quote:

Goodness... "as we speak", no less?!! Actually, the FACT is, the Left dusts-off and drags-out this nonsense every election year, and yet... NOTHING ever happens -- just more political scare-tactics and feigned hysteria. Of course, if you have some PROOF of PENDING LEGISLATION that would render birth control, the morning-after pill, and abortion ILLEGAL, by all means... do share this urgent information?!! Enquiring Minds Want to Know!!!

The simple fact is... with WOMEN comprising HALF of the voting electorate, abortion will NEVER be made illegal -- ever!!! That would be political suicide... and those on the Right who spout-off about overturning Roe vs. Wade are PANDERING

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

You are avoiding the definition I have shown, which conflicts with your formulation. So, is "Life begins at birth" a biological premise or a legal convenience? What is the basis for your formulation for the start of life?
Simple question for you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

The question is, at what point between conception and birth does this new and unique human life require consideration in its own right.

When the issue is posed in the terms you have chosen (which seem a reasonable enough formulation to me), an answer that suggests itself is: "when the foetus is capable or potentially capable of surviving in its own right" ie when the foetus is viable. What do you think?

That's the problem, of course. We don't know. One purely pragmatic defense of the conception argument is that it is better to err on the safe side in such matters. Personally, I am unable to say at what point consideration of this new life in its own right becomes required. Viability is a reasonable proposal. But I think the greater concern is at what point the sentience of the foetus is sufficient to require consideration in its own right. That may occur before full physical viability, itself a smeary line, or not until after. I don't know. I will be content with a decision that errs on the safe side of our best knowledge and understanding.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA
And often originating from your side of the theological/political fence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA
[image]local://upfiles/687741/8F2838165CCB4EC8A1837C6B0792E28C.jpg[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Your utter contempt...

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Your utter contempt...

...for the absolute hypocritical idiots on the Left?!!

[:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

Your utter contempt...

...for the absolute hypocritical idiots on the Left?!!

[:D]

Your post reminds me of a man with a paper asshole trying to fight a forest fire.

quote:

And Atheist assholes assume there is no "soul" -- I challenge you to prove this.

quote:

What is the difference if you probe a newly born child harshly and do the same to a late term fetus? Both will react, no?

quote:

ORIGINAL: AngelOfSilence

quote:

What is the difference if you probe a newly born child harshly and do the same to a late term fetus? Both will react, no?

As will an earthworm.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel
Your utter contempt...

...for the absolute hypocritical idiots on the Left?!!

[:D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

The Holy Bible: Life begins at first breath

quote:

The pro-fetus brigade that is the Republican party is screaming, drooling and rabid about life beginning at conception. They get right in our face, or type at you all in caps, that GOD’S own book, the bible, says life begins at conception. Guess what? It doesn’t.

My good friend, Sheila, is smart, wise, funny and driven to expose lies on the right. She gave me a bit of an internet slap in the face a few days ago when she reminded me of a little passage in Genesis about the breath of life. The passage reads that

quote:

God “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and it was then that the man became a living being.”

The bible actually has quite a lot to say on the subject of the breath of life. Here are a few more passages that illustrate when life begins.

quote:

Job 33:4-“The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty gives me life.”

quote:

Ezekiel 37: 5&6- “Thus says the Lord God to these bones: Behold, I will cause breath to enter you, and you shall live. And I shall lay sinews upon you, and will cause flesh to come upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and you shall live; and you shall know that I am the Lord.”

...why does the pro-fetus brigade believe life begins at conception, when their own holy book says quite the opposite?

One thing I have been told is that a fetus breathes while in the womb. Um, no it doesn’t actually. While in the womb, a fetus receives oxygen from the umbilical cord, and the first breath is not taken until birth. You know how the OBGYN makes the newborn cry? That’s usually the first breath. While floating in amniotic fluid, the fetus does not breathe. It’s liquid.

We see billboards all over our county that read “My heart beat 17 days after conception!” and “I can dream!” First, a fetal heartbeat cannot be detected until, at the earliest, 5 ½-6 ½ weeks after conception, and only via ultrasound. Second, “directly measuring the brain activity of a human fetus in the womb is impossible” according to an article at Science Daily.com. Researchers have noted REM-like stages, but to actually measure dreams is not possible.

Huh. The Bible says life begins with “breath,” the first breath is taken AFTER being born, fetal heartbeats are detected much later than the pro-fetus brigade claims and it’s impossible to measure the brain activity of a human fetus in the womb. It seems, at least to this pro-choice mother, that the pro-fetus brigade has absolutely no frigging idea what they’re talking about.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NottyLilGirl

Who gives a rat's behind what the bible says about the subject. Not everyone in this country is a bible thumping Christian, and Religion should have no bearing on Law. If the Scientific community defines life as beginning at the time of birth, then that is the definition which should be used, and all of the biblical crap should remain behind the doors of the churches and get out of my Government.

quote:

Yes. But in this thread . . . apples and oranges, yanno.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AngelOfSilence

quote:

Yes. But in this thread . . . apples and oranges, yanno.

No. By your definition an earthworm is sentient, as is a paramecium.

quote:

the definition includes the inference of suffering and being aware of the suffering. Not simple stimulus and response.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AngelOfSilence

quote:

the definition includes the inference of suffering and being aware of the suffering. Not simple stimulus and response.

Yet you used simple stimulus and response as proof of suffering and the awareness of suffering and thus sentience, therefore certain single celled organisms are, by your definition, sentient and you kill them by the trillions every time you boil water or use mouth wash, which makes you guilty of whatever an abortionist is guilty of many times over. Do not blame me if you do not fully consider the implications of the foolishness you espouse.