If Wiki is nonsense it should be easy for you to refute, so why don't you try instead of posting more anal comments. You like the word "obviously" don't you, so it must be "obviously" easy for you to find evidence that supports your premise, of course that could well be "obviously" to difficult for you. Where do I mention embryo/fetus, this stage is before an embryo/fetus even exists .. please do some biology lessons before jumping in with "obviously" inaccurate information, "we all know" its inaccurate. It's the usual thing seen here that when you cannot refute what has been provided you resort to the inane responses that are common with your replies, problem is it doesn't work with most of the people here.. it just makes you look arrogant.
I am not even 'the same' as I was yesterday. Life, as you know, begins at birth. Otherwise every amoeba is human and to be protected. Avoid chop-logic and think.
However hard I try, pregnancy seems to escape me! Obviously nothing 'just appears at birth' in the sense that it comes like a rabbit out of a hat, but if you get obsessed with causality you either choose that point ofr go back to simple, single-celled organisms and enslave everyone forever to protect them. What you people are is bullies, you know, however moral you may feel, and, indeed, self-righteousness is a sure sign. When you have had to endure the fate of so many unmarried mothers in poverty or been brought up like the unwanted children you lot doom to jail, get back to me, but meanwhile I think you are just playing Holy with other people's lives, and you should fight it.
Hey you ran from my question as do several others on here. LOL I will ask it AGAIN. Are your for allowing women choice to abort anytime they wish...or does your position enslave the woman...based on your morality?
Life does not start at birth. Let me educate you. The consensus is overwhelming that life starts at CONCEPTION NOT BIRTH. When the egg is fertilized by the sperm...it becomes a zygote which is a GENETICALLY DISTINCT PERSON. GET IT? Dr. Bradley M. Patten’s textbook, Human Embryology states, “It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual.” Dr. Keith Moore’s text on embryology referring to the single cell zygote says, “The cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being.” He also states, “Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote.” THESE ARE TEXTBOOKS...people refer to them when they are studying to be doctors. Much research goes into them before they are allowed to be published..to be able to state something like that. Dr. Louis Fridhandler, in the medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as, “that wondrous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual.” Doctors E.L Potter and J.M. Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, “ Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death os brought about by some specific condition.” The facts I just posted do not come from clergy...but medical doctors, scientists...they come from research in a lab not a church. They are secular sources and their conclusions are based on SCIENTIFIC AND MEDICAL FACTS. And who is to be believed...someone with credentials like this.... Dr. Jerome Lejeune was an internationally known geneticist and a professor of genetics at the University of Rene Descartes in Paris. Dr. Lejeune received the Kennedy Award from the late President for his discovery that Down's syndrome (Trisomy 21) was due to an extra chromosome. Dr. Lejeune contributed greatly to genetic research to prevent and treat Trisomy 21. The following testimony was given by Dr. Lejeune before a U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee. This is worth reading. These facts state not a theory or hypothesis and certainly not a religious belief. Every one of these examples is a secular source. Their conclusions are based on scientific and medical FACTS.
'Life' starts a very long time ago in the Primal Soup. Individual life starts at birth. I made a typing slip and fell amongst chip-logicians, Sorry - it is my dyslexia!
You are wrong based on the medical and scientific evidence we know. Life outside the womb starts at birth. But human life, the start of a new individual life starts at conception inside the womb. Why not get educated on this?
You are running from the question. State your position clearly. Should a woman be allowed by our laws to abort at any time? yes or no Or should there be restrictions?
My position is very clear. When we were told we should have an abortion, we didn't, but it was nobody's business but ours. Childbirth to whatever point is the business of the woman concerned. MYOB!
So you are for allowing a woman to walk into a clinic a week before her due date and kill the life inside her. Wow. Hey Pasithea....found one more in your group !!!
You are in favour of forced birth then, so that you can torment and make the child suffer in your slums and prisons? What is it with you people to want to enforce this horror on others?
Yes. yes and yes. And you are in favor of killing children...even in the ninth month......wow. Now that is something to put on a resume. Now can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that every child allowed to live would end up in prison or slum? Please provide proof.
Absent the fact that every human being begins that way, you might have a point. but there is that one pesky fact that gets in your way. And I see you have once again maintained that a living human being in his/her first stage of development is not a "living human" Seems you are insulting yourself! - - - Updated - - - Birth cannot be forced absent the application of drugs and/or hormones artificially to enduce labor. That is not what any pro -life person is proposing. Birth is a natural progression of pregnancy. Read up on it, it is actually fascinating!
Well. you've been desperate to get back into cliché rather than have a sensible discussion, and here we are. Capitalism ensures that anyone unwanted ends up either in jail or as a capitalist thief, as you know. So many of you lot detest people and want them to suffer, so you force them to be born. I hope you are prepared to face the Judgement you believe in for this detestable wickedness.
Well unlike you, I try to stay on topic. Fetuses are aborted, not blastocysts. Therefore, whether or not a fetus is a human being is the important factor. Perhaps you should become educated yourself before you start slinging feces. - - - Updated - - - Well as you have been schooled on repeatedly, nobody anywhere agrees with you. Roe V Wade is not consistent with your view, nor are any laws on abortion anywhere in the world that I am aware of. Perhaps you could dredge up some obscure person or nation somewhere that shares your barbaric view.
It is shameful that I even have to explain this to you, but "same" does not always mean "identical". A child is the same person as the adult he/she grows up to be despite not being identical in every way. Identified the same way, with the same lineage, DNA, etc....
It is funny that we have been through this about 10 times now and you have yet to justify this statement. How does the fact that the creation of the human being goes through stages get in my way ? The creation of a heart begins with a single heart cell but that single heart cell is not a heart. (This refutes your claim btw, ) As usual you are incorrect. The premise of my post is that you have not provided a valid argument for the premise " zygote is a living human" There may be a valid argument out there. You just have not come up with one. In fact you have not even made an argument, never mind a valid one. Repeating a premise over and over again is not an argument.
I think that, probably, you have difficulty with reading. What do I care about your ludicrous laws, man? - - - Updated - - - The self is a crazy fantasy, as is the notion of continuity-as-identity. An amoeba is not a fish is not a monkey is not a baby, as well you know. On your logic, you are a corpse.
your quote "'Life' starts a very long time ago in the Primal Soup. Individual life starts at birth. ...." So tell me how I am wrong. Roe does not condone abortion up to birth, does it? Show me. Has anyone else here shared your silly opinion that human life begins at birth? Show me. You clearly have no concept of what logic is, given your last statement below. There is no continuity in identity? Hmm, tell that to the authorities in any jurisdiction anywhere if you want to hear them laugh. "I am sorry officer but I was speeding 30 seconds ago, I am a completely different person now and can not be identified as the offending individual"
Individual human life starts at birth. Americans extremists, doubtless, begin with and include the amoeba and the rotting corpse in their triumphant money-grubbing. Stop woofling, and don't force this curse of life-in -capitalism on those who haven't deserved it..
Really, so you are at odds with other pro-lifers then as they are trying to stop the sale of the morning after pill and IUD's as these interfere with the ability of the blastocysts to implant into the uterine wall, which they claim is an abortion . .are they wrong? http://www.prolifephysicians.org/map_esc.htm http://www.cogforlife.org/morningafterpill.htm Let us remind everyone of what you posted that is contradictory. Well the blastocyst is one of the earliest stages of fetus and it is not the same person or human being as the fetus in a later stage. So which is it. Is the fetus in all stages of development a person or not, so are you now making a idiotic comment.
Since you are a Wiki fan, check this out: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_blastocyst What is a blastocyst? In: Growth Rates [Edit categories] Answer:When a sperm fertilizes an egg, the resulting embryo develops from the original single cell into a complete human being, consisting of billions of cells. This occurs through a series of cell divisions into two cells, then four, then eight and so on. By about four days after fertilization, there is a ball of cells, which then absorbs fluid and expands to form a cavity. The embryo is now called a blastocyst and consists of a layer of outer cells that eventually become the placenta, and a small number of inner cells, which will form the fetus. At this stage, about a week after fertilization, the embryo has completed its journey down the Fallopian tube and reached the uterus. About this time the blastocyst hatches out of its thin shell (the zona pellucida) and implants in the womb lining. I don't see how the fact that some blastocyst cells are cast off to form the placenta has any effect on my assertion that the zygote through the infant is the same person. Some cells ouright die during the process. I never claimed that every cell along the way stays intact and is present in the infant.
Right back at you, where do the cells that form the placenta come from, do they magically appear out of thin air or are they also part of the original conception, is the placenta also human life and as such (in your opinion) deserving of rights? Do you or biologists know from the single cell which will become the fetus and which the placenta?
I must refer you back to post #399 wherein I stated "I don't see how the fact that some blastocyst cells are cast off to form the placenta has any effect on my assertion that the zygote through the infant is the same person. Some cells outright die during the process. I never claimed that every cell along the way stays intact and is present in the infant." You highlighted the fact that cells within the Blastocyst will form the fetus. Perhaps you can explain why you think this has an affect on the validity of my premise.
