Abortion?

I’m pro-life and I believe that life begins at conception. The idea that a human being is not alive at conception is not only ridiculous but it’s insulting to the numerous textbooks and scientific data regarding human development. I also hold that life begins at conception because it’s the only view which ensures equality regarding a persons humanity and does not allow some person to determine another persons worth based on some made up timeline.

Furthermore abortion was passed in the USA anyway on a faulty premis of “we don’t know if it’s a human being at conception, therefore we can have an abortion.” That premis not only is a lie but it’s a type of premis that can be found nowhere else in law. If I’m hunting and I hear a noise in the bushes and I think it might be another hunter, I do not have he right to shoot. If I’m driving down the road and see a shadowy figure in the road that might be a human then I have an obligation to avoid hitting it with my car.

How the law works:

• I kill a human in a situation where I didn’t know if it was human = manslaughter
• I kill a human knowing it was a human = murder.

Abortion is one of the greatest crimes against humanity.

 

References for those who do not believe human life begins at conception:

Life Begins at Fertilization
The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:




"Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."
[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]


"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]


"Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."
[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]


"Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."
[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]


"Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."
[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]


"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]


"Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."
[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]


"I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."
[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]


"The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]


"The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."
[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]


"Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]


"The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and malepronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."
[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]


"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."
[O'Rahilly, Ronan and M�ller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]


"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."
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

Source:https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html


Whether it’s a human and alive is not a topic for debate nor is it an opinion. A human is alive at conception is a biological and scientific FACT!

 

I did however sell Plan B pills at the local Fred Meyer. If you are on your shit as a couple, abortions are kinda unnecessary. Use condoms even in a committed relationship. Keep some Plan B tablets in the back of the cupboard. Don't engage in high risk activities. If I were a woman no condom=no sex no exceptions.

 

@CassTeaElle i didnt mean to offend lol I think we fundamentally agree on this subject besides one aspect, given it's a pretty huge aspect. I think you're having trouble understanding because you're expecting me to say legal or illegal, but my answer is a grey area. I havent really been contradicting myself, i state both sides and make a thesis. So ill try to say my side now and be a bit clearer.

Idk how to split up the text, so in chronological order of paragraphs..

Well, I don't think the government should be involved in this decision. It is right now, but it can not be later on. idk if youre american. But in the US, we have found that banning and prohibiting (alcohol back in the day, and drugs now) creates more problems. People do what they want to do. If a woman gets raped and its illegal to have an abortion, she'll do the clothes hangar method which is MORE unethical than the painless methods that are in place.

I've thought plenty deep, I'm thinking of this is in a practical standpoint. I said "assuming life begins at conception.... its wrong," which is true. Because you're taking a lifeform. What's the difference between that and killing a newborn (this is your statement i believe). Now, I'm not convinced it is a lifeform, im kinda on the fence bc of lack of knowledge. So, for argument sake (to be safe), we'll say its a lifeform. If so, i DO believe it is murder. How do i justify not doing anything? Well, like i previously stated, I would like to see a societal change vs a governmental change. Over time, people will choose to put their kids up to adoption (bc of money) vs abortion clinics. It's like drugs in the US (which is relevant), i hope to see all drugs to be legalized (not all at once, harder drugs get legalized last). The fact that drugs are illegal and punishments are severe, it has caused a plethora of problems (death&crime) & wasted even more of our money in the economy. We critizize drugs addicts and outkast them from society, when we need to bring them in. People will die, mainly junkies that already exist, but it would improve our economy and drastically reduce the drug problem in america. Get rid of overcrowded prisons of non-violent drugs offenders, get rid of cartel and gang violence, get rid of pointless DEA agencies. Abortion wont have these many downsides but if it were illegal it has potential for more unethical problems.

I wasn't implying that, i wasnt sure where you landed on the life begins at conceotion thing, but now i do.

I'm always honest with myself. ASSUMING a fetus is alive, again, it would be textbook murder. I don't think its crazy to not have gov regulation on it, but thats where we disagree. You're making the assumption that a fetus is alive, which may be true. But you're very stating that as a solid fact.

Forget the catholic church. again i didnt contradict myself really, but it's cool. We're gonna keep pushing forward. We'll get through this together.

Science is inconclusive on that aspect, so what would you say to that?

Again, assuming a fetus is alive, than yes i agree with your statement. The last sentence, "....so its imperative, as a society, fight for them when necessary. I agree, yes. I just think we have different ways of going about that.

This next statement, you're gonna say im contradicting myself, so I'm gonna choose my words very carefully. I think we should make it a societal change as I've explained throughout the entirety of the posting, HOWEVER, if the government came out and said "Abortion would now be illegal." I honestly wouldnt be mad at all partly because I dont think strongly on this issue and it wouldn't affect me. I just stated how we should go about "out-casting" abortion instead of making another made-up silly rule that congress made up. Life's too short to get mad over something such as that, besides, I want to focus on other political problems (drugs, veterans commiting suicide, gay marriage (check),etc ).

 

Yes, exactly. That argument starts to sound a whole lot like the argument in favor of slavery. Bad things tend to happen when we start to decide for ourselves who is a human being worthy of basic rights and who isn't.

Amen. I always like to tell people, so it's clear, that my perspective is coming from a woman who has absolutely no interest in having kids and is terrified of the idea of being pregnant. And what do I do? Use protection, like a smart person. I'm very cautious.

What makes you think I was offended? I'm just having a rational conversation, like an adult.

I understand what you mean, but you're equating abortions to drug use, and I'm equating it to murder. You could make those same arguments for murder, and they would sound ridiculous. You could say "well if we make murder illegal, people will still kill people, so what's the point?"

Well that's precisely what I'm saying... You have a lack of knowledge, so why not err on the side of being safe rather than sorry?

See, that just seems insane to me. If you believed people were murdering babies without legal consequence, it seems absolutely insane to put together a plan of gradual societal change rather than just saying no, you can't do that, and if you do you'll go to prison. IF, as we are speaking right now for arguments sake, a woman having an abortion is murdering a baby, why on earth should she not go to prison? If it was outside the womb, she would be in prison, but because it's inside it's different somehow? That doesn't make sense to me.

I completely disagree that this is relevant, and I don't understand how your logical mind could compare the two as equal in nature. Murdering a baby and doing drugs that only harm you and your own body are not even close to being the same thing. I'm also fully in favor of legalizing all drugs for all the reasons you said. Largely because it only hurts the person who decided to take them, so I think they should be allowed to make that dumb choice if they want. But you cannot argue that someone ruining their body with drugs is the same as someone ending someone else's life. It sounds like you have a fairly libertarian view of government, but even as a libertarian, the belief is that the government should protect its citizens from harm from other citizens. And if you harm another human being, you need to be punished. That's not the same as doing drugs, at all.

Yes, we definitely do disagree there. I think it's insane to allow murder to be legal, and I'm surprised that that's a controversial stance.

Well first of all, I would say everything that Chris just said.

And secondly, I would say that even if it is as gray of an area as you think it is, I would rather be safe than sorry. If there's even a question that it's a human life, and a freaking BABY at that, I would say that's absolutely worth banning it altogether just to be safe. I don't understand why it's such an important thing to so many people to have the "right" to an abortion. There are plenty of other ways to not become pregnant, and even if you do become pregnant, having a child is not going to kill you. So just suck it up, be a grown up, and own up to the consequences of your decision to have sex. You don't NEED the "right" to kill your child because you screwed up. Nobody is going to die from not being able to have an abortion, and if a woman is actually in a life or death situation, her life is always valued above the life of the child anyway.

Well I'm glad you agree on that, but I think it's odd that you think a slow, gradual society shift due to making abortions more expensive is a good way to fight for all the unborn babies who are losing their lives because women are selfish and irresponsible. That doesn't seem good enough to me. But we will just have to agree to disagree on that.

That's an odd way to describe murder laws. I don't think murder laws are silly things that Congress made up. They're very important and valuable in our society. But again, I guess we have to agree to disagree.

Well good, I'm glad you wouldn't be mad if abortion was made illegal. I really don't understand the people who seem like they would practically give their lives for the right for people to have abortions. It seems like a really weird hill to choose to die on. I think fighting for the life of unborn babies is a noble hill to die on, but fighting for the right to be able to have some extra convenience in case you were too dumb to use protection or practice abstinence, that might result in killing someone, not so much.

Of course I did, we were having a reasonable conversation. And I hope you have a good day as well.

 

So you you read what I said and threw it out the window. I said even six weeks is plenty of time for them to decide, the heart is most commonly devoloped within six weeks and sometimes even in as little as four. I don't understand why it takes them so long to figure it out as you should know pretty quickly if you want an abortion or not.

Thanks but don't put words in my mouth next time.

 

Are you sure about that? I mean really sure?
Why should we even bother saving a life when it's too inconvenient?

 

I know people don't like this kinds of in your face emotional arguments, but honestly, that really is crazy to think about. The fact that babies are so innocent and tiny and completely helpless, and their mother is supposed to be the one to protect them above all else, and the womb is supposed to be the safest place in the world for them, away from the world and from harm, always with their mother who is there to care for them and protect them. It's crazy to think about that, knowing that abortion is legal.

 

Why stop at children? What are you doing to help these issues? What if it’s too inconvenient to keep you around? I’ll bet your humanitarian tune might change a bit when it comes to someone determining your life and worth. If you’re not willing to sacrifice your own life for these causes then what right do you have to speak for the unborn to sacrifice theirs? Hypocrisy at its finest.

Obviously I don’t want you to kill yourself but good lord SP rethink your stupid position which would open the door to a the next big genocide. FFS