Scientists witness 'flash of light' during conception

Good ole religion....

It will never leave us and is always there to make no sense when we need some comedic entertainment.

 

Yet, there is no flash of light unless the egg is bathed in fluorescent Zn2+ indicator (dye) solution and the dye is excited with an excitation light source. But, don't let that disturb your interpretation of Genesis.

 

Yes, "fetus" describes one stage, "baby" describes another, "teenager another. You can call your adult children "baby" but they will still be LEGALLY adults and you can call a fetus a giraffe but that won't LEGALLY (or scientifically) make it one.

You'd prefer women did what you expect of them.....how disappointing for you....

 

No. The assailant should be charged with assault on the woman. Grave bodily injury can carry long sentences depending on the state and the judge has a lot of discretion.

- - - Updated - - -

If you are claiming the UVVA sees a fetus as a person then you must also admit that the UVVA allows the killing of this "person" in an abortion because the law specifically says that is ok.

 

NO where in the following did I blame all unwanted pregnancies and abortions on Republicans.



"""""""No problem since it isn't "innocent"(it's also not innocent, it's can't be either) nor A human.

,


Last I looked women are under no obligation to use birth control and there are the Anti-Choicers who glorify in shutting down clincs where women can get accessible , affordable, safe birth control.




There is NO reason a woman should have to give up 9 months of her life, suffer the pain and damage of pregnancy and child birth, suffer financial and possible job loss, suffer setbacks to her career or education just to give another couple a baby...that would be stupid and I bet YOU wouldn't do it...






YES, having an abortion when you don't want or can't afford a kid IS taking responsibility for your actions and NOT dumping them on a kid!!!!!!




Oh, BS!

Abortions have been happening since people have been happening they didn't start with RvW...(and some poster argued with me when I said Repubs have NO knowledge of history)""""""







WHY do Anti-Choicers have to use so many lies? Don't they have a good honest argument?????

Maybe you could explain how shutting down clinics that offer affordable, accessible birth control helps stop abortion????????

It's a warped mind that thinks children should be born to people they think are so irresponsible....what a thing to wish on those kids!!!


Abortion isn't covering up anything, it's a legal medical procedure.


Can't address anything else in my post like the stupidity of saying, "oh , a woman can simply adopt it out"

 

Indeed it does. Because no one has the right to enslave another person against that person's will even as a means of survival.

 

So if a pregnant woman terminates a fetus (not embryo) for some person reason, lost her boyfriend or can't make a trip, has an abortion, then why do women who abandon or harm their 3 month old baby, get punished. Said another way, if a future human child (second human stage) can be legally terminated, what has changed by 3 months, to be convicted of some crime.

 

This is a legal matter. Our laws tell us that through capital punishment, in self-defense, and with abortions, you can legally take a human life. With a final exception of war, there is no other legal manner to take a life in the United States, even though some states are decriminalizing assisted suicide, it is still illegal at the federal level. Killing a three month old baby isn't one of those legally allowed ways to take a human life, and it is therefore illegal.

I hope this clarifies things.

 

His whole point is that this(manslaughter) law regards a fetus as a person, while the abortion law does not. So one would think that the progressives, to be consistent, would find the former law an offensive relic, even a threat, in need of retirement. Otherwise, abortion is as much manslaughter as a fetus death by assailant. After all, by law, a woman cannot kill or even beat or otherwise abuse her own children. So her free choice and values are rendered irrelevant by a multitude of laws.This is your predicament.

 

Your puerile strawman is ludicrous and has nothing whatsoever to do with individual constitutional rights.

You are also abysmally ignorant of the Law of Land and what it does and does not cover.

Your local community college offers adult remedial education that will help those suffering from being home schooled.

 

And it will immediately be challenged as a violation of a woman's right to an abortion and subsequently overturned by the SCOTUS because RvW made is clear that abortions cannot be banned by the states no matter what the specious pretext might be.

In this instance the "slippery slope" of allowing states to arbitrarily DICTATE what medical procedures are deemed to be "unprofessional conduct" is utterly ridiculous. What comes next? Gender reassignment surgery will be banned as "unprofessional conduct"? How about kidney transplants or hip replacements? Where does the line get drawn if the states can arbitrarily decide what is and isn't "unprofessional conduct" for medical doctors?

That unconstitutional law is DOA and it hasn't even been signed by the governor yet.

 

The difference? One is BORN and one is not. There is no person until one is born. You can argue with goofy comparisons but the law says you become a person at birth.

 

No, it won't stand with a 4-4 split because the law will be vacated by the federal circuit court as unconstitutional before it even gets to the SCOTUS. And it is unlikely that once the circuit court makes that ruling that the SCOTUS will even grant it cert.

Furthermore if you are banking on a conservative replacement for the late unlamented Fat Tony Scalia that is highly unlikely given that the GOP candidates have been alienating women voters across the board.

- - - Updated - - -

Life began on this planet 3.5 billion years ago.

 

Sorry, you're just another one who has no idea what the word "consent" means.

You are of the mind that women have no choice in anything so you want to tell them what to do.

Pregnant women have a choice. Take away that choice either by assaulting her and killing her fetus or by Anti-Choicers taking away her choice to have an abortion(two very similar entities) and that's breaking the law.

Abortion is not manslaughter, it's a legal medical procedure.
Assault is not...sorry you don't know the difference.,

 

Assumes facts NOT in evidence.

The right to privacy is not a "special right" and your right not to have your medical records made public is no different to those of a pregnant woman. Decisions made by you and your doctor are private matters and no, you don't get to dictate that they are public when it comes to abortion.

 

You are saying Constitutional rights only apply to citizens, yes?

 

I disagree. If the multitude of laws covered that, an abortion would be considered 'manslaughter'. There's one plain and simple reason it's not...

 

Up to 80% of pregnancies self abort.

 

What right did the fetus have when two consenting adults chose to fornicate? The mother and father are every bit responsible for what goes on in a pregnant woman's body.

 

Legally speaking, one could also look at it as an execution. And do you also believe that laws that dictate women cannot abuse, neglect or kill their children are also laws against women? Just because a woman is the sole individual responsible for her choices, it does not mean that to hold her responsible for her choices is somehow an attack on women. That's just silly and boo-hooey reasoning.

 

....because the majority of the Supreme Court didn't think it thru?

 

That's one opinion. The other being, they are correct. Both sides are up for debate. What isn't, is the decision.

 

True and fair point. Ya got me there.