Texas 6-week abortion ban takes effect after Supreme Court inaction

No, I say so because science says that is when a human begins to develop. It's been that way since animals have been bearing young.

 

Indeed. Same direction I was going. Life is a continuum, not an event.

 

How could they? Fingerprints are in no way genetically determined.. They form from pressure on a baby's tiny, developing fingers in the womb and they are never exactly the same, even on ID twins

 

Then he shouldn't be charged his share, but he should have to swear under oath and be held to all the child support if the mother changes her mind.

 

That makes no sense. When DOES life begin implies that some life is still beginning. Which it does. At conception, for animals.

Life or human? Make up your mind.

How 'bout both.

Human life in its current form, homo sapiens, began over 300,000 years ago, and continues to this day. If we had evolved from the reptilia class, women would bury their eggs and be done with it. We wouldn't be having this discussion. But that obviously wasn't God's plan.

The moment of conception may seem to be the obvious choice for "when does life begin," but it doesn't pass the logic test. Conception is a stage, which is preceded by other stages, all of which are necessary, and the disruption of any alters the potential life that may be formed.

Here's a thought experiment. We assume that human involvement in pregnancy is accepted, which is an argument in itself.

(I believe we are already at this stage in knowledge.)

Is it ethical to sift through a sample of sperm looking for the most viable specimen? Or for desired characteristics? Since each is a potential life, and considering the natural method would select a different sperm, are we not "murdering" the "rightful" (half) baby?

That life begins at conception is logically arbitrary.

 

Thanks. I'm an expert on fingerprints now. Lol.

 

You asked the nebulous question, then started talking about single celled amoeba or whatever the first life was 4 billion + years ago.

Conception has no earlier stage. A human sperm or egg, by itself, will never create a separate human being. Sorry. Simple science. That is when a human life (and other animal kingdom life) begins. At the point the egg is fertilized. This is like middle school biology.

 

That's fine... But I mean the Father take full custody of the child the mother will have no right to it. There will be the issue IF the child will be safe with her seeing how she wanted to kill it..

 

"Let's just define ourselves as correct!" is so much fun. Watch me do it.

Me, I can trace my development back to an unfertilized egg. That egg indisputably developed into me. Therefore, that egg is a human being, and anyone who destroys eggs is killing helpless haploid humans. That includes by starving them of any resources they need to develop, like a sperm cell. Celibacy is murder.

My argument there is ... slightly more sensible than yours.

 

LOL, if the egg remained unfertilized, you'd not be here. Is that fact, or me defining you into existence?

 

.

 

And if the zygote didn't emplant in the uterine lining, you wouldn't be here. And if a whole chain of other things didn't happen, you wouldn't be here.

You just focus on one of many things in the chain. You're simply defining yourself as correct, using a totally subjective choice.

 

Weird, I thought there was another process that fertilize the egg... BY GOD are you suggesting you were of immaculate conception!

 

The question is when does a human life begin. NOT "when might a human life fail naturally to develop?" Thanks. You can put down the goalposts you're moving around, I'm not chasing them.

 

I'll take it a step further. Where did that egg come from? It came from another egg. So, any disruption to the other egg means the egg that created you would never exist. Looks like a double murder to me.

 

Well according to Texas law, when there is a heart beat, that should be fair enough! If you can't determine if you want it or don't in six weeks then maybe more aggressive birth control should be considered,

 

And the women making that choice don't share your views.

 

They're not the only human life involved. The other side being murdered can't speak for itself, unfortunately, or they'd probably disagree.

 

Again, human life existed before conceoption. This isn't a debate, no matter how you try to move the goalposts.

You're the one hauling them around the field. I'm just pointing out, correctly, that you're using totally subjective standards to define yourself as correct, so you can get your hate-jollies calling other people murderers.

You are free to do that, of course, no matter how illogical, science defying and immoral it is. Just don't expect anyone else to bow down to your subjective edicts.

 

I think the real issue here is not abortion but abuse of abortion! Jesus Christ, how did we get to the level that medical procedure replaces common sense and contraceptives? Seems to me somebody needs wise up and start thinking things thru, it's not like having unprotected intercourse could and DOES result in pregnancy

 

What are you talking about? A sperm cell is not a separate human life and never will be if not fertilizing an egg. Same for the egg, if it's not fertilized.
Sounds like some strange equivocation fallacy you have going on here.

I've never seen an unfertilized human egg driving down the road, or sitting in a school desk learning its ABCs.

It's not a subjective standard. It's scientific fact.

 

It gets born.

"Person" or "human being" or "a human" is a social and legal definition. It always has been. It has never been a scientific definition. And for all of human history, all of humanity has assigned that status at birth.

Your defnition says the opposite, being it says "individual", which a fetus is most certainly not.

 

Lol. Conception IS A STAGE. It's not made of stages. Your comprehension is lacking severely, so I'll just ignore the rest. The middle school biology lesson is cute, but cute obviously isn't enough to comprehend greater ideas.

You say a fertilized egg is when life begins. I say a fertilized egg is a stage of life, which began 4.28 billion years ago. You think this stage is special. I'd agree. I think the fight among millions of individual sperm is special, as well. It's all special. Where we differ is you feel your idea of special should be encoded into law. For no apparent reason, other than your opinion.

There's another human being you're leaving out of the equation here. You know, the one whose body produced the egg to begin with. The one whose body the egg attached itself to.

Okay, recess is over. Back to 7th grade biology.

 

You say that because you're obviously trying to justify your murder of helpless haploid humans.

Again, fixating on one step in a many step process is completely subjective.

Skin color is also a scientific fact, but it's wildly subjective to choose it as a standard. Same with your choice.

 

This is begging the question. A fallacy. The debate, as it comes to abortion, is in part whether the law should consider an unborn person to have rights. You don't get to point to the law and then say, that's what the law says, I win, lol. The law just is what is being debated.

If I used your logic, I could defend slavery before it was outlawed. That's the law! A slave is 3/5 of a person and that's that!! Surely you can see how absurd an argument that is.