The Politics of the "Abortion" Word Games

[Derideo_Te]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Stephen Hawking has admitted he made a mistake and the theoretical physicists and cosmologists the world over have been basing their science on incorrect presumptions for the last 40 years. There are now no black holes. He forgot to carry the 2.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Not knowing the limitations of science makes you less scientific than me. It's scientists who have acknowledged they can't explain life, the driving force that causes cells and organisms to will itself into existence from nascent forms into fully functional adults. Real scientists distinguish themselves from pseudo intellectual morons like yourself by something you'll never grasp or comprehend.

Humility.

 

[BlindBoo]

Except that is doesn't exist.

That's the funny thing about the absolute nature of truth. Your disbelief won't save you from hell. Only repentence will. All persons who commit, comission, or advocate abortion will be condemned unless they repent.

That last part was the good news.

Oh I'd love to believe in the fairy tale that sends all the bad people to a place for eternal punishment for their deeds, unless they repent but, I don't.

Absolute truth doesn't care what you believe.

Nor the Greek, Romans or Egytians, nor the current brand of popular poly-theism either.

The absolute truth is you cannot tell me where the mythical place called Hell is can you?

Dear BlindBoo
Hell is relative for each person, just like Heaven.

Heaven is where there is love, forgiveness, healing and equal inclusion and security/peace for oneself and all others as one.
This can be found internally in the mind, it can be established externally in relations. It can exist collectively for all humanity somewhere in time and space, and some people can already be living at that energy level of existence, while others aren't.

Hell is where there is suffering from unforgiven conflicts, projected instead of healed.
this goes in a vicious cycle to cause "eternal hell"
collectively, the suffering of all humanity on all levels of spirit and whatever levels of life and consciousness or energy
exists, becomes this greater hell.

War is hell.
Drug addiction that leads to endless drive toward self destruction is hell.

It depends on the person what is their part of hell and process of experiencing or overcoming the forces of hell.

BlindBoo if you want to get scientific about it
we could start measuring the energy and brainwaves when someone is at peace
and the energy/brain waves when someone has demonic obsessions that are a living hell.

So we could distinguish these two, and agree what we are talking about.

One is positive life giving energy that facilitates healing and productive good will and good faith in relations.
And that energy will show up as one form or level.

The other is negative energy of retribution and ill will, that kills the spirit,
blocks healing of the mind and body, destroys relations and leads to abuse, crime, violence, bullying etc.

If you want to scientifically prove
that one is positive and the other is negative
that isn't impossible to do.

So one leads to peace and collectively what people call the Kingdom of God or heaven on earth
by healing and maximizing relations and resources we share with others

And the other leads to diminished health, destroying relations and wasting resources
on war, crime, violence abuse and unresolved conflicts creating negative cycles.

One aligns with the path to heaven by forgiveness correction healing and inclusion.
One aligns with the path to hell by unforgiveness retribution ill will and divisive bullying by coercion or exclusion.

These two are clearly distinct from each other.
And attract the respective consequences by cause and effect or the laws of justice.

Heaven and Hell are symbolic terms for the COLLECTIVE level
but they can refer to someone's personal process and experience on an individual level.

either positive toward life and healing, or negative toward death and destruction.
Not rocket science, but so simple a child can understand.

In symbolic terms I can understand and even agree somewhat. However, those are not absolutes. That path to Heaven, or Nirvana, is not dictated by me accepting some mythological creature as the Christ, or savior of mankind, who died for my sins......nor is it contingent upon me to denounce my pro choice stance.

 

[BlindBoo]

Oh I'd love to believe in the fairy tale that sends all the bad people to a place for eternal punishment for their deeds, unless they repent but, I don't.

Absolute truth doesn't care what you believe.

Nor the Greek, Romans or Egytians, nor the current brand of popular poly-theism either.

The absolute truth is you cannot tell me where the mythical place called Hell is can you?

You'll be shown the way.

That is merely a belief. Not an absolute. There is no known location for Heaven or Hell is there? That is an absolute.

Hell's existence is not predicated on my ability to tell you where it is. Your argument is falling apart faster than Ikea furniture.

Your belief in Hell is not an absolute.

It is an absolute truth that the location of this Hell you believe in has never been known to any living man.

 

[Derideo_Te]

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Stephen Hawking has admitted he made a mistake and the theoretical physicists and cosmologists the world over have been basing their science on incorrect presumptions for the last 40 years. There are now no black holes. He forgot to carry the 2.

You really are "special", aren't you?

 

[chikenwing]

"You did not once during the 2008 campaign ask why Barack Obama voted in favor of legalizing infanticide,"Gingrich said. "If we're going to debate about who is the extremist on this issues, it is President Obama, who, as a state senator, voted to protect doctors who killed babies."
Newt Gingrich Calls Obama An 'Extremist' Who Supported 'Infanticide' At GOP Debate

This is why Newt Gingrich is an asshole.

2. n·fan·ti·cide/inˈfantiˌsīd/
Noun:
The practice in some societies of killing unwanted children soon after birth.

Soon after birth.

3. "Gingrich was presumably referencing Obama’s opposition to Illinois’ proposed version of a “born alive” law,intended to require doctors to administer immediate medical care to any infant that survived an intended abortion....FactCheck.org found holes in Obama’s explanations as to why he did not support the “born alive” legislation..."
FACT CHECK: Gingrich Claim on Obama Infanticide Vote A Stretch - Naureen Khan - NationalJournal.com

Is Gingrich a qualified medical practitioner? No? Then he can take a seat and listen to people who are. And the medical community is overwhelmingly pro-choice (like the rest of the population in general).

a. "Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee’s 2003 mark-up session."
FactCheck.org : Obama and ‘Infanticide’

And? Bills are huge. You can't expect a politician to know everything in each one.

4. If a child is 'accidentally' born alive as a result of a botched abortion attempt, Senator Obama had no problem allowing that newborn to die, sans any medical attention.

What's your point? It's not wanted. The doctor simply made a mistake. It technically becomes infanticide at that point, but it's still the woman's choice.

You sleep well at night,born alive mean what to you?

 

[Carib Gyal]

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Stephen Hawking has admitted he made a mistake and the theoretical physicists and cosmologists the world over have been basing their science on incorrect presumptions for the last 40 years. There are now no black holes. He forgot to carry the 2.

You really are "special", aren't you?

My family certainly thinks so, but it's nice of you to notice. However, his 40 year error had nothing to do with me.

 

[Derideo_Te]

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Not knowing the limitations of science makes you less scientific than me. It's scientists who have acknowledged they can't explain life, the driving force that causes cells and organisms to will itself into existence from nascent forms into fully functional adults. Real scientists distinguish themselves from pseudo intellectual morons like yourself by something you'll never grasp or comprehend.

Humility.

Science doesn't waste time on idiotic religious dogma like the "force of life".

Genuine scientists are far more interested in figuring out how things actually work than bothering with your mumbo-jumbo gibberish.

Obviously you know even less about science than you do about how to make a cup of coffee.

 

[koshergrl]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

I would agree with you as to when human development begins. If all goes well that development will eventually lead to a human being. Building a house may begin with a the laying of a single brick but that doesn't make that brick a house. It is impossible to say when the construction of a house results in a "house" just as it is impossible to say when biological development results in a human being. The line will be arbitrary and different people will view where that line lies differently. None of them are wrong but they have no basis to say that everyone else must accept their line as the only correct view.

No, it's already a human being. In the early stages of development.
Just as a teen is a human (but isn't an adult) and a child is a human, and an elder is a human, and a baby is a human.

It's exactly the same thing, just at a different developmental stage.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Not knowing the limitations of science makes you less scientific than me. It's scientists who have acknowledged they can't explain life, the driving force that causes cells and organisms to will itself into existence from nascent forms into fully functional adults. Real scientists distinguish themselves from pseudo intellectual morons like yourself by something you'll never grasp or comprehend.

Humility.

Science doesn't waste time on idiotic religious dogma like the "force of life".

Genuine scientists are far more interested in figuring out how things actually work than bothering with your mumbo-jumbo gibberish.

Obviously you know even less about science than you do about how to make a cup of coffee.

You have no idea what science does or doesn't concern itself with. That much you made clear. Have a nice life.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Based on the life begins at conception theory,

if a woman has an abortion, she has murdered her baby. Why do none of you who claim to support the premise refuse to support the logical consequence?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Abracadabra, spooky magic stuff for those who believe in stone age superstitions.



"Force of will" is utter nonsense when applied to cell division which a biochemical process controlled via DNA.

You might as claim that the app running on your cell phone has a "force of will" because it was programmed to send out your tweets.

Science is mystified by the force of life. The great philosophers have exalted its inscrutability. You don't even know that classes are held on it. How pathetic is that?

More Ooga-Booga superstition from the believer in sky bullies and talking snakes.

Getting a science lesson from you would be like listening to pond scum expound on what happens inside a black hole.

Not knowing the limitations of science makes you less scientific than me. It's scientists who have acknowledged they can't explain life, the driving force that causes cells and organisms to will itself into existence from nascent forms into fully functional adults. Real scientists distinguish themselves from pseudo intellectual morons like yourself by something you'll never grasp or comprehend.

Humility.

Science doesn't waste time on idiotic religious dogma like the "force of life".

Genuine scientists are far more interested in figuring out how things actually work than bothering with your mumbo-jumbo gibberish.

Obviously you know even less about science than you do about how to make a cup of coffee.

You have no idea what science does or doesn't concern itself with. That much you made clear. Have a nice life.

So now you are a mind reader too? Is there no end to your magical powers?

 

[koshergrl]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

BZZZT Wrong!

According to your own link "human development" begins at conception.

However it is not yet a human being at conception, merely a potential human being.

That's a value judgment. The very fact that it multiplies, specializes, and creates a human form through no other force of will but it's own is a compelling indicator of humanity that can't be set aside.

Yes everyone who is alive today began life as a simple fertilized egg. That doesn't mean every fertilized egg is a human life. Many never implant and simply get flushed away.

So you don't agree with the science.

Got it.

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

 

[NYcarbineer]

Life does begin at conception (scientifically speaking):

""Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception)."

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

I would agree with you as to when human development begins. If all goes well that development will eventually lead to a human being. Building a house may begin with a the laying of a single brick but that doesn't make that brick a house. It is impossible to say when the construction of a house results in a "house" just as it is impossible to say when biological development results in a human being. The line will be arbitrary and different people will view where that line lies differently. None of them are wrong but they have no basis to say that everyone else must accept their line as the only correct view.

No, it's already a human being. In the early stages of development.
Just as a teen is a human (but isn't an adult) and a child is a human, and an elder is a human, and a baby is a human.

It's exactly the same thing, just at a different developmental stage.

In your ideal world, would the death penalty be appropriate for a woman caught using the morning after pill?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Based on the life begins at conception theory,

if a woman has an abortion, she has murdered her baby. Why do none of you who claim to support the premise refuse to support the logical consequence?

Technically if she has a miscarriage she is guilty of manslaughter too.

 

[koshergrl]

""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]"

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Once again Don PoliticalSpice Quixote is on her futile crusade to tear down the wall of separation between church and state.

There is no such "wall, " you uneducated dunce.

The KKKer, Hugo Black, FDR's first Supreme Court nominee, inserted it and dopes like you believe that the concept was not anathema to the view of the Founders.

1. The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting ... First Amendment to the United States Constitution

Once again PoliticalSpice exposes her woeful ignorance of American history.

The KKKer, Hugo Black, FDR's first Supreme Court nominee, inserted it and dopes like you believe that the concept was no anathema to the view of the Founders.

Try reading Thomas Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists.

Jefferson s Letter to the Danbury Baptists June 1998 - Library of Congress Information Bulletin

Gentlemen

The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

Th Jefferson​

Jan. 1. 1802.

It was Jefferson himself who first used the phrase to describe the intent of the 1st Amendment.

Once again you have made a fool of yourself!

And once again the OP exhibits her ignorance of the Constitution and its case law.

The Constitution and case law are two very different things. Can you guess which one is the law of the land?

Incorrect

The Constitution and its case law are one in the same.

 

[Carib Gyal]

Based on the life begins at conception theory,

if a woman has an abortion, she has murdered her baby. Why do none of you who claim to support the premise refuse to support the logical consequence?

Because abortion is legal.

 

[koshergrl]

""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]

That's what the "science" says ^

Life Begins at Fertilization with the Embryo s Conception