Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception - says the Holy Bible


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception - says the Holy Bible Page: <<   < prev  12 13 14 15 [16]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 6:52:25 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

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.


My pro-choice proclivities are challenged by some of the nonsense I read on this thread.

Where is it that the "Scientific community" defines life as beginning at birth? Who speaks for the whole of Science on this topic, which is loaded with ethical and legal dimensions? And when is Science always 100% right about anything? Science is fluid; not dogmatic as you make it out to be.


(in reply to NottyLilGirl)
Profile   Post #: 301
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 6:55:13 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
The whole of science must by definition of the words, (scientifically) say that life begins at viability.  Personal religious and other views notwithstanding.

So, thats all there is to that.



_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 302
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 7:01:49 AM   
RemoteUser


Posts: 2854
Joined: 5/10/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

The whole of science must by definition of the words, (scientifically) say that life begins at viability.  Personal religious and other views notwithstanding.

So, thats all there is to that.


Some life isn't viable even after decades. The best solution is to give life to the fullest (fire buckshot when she blows you).

_____________________________

There is nothing worse than being right. Instead of being right, then, try to be open. It is more difficult, and more rewarding.


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 303
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 7:08:36 AM   
AngelOfSilence


Posts: 119
Joined: 5/8/2012
Status: offline
quote:

There is nothing in the definition at #270 that speaks of stimulus and response.

Correct, however I was not responding to #270. I was responding to #267 where you did speak of stimulus and response and moreover set that as the test to prove awareness of suffering, which you claim is proof of sentience. Therefore, by your own criteria the touch-me-not flower is sentient, as shown in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLTcVNyOhUc&feature=related.


_____________________________

My lack of concern for your sensibilities knows no bounds.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 304
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 7:20:24 AM   
fucktoyprincess


Posts: 2337
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

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.


My pro-choice proclivities are challenged by some of the nonsense I read on this thread.

Where is it that the "Scientific community" defines life as beginning at birth? Who speaks for the whole of Science on this topic, which is loaded with ethical and legal dimensions? And when is Science always 100% right about anything? Science is fluid; not dogmatic as you make it out to be.




"Science" is not one thing. So I would have to agree that there is likely no one definition even from the scientific community.

However, as a society, we can come up with definitions that will allow patients and doctors to make appropriate determinations. To that end, I do think the concept of "viability" is likely the best option. This, coupled with the historical treatment of miscarriage by all religions, seems pretty dispositive on this issue. Certainly, a law allowing a first trimester abortion should really not be an issue even for those whose religion prohibit one. Again, it should be a personal decision.

And let us all be very, very clear here. I know of very few religions (Jainism? Buddhism?) that feel all killing is wrong. Most religions do make a distinction between acceptable killing and "murder". Otherwise, we would never have war, would we? So at some very cynical level, part of me feels we don't have to actually have to agree, as a society on a dispositive definition of when life begins in order to have a law on the books about abortion that is respectful of differing religious beliefs. Decisions should be left to the individual based on their own religious beliefs. Create the law that gives the widest latitude for personal religious beliefs. I support the maximum religious freedom - which means leaving this decision to the individual.

And for those who are going on and on about "killing a life", please explain to me then why you support our troops all over the world in activities that result in the deaths of other human beings. Human beings that no one disputes are "lives". Exactly how are you justifying that? That the enemy can never be "innocent"? Really? How morally interesting. Again, the indifference that people show to the "lives" that currently exist on this planet, never ceases to amaze me. If half of the energy directed at anti-abortion rhetoric and activities were directed towards helping people who are actually here, the world would be an infinitely better place. Such a misplaced effort.

_____________________________

~ ftp

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 305
RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception ... - 5/24/2012 7:58:32 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AngelOfSilence

quote:

There is nothing in the definition at #270 that speaks of stimulus and response.

Correct, however I was not responding to #270. I was responding to #267 where you did speak of stimulus and response and moreover set that as the test to prove awareness of suffering, which you claim is proof of sentience. Therefore, by your own criteria the touch-me-not flower is sentient, as shown in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLTcVNyOhUc&feature=related.



PUHleeeez!!! I was speaking specifically to the testing that farglebargle was proposing only after the birth. It was the time frame that I questioned. Try to stick within the context of the messages. It was not a definition by any stretch of the imagination. I will refrain for the purpose of civility from telling you where to place your touch-me-not flower.

(in reply to AngelOfSilence)
Profile   Post #: 306
Page:   <<   < prev  12 13 14 15 [16]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Life does not begin at Fertilization or conception - says the Holy Bible Page: <<   < prev  12 13 14 15 [16]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.063