The abortion issue troubles me mightily

[Chuz Life]

Every creature on the planet is a unique being. What makes a fertilized human egg different from the fertilized egg of any other mammal?

Human biological parents.

You may soon have to come up with a better definition. In vitro fertilization, cloning, surrogate parents, changing the DNA of a zygote are just the beginning. Soon I'll be able to take my DNA, put it into a pig's egg and have the pig deliver my baby. Not something I advocate but it will be technically possible. Is that baby human?

If the DNA of an organism is himan, it's ******* human.

How can you be so easily confused about that?

 

[alang1216]

Every creature on the planet is a unique being. What makes a fertilized human egg different from the fertilized egg of any other mammal?

Human biological parents.

You may soon have to come up with a better definition. In vitro fertilization, cloning, surrogate parents, changing the DNA of a zygote are just the beginning. Soon I'll be able to take my DNA, put it into a pig's egg and have the pig deliver my baby. Not something I advocate but it will be technically possible. Is that baby human?

If the DNA of an organism is himan, it's ******* human.

How can you be so easily confused about that?

I'm confused by you. First I'm told the fact that a fertilized egg is unique is key, then you say having human biological parents is key, and now you say that DNA is key. Which is it?

 

[ding]

DNA

 

[Chuz Life]

Every creature on the planet is a unique being. What makes a fertilized human egg different from the fertilized egg of any other mammal?

Human biological parents.

You may soon have to come up with a better definition. In vitro fertilization, cloning, surrogate parents, changing the DNA of a zygote are just the beginning. Soon I'll be able to take my DNA, put it into a pig's egg and have the pig deliver my baby. Not something I advocate but it will be technically possible. Is that baby human?

If the DNA of an organism is himan, it's ******* human.

How can you be so easily confused about that?

I'm confused by you. First I'm told the fact that a fertilized egg is unique is key, then you say having human biological parents is key, and now you say that DNA is key. Which is it?

Do scientists just pick ONE thing or do they examine and consider all of the above and then some to make a determination?

 

[Chuz Life]

If men could get pregnant, abortion would never have been illegal in the first place.

How do you explain pro-life/ anti abortion women and the fact that many of them are women who have already had an abortion and now regret it?

I explain it the same way that I explain Trump voters. Never overestimate the intelligence of the average American voter.

You are dodging the question.

Chuz, you have been pushing the anti choice agenda for so long that you have totally lost sight of the fact that if people want an abortion, they will have one, and if they don't, they won't. The only change that would occur if you succeeded in outlawing it would be that some doctors might go to prison or lose their licenses. There has never even been a penalty to the woman involved. You are blind to the fact that before Roe VS. Wade, gynecologist's most frequent procedure was D & C's. If they couldn't do that, there was always the vacation trip to a foreign country. For the poor, there was the friendly neighborhood abortionist. Frank Sinatra's mother used to do them, back in Hoboken. Your time would be better spent preaching hell and damnation to women directly. That would overcome my objections, anyway.

It is intellectually indefensible that a person's rights should begin at any point after their life does.

If you (or anyone else) holds the view that a persons rights should begin when their life does, then you have no choice but to oppose any and all laws or regulations that run contrary to that belief.

It is as simple as that.

 

[alang1216]

Do scientists just pick ONE thing or do they examine and consider all of the above and then some to make a determination?

You are right of course but science can't make a moral judgement, no matter how many factors are considered. Morality is never absolute unless a deity is the source.

 

[Chuz Life]

Do scientists just pick ONE thing or do they examine and consider all of the above and then some to make a determination?

You are right of course but science can't make a moral judgement, no matter how many factors are considered. Morality is never absolute unless a deity is the source.

The "moral" aspect has already been addressed.

The Constitution says that "ALL persons" are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

That's pretty ******* inclusive.

From that point, Science and science alone is all that is needed to identify what a "person" is.

 

[alang1216]

The Constitution says that "ALL persons" are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

You are not the final authority on the Constitution, the Supreme Court is and they disagree with your definition of a person.

 

[Chuz Life]

The Constitution says that "ALL persons" are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

You are not the final authority on the Constitution, the Supreme Court is and they disagree with your definition of a person.

They also said that any State could establish that a fetus is a person and since the SCOTUS made thatdevlaration, more than 30 State and Federal Fetal Homicide Laws have Bern passed which do exactly that.

You can't be charged with MURDER for killing anything less than another PERSON.

CAN YOU?

 

[ding]

The Constitution says that "ALL persons" are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

You are not the final authority on the Constitution, the Supreme Court is and they disagree with your definition of a person.

Actually I think they said if they could prove it was a person it would be illegal to end its life.

 

[alang1216]

The Constitution says that "ALL persons" are entitled to the equal protections of our laws.

You are not the final authority on the Constitution, the Supreme Court is and they disagree with your definition of a person.

They also said that any State could establish that a fetus is a person and since the SCOTUS made thatdevlaration, more than 30 State and Federal Fetal Homicide Laws have Bern passed which do exactly that.

You can't be charged with MURDER for killing anything less than another PERSON.

CAN YOU?

Your semantics haven't convinced me and you haven't convinced most Americans either. Currently in the US, 57% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 40% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. At least you're not yet in the lunatic fringe.

 

[ding]

150 years from now people will look back at us in horror at us for not protecting the most innocent and defenseless.

 

[G.T.]

150 years from now people will look back at us in horror at us for not protecting the most innocent and defenseless.

First, they'll probably have a giggle at your insecure & obnoxious signature

 

[ding]

150 years from now people will look back at us in horror at us for not protecting the most innocent and defenseless.

First, they'll probably have a giggle at your insecure & obnoxious signature

Only if they are socialists.

 

[otto105]

I would like to know how many pro-lifers named their fetus before birth.

 

[otto105]

150 years from now people will look back at us in horror at us for not protecting the most innocent and defenseless.

First, they'll probably have a giggle at your insecure & obnoxious signature

Only if they are socialists.

Innocent and defenseless are people the christian bible repeatedly mentions throughout its text.

A text all here ignore outside of the abortion debate which the bible doesn’t directly address.

 

[ding]

I would like to know how many pro-lifers named their fetus before birth.

A better question would be how many named and buried them after a miscarriage.

 

[Hollie]

I would like to know how many pro-lifers named their fetus before birth.

A better question would be how many named and buried them after a miscarriage.

It’s truly depraved how you attempt to capitalize on the misfortune of someone who miscarried to press your agenda of hate and derision.

 

[ding]

I would like to know how many pro-lifers named their fetus before birth.

A better question would be how many named and buried them after a miscarriage.

It’s truly depraved how you attempt to capitalize on the misfortune of someone who miscarried to press your agenda of hate and derision.

It's not surprising you would see it that way.

 

[ding]

The answer to the question is that they all named them and buried them.