacy civil law – one having nothing to do with the other.

It is neither the role nor responsibility of government to dictate to a woman whether she may have a child or not; the right to privacy safeguards citizens from government excess and overreach with regard to such personal decisions.

Again, no one is forcing a woman to have an abortion, although far leftwing states like China do. Interesting how you people defend China with their forced abortions yet claim you are against government dictating to women if they can have children. Which means you are all full of shit.

Outlawing the killing of human life isn’t anymore of an “overreach” of government anymore than government outlawing rape.

Again, you keep circle jerking over your same failed argument. You still fail to prove anyone is killing a fully developed human being. Why? Because there is no known science out there that identifies a fully developed human being with a functioning brain that uses reason in the womb. Keep circle jerking and you will always go back to where you started.

Really? Yet you can’t explain why killing a newborn is illegal when it isn’t a “fully developed” human being.

I never explained killing a newborn was illegal. I never offered that information, because the newborn is out of the womb. Something you don't get, or can argue about. Why do you make up shit that I never argued about? Answer, because your own argument is a failure.

In other words you can’t defend your idiotic position about “fully developed” humans not being real people. You were too dumb to realize the words you were using also described an infant.

More inventions! Boss, you can 't help yourself can you? Let's make up another scenario, of which I never made claim to. Why do you do this? Simple, you have lost the argument, and you are not smart enough to walk away from it.

Dude, get a hold of yourself. No one said anything about a fully devoloped person not being a human being. Science identifies a fully developed human being at birth. You continue to invent nonsense and lies.

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

I recorded the movie and watched it today.

Wow.

Even the anti choice jerk admitted that it was all a scam. He admitted that he used her. He even said a woman has the right to choose.

She lied the whole time.

They used her and she used them.

Wow.

All of the anti choice people have been scammed and manipulated. Just as I've been saying all these years.

They aren't pro life. They have never been pro life.

They have always hated women and always wanted to punish women for having sex. While having no problem with men having sex, making a woman pregnant then walking away without even looking back to see what he has done.

We see it on this board all the time. The woman is a slut or whore. Yet they have no problem with what they consider a slut or whore raising a child.

The fact that they do all they can to prevent women from having contraceptives, from having any health care, no living wage, no reliable child care and no job security screams it's not about life to those people. They don't give one damn about any life. It's all about making themselves feel superior and punishing women for having sex.

Remember when he said the gig was up? That was priceless. The pro-life folks boxed themselves in with payoffs, ignorance of science, and their false claims about the sanctity of life. They're pro-birth. They could give two shits about life. Look at how they are so eager to sacrifice others to Corona. They make you want to puke.

Yes I remember. I was floored. How he could say that so casually.

All the people who are hurt. All the people they murdered. All the people they scammed money from. All the lives they destroyed.

All the lies and deceptions.

It's all sickening. They are seriously disgusting human beings.

And that is why this anti-abortion crowd stay in the gutter with the same nonsensical arguments. They go round and round like the chickens with the head cut off. Science is not on their side. They cannot determine intelligently, and scientifically when life begins. They just can't. So what do they do? They invent a time table in their heads.

You are really, really ignorant.

No,it's just that you have no intelligent/informative/scientific arguments. That makes you the ignorant one, not me.

 

[BWK]

I'm going to post what someone else said on a different site.


Two possibilities here.

1) she was a pro choice liar this whole time, which indicates that pro choice advocates are dishonest

or

2) she was pro life this whole time and pro choice advocates deceptively quoted her and lied.

Both make their side the liars. Again.

Who lost the case? And who confessed to the payoff? The payoff tells us the pro-life crowd knew they had no case, or they would never have needed to pay some one to lie.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I'm going to post what someone else said on a different site.


Two possibilities here.

1) she was a pro choice liar this whole time, which indicates that pro choice advocates are dishonest

or

2) she was pro life this whole time and pro choice advocates deceptively quoted her and lied.

Both make their side the liars. Again.

I'm choosing #2. I will not trust a leftist.

 

[BWK]

I'm going to post what someone else said on a different site.


Two possibilities here.

1) she was a pro choice liar this whole time, which indicates that pro choice advocates are dishonest

or

2) she was pro life this whole time and pro choice advocates deceptively quoted her and lied.

Both make their side the liars. Again.

I'm choosing #2. I will not trust a leftist.

Makes no difference either way. The whole case was premised and paid off as a lie. And that's what counts. The pro-life suit committed to lies for the win, and they lost. They failed on the non-existent science, and the payoffs to lie. And now look at these scum bags. They murder people at clinics after being proven liars and failures on the science. Pathetic people.

 

[buttercup]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

I recorded the movie and watched it today.

Wow.

Even the anti choice jerk admitted that it was all a scam. He admitted that he used her. He even said a woman has the right to choose.

She lied the whole time.

They used her and she used them.

Wow.

All of the anti choice people have been scammed and manipulated. Just as I've been saying all these years.

They aren't pro life. They have never been pro life.

They have always hated women and always wanted to punish women for having sex. While having no problem with men having sex, making a woman pregnant then walking away without even looking back to see what he has done.

We see it on this board all the time. The woman is a slut or whore. Yet they have no problem with what they consider a slut or whore raising a child.

The fact that they do all they can to prevent women from having contraceptives, from having any health care, no living wage, no reliable child care and no job security screams it's not about life to those people. They don't give one damn about any life. It's all about making themselves feel superior and punishing women for having sex.

Remember when he said the gig was up? That was priceless. The pro-life folks boxed themselves in with payoffs, ignorance of science, and their false claims about the sanctity of life. They're pro-birth. They could give two shits about life. Look at how they are so eager to sacrifice others to Corona. They make you want to puke.

Yes I remember. I was floored. How he could say that so casually.

All the people who are hurt. All the people they murdered. All the people they scammed money from. All the lives they destroyed.

All the lies and deceptions.

It's all sickening. They are seriously disgusting human beings.

And that is why this anti-abortion crowd stay in the gutter with the same nonsensical arguments. They go round and round like the chickens with the head cut off. Science is not on their side. They cannot determine intelligently, and scientifically when life begins. They just can't. So what do they do? They invent a time table in their heads.

You are really, really ignorant.

No,it's just that you have no intelligent/informative/scientific arguments. That makes you the ignorant one, not me.

I can see that you live in upside-down land, so I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the reality is, scientifically, the baby in the womb is indeed a human being, a member of the human species. Here are a few excerpts from medical textbooks for you. There are many more like this.

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

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

______

“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

______

“Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D., one of the pioneers of in vitro fertilization:

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; human beings begin at conception.”

From Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40

______

Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

______

“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)

______

Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144

“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”

______

National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization”

______

“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55

______

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”

______

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3
“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”

______


Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”


______


“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

______

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."

______

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”​

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I'm going to post what someone else said on a different site.


Two possibilities here.

1) she was a pro choice liar this whole time, which indicates that pro choice advocates are dishonest

or

2) she was pro life this whole time and pro choice advocates deceptively quoted her and lied.

Both make their side the liars. Again.

I'm choosing #2. I will not trust a leftist.

Makes no difference either way. The whole case was premised and paid off as a lie. And that's what counts. The pro-life suit committed to lies for the win, and they lost. They failed on the non-existent science, and the payoffs to lie. And now look at these scum bags. They murder people at clinics after being proven liars and failures on the science. Pathetic people.

When you step back from the leftist spin, you find info like this:

In the documentary, Sweeney produces documents showing McCorvey received $456,000 over several years from pro-life groups, payment for reciting “scripted anti-abortion lines” in front of cameras. But such a revelation is hardly a bombshell, Operation Rescue founder Randall Terry told me.

“She made her living from contributions and speaking engagement fees,” Terry said. He often traveled around the country with McCorvey and once put her up in his house for a month. Pro-life leaders occasionally helped McCorvey write speeches. “But that amount over all those years is not a lot of money.”

McCorvey “could say things that were controversial,” Cheryl Sullenger, a friend of McCorvey and senior vice president of Operation Rescue, told me. She recalled a few times that McCorvey, tired after a long speaking engagement, used colorful language to put off pro-lifers who asked her personal questions.

“The chances are zero that her pro-life beliefs were fake,” Sullenger said.

Pro-life advocate Abby Johnson said Wednesday in a statement that McCorvey called her days before she died to talk with someone else who had a “big number”—abortions for which she felt responsible. “She felt like she owned them all,” Johnson, a former Planned Parenthood director, said.

Johnson also encouraged people to listen to Pavone’s assessment of McCorvey’s position: “He knew the real Norma. And he knew the sincerity of her conversion.”

Pavone says he witnessed firsthand McCorvey’s regret. Although she never had an abortion, she once attended a Rachel’s Vineyard retreat, a ministry to post-abortive women. Pavone helped lead the retreat. He doesn’t think she would have put herself through it if she hadn’t felt she needed to.

“We saw the grief, the pain, the crying,” Pavone said.

Pavone disputed the claim that the McCorvey interview was a “deathbed confession.” Pavone said the filming occurred in May 2016, nine months before she died. Pavone encouraged Sweeney to release all his footage.

“She could be erratic, but her journey isn’t captured in a single story,” Pavone said. Pavone, who also officiated at McCorvey’s funeral, spoke with her on the phone the day she died. She was coherent and made him promise that he and other pro-lifers would “continue with the cause.”

Pro-life critics say documentary’s Jane Roe bombshell is a dud - WORLD

Film claims advocates manipulated the woman who went from landmark abortion case plaintiff to pro-life activist

world.wng.org

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; human beings begin at conception.”

All true, but trying to explain SCIENCE to a political tar is pointless. Their attachment to their idiotology prevents them from even considering FACTS

 

[buttercup]

Clearly Jane Roe couldn't afford to take a case clear to the Supreme Court. Who paid for her legal costs, Planned Parenthood?

What we do know, is that the pro-life paid her to start with to lie. And since your question has no answer, it's worth nothing. Next!

Are you not familiar with the whole story? She said the same thing about the pro-abort side, she claimed she was manipulated and used by them so that they could legalize abortion, she said that they never cared about her, they only cared about having a plaintiff for their case. She stated that the entire Roe v Wade case was based on a lie.

Now, allegedly, she claimed she was paid by the pro-abortion side? Go back to post #69.

Ultimately, nothing that she says matters. HER thoughts on abortion, no matter what they are, does not change actual truth. Truth is not dependent on what we think it is, it just is what it is.

 

[B. Kidd]

BWK = gullible Dimm wit.
He saw something on TV, so it must be true!

 

[BWK]

Documentary reveals 'Jane Roe' of Roe V. Wade was paid to reverse abortion stance

Norma McCorvey, known for years as Jane Roe the plaintiff from one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history: Roe v. Wade, reveals that she was paid to reverse her stance from pro-choice to anti-abortion by Operation Rescue, now known as Operation Save America, according to a new...

www.msnbc.com

Well now, that changes everything. So no one on the pro-life side ever had anyone to really represent them during Roe vs. Wade. That explains everything. That just means the pro-life argument has been bs from the beginning. And it still is. They knew way back then they would never be able to prove the pro-life argument from a scientific point of view, so they up and paid someone to lie about it, with their instructions. These are such disgusting people. And look at the people these pro-life nuts murdered because of lies and payoffs.

I recorded the movie and watched it today.

Wow.

Even the anti choice jerk admitted that it was all a scam. He admitted that he used her. He even said a woman has the right to choose.

She lied the whole time.

They used her and she used them.

Wow.

All of the anti choice people have been scammed and manipulated. Just as I've been saying all these years.

They aren't pro life. They have never been pro life.

They have always hated women and always wanted to punish women for having sex. While having no problem with men having sex, making a woman pregnant then walking away without even looking back to see what he has done.

We see it on this board all the time. The woman is a slut or whore. Yet they have no problem with what they consider a slut or whore raising a child.

The fact that they do all they can to prevent women from having contraceptives, from having any health care, no living wage, no reliable child care and no job security screams it's not about life to those people. They don't give one damn about any life. It's all about making themselves feel superior and punishing women for having sex.

Remember when he said the gig was up? That was priceless. The pro-life folks boxed themselves in with payoffs, ignorance of science, and their false claims about the sanctity of life. They're pro-birth. They could give two shits about life. Look at how they are so eager to sacrifice others to Corona. They make you want to puke.

Yes I remember. I was floored. How he could say that so casually.

All the people who are hurt. All the people they murdered. All the people they scammed money from. All the lives they destroyed.

All the lies and deceptions.

It's all sickening. They are seriously disgusting human beings.

And that is why this anti-abortion crowd stay in the gutter with the same nonsensical arguments. They go round and round like the chickens with the head cut off. Science is not on their side. They cannot determine intelligently, and scientifically when life begins. They just can't. So what do they do? They invent a time table in their heads.

You are really, really ignorant.

No,it's just that you have no intelligent/informative/scientific arguments. That makes you the ignorant one, not me.

I can see that you live in upside-down land, so I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but the reality is, scientifically, the baby in the womb is indeed a human being, a member of the human species. Here are a few excerpts from medical textbooks for you. There are many more like this.

​

​

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

​

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

​

______​

​

“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​

​

______​

​

“Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D., one of the pioneers of in vitro fertilization:​

​

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; human beings begin at conception.”​

​

From Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40​

​

______​

​

Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.​

​

“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”​

​

______​

​

“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)​

​

______​

​

Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144​

​

“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”​

​

______​

​

National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...​

​

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”​

​

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization”​

​

______​

​

“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”​

​

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55​

​

______​

​

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419​

​

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”​

​

______​

​

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3​

“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”​

​

______​

​

​

Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986​

​

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”​

​

​

______​

​

​

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”​

​

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)​

​

______​

​

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.​

​

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual."​

​

______​

​

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:​

​

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”​

There has never been a foundation in science that can definitively define life. Living cells at conception that are multiplying and developing have no basis for confirming life as it relates to a living full person.

What is the nabecause ture of the new cell that comes into existence upon sperm-egg fusion? Most importantly, is the zygote merely another human cell (like a liver cell or a skin cell) or is it something else? Just as science distinguishes between different types of cells, it also makes clear distinctions between cells and organisms. Both cells and organisms are alive, yet organisms exhibit unique characteristics that can reliably distinguish them from mere cells.[2]

A Scientific View of When Life Begins - Lozier Institute

In this paper, Dr. Maureen Condic examines scientific evidence for the point at which it is evident that human life begins.

lozierinstitute.org

So, that is the argument that cannot be answered. Living cells have been with us since the beginning. But the life of an actual organism cannot be decided by science.

You yourself are hijacking the science to your own end.

The difference between conception with sperm-egg as a Zygote can be viewed as a cell, just as a liver or kidney, but cannot be viewed as a living organism, because the living organism exhibits different characteristics other than cells. Therefore, your claim is quickly dismissed. You base your arguments on religion and philosophy. Neither of which have any practical application.