Which should have first priority: The woman, the fertilized egg, or the fetus?

[Cecilie1200]

I’m From Alabama And Gave Birth To My Rapist’s Child Because I Couldn’t Get An Abortion

I GAVE BIRTH TO MY RAPIST’S BABY — AND IT CRUSHED ME

Women come first.

Lakhota so is it the woman's fault she got raped.
Where is the focus on the MEN to take responsibility first
before trying to put it on the women second?

Here are women who choose to have children conceived after rape.
Do you see liberals supporting these women?
www.choices4life.org

Here is the nonprofit that I believe deserves at least equal funding as Planned Parenthood.
The Nurturing Network www.nurturingnetwork.org

Why not focus on supporting women who don't want abortion.
Why is all the support and focus on women to have abortions?

Seriously, do you have a reading comprehension problem? I am defending women's reproductive rights.

Seriously, do you have a grammar problem? Abortion is not about "reproduction"; that's already happened at that point. Abortion is a PARENTING decision, and killing the kid as a nuisance just isn't a valid child-rearing option.

 

[Lakhota]

Yes, it's time to start regulating men's bodies!

 

[BWK]

This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.

NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.

Keep your legs closed and you won't have to decide

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

 

[BWK]

I’m From Alabama And Gave Birth To My Rapist’s Child Because I Couldn’t Get An Abortion

I GAVE BIRTH TO MY RAPIST’S BABY — AND IT CRUSHED ME

Women come first.

Lakhota so is it the woman's fault she got raped.
Where is the focus on the MEN to take responsibility first
before trying to put it on the women second?

Here are women who choose to have children conceived after rape.
Do you see liberals supporting these women?
www.choices4life.org

Here is the nonprofit that I believe deserves at least equal funding as Planned Parenthood.
The Nurturing Network www.nurturingnetwork.org

Why not focus on supporting women who don't want abortion.
Why is all the support and focus on women to have abortions?

Seriously, do you have a reading comprehension problem? I am defending women's reproductive rights.

Seriously, do you have a grammar problem? Abortion is not about "reproduction"; that's already happened at that point. Abortion is a PARENTING decision, and killing the kid as a nuisance just isn't a valid child-rearing option.

"Kid?" What "kid?" When did an abortion happen with a fully developed "kid" in the womb? And by the way, please define "kid" in the womb, because that's a new one on me.

 

[BWK]

This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.

NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.

Keep your legs closed and you won't have to decide

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

If it was without a care in the world, they wouldn't put so much effort into lying to themselves and everyone else about it.

Put this statement of yours in front of a woman who was just raped and impregnated, and she'd cuss you for everything you are worth about the lies you are telling.

 

[buttercup]

Keep your legs closed and you won't have to decide

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

 

[keepitreal]

What if the fetus is female?

 

[BWK]

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

 

[buttercup]

I’m From Alabama And Gave Birth To My Rapist’s Child Because I Couldn’t Get An Abortion

I GAVE BIRTH TO MY RAPIST’S BABY — AND IT CRUSHED ME

Women come first.

Lakhota so is it the woman's fault she got raped.
Where is the focus on the MEN to take responsibility first
before trying to put it on the women second?

Here are women who choose to have children conceived after rape.
Do you see liberals supporting these women?
www.choices4life.org

Here is the nonprofit that I believe deserves at least equal funding as Planned Parenthood.
The Nurturing Network www.nurturingnetwork.org

Why not focus on supporting women who don't want abortion.
Why is all the support and focus on women to have abortions?

Seriously, do you have a reading comprehension problem? I am defending women's reproductive rights.

Seriously, do you have a grammar problem? Abortion is not about "reproduction"; that's already happened at that point. Abortion is a PARENTING decision, and killing the kid as a nuisance just isn't a valid child-rearing option.

Again, THANK YOU. It annoys me when people use that completely deceptive phrase "reproductive rights" which is just something they're parroting from the slick, manipulative ghouls behind the abortion industry.

It's a lie right off the bat, as people already have reproductive rights. To Lakhota: you have the right to reproduce. And you also have the right to NOT reproduce. ONCE YOU BECOME PREGNANT, YOU HAVE ALREADY REPRODUCED. So, at the very least, be honest. You don't support "reproductive rights" (you already have that) you support "killing rights."

 

[buttercup]

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

 

[BWK]

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

No, it is not a "human" at conception, and "Life" has not been proven as I already linked earlier. What we have, is a developing fetus that develops into a fully developed human being at birth.

www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/human-being

 

[buttercup]

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

No, it is not a "human" at conception, and "Life" has not been proven as I already linked earlier. What we have, is a developing fetus that develops into a fully developed human being at birth.

www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/human-being

You make this too easy. I'm actually embarrassed for you.


“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

*********

“Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D. was first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization:

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

From Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40

*********

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

*********

National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization” 11/18/13

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

*********


Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.
“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

*********

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

*********

Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144
“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”
Quoted in Randy Alcorn “Pro-life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments” (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2000)

*********


“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55

*********

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”

*********

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3
“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.”

*********

Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943

“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. ”

*********

Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”

*********

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, [at conception] the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

*********

Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3

“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.”

*********

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and 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."

*********

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

 

[BWK]

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

Posters on here are claiming that abortion kills children or kids, which is a lie, because there is no established Biological evidence that a fetus in the womb is either one. They hijack the narrative to feed everyone inaccurate information. The same that you are doing.

And as my previous post points out, the definition of human being, says it is a man, woman, or child. It does not reference the pre-born. Why? Because it can't? And why is that? Because the definition has not established that it is a human being in the womb that is experiencing life? And why is that? Because Life has not been established in the womb from a scientific interpretation. You would tell us it is life based on your own convenient interpretation, but you have zero proof. Therefore, no one can accurately claim life, children, or kid while the fetus is in the womb.

 

[buttercup]

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

Posters on here are claiming that abortion kills children or kids, which is a lie, because there is no established Biological evidence that a fetus in the womb is either one. They hijack the narrative to feed everyone inaccurate information. The same that you are doing.

And as my previous post points out, the definition of human being, says it is a man, woman, or child. It does not reference the pre-born. Why? Because it can't? And why is that? Because the definition has not established that it is a human being in the womb that is experiencing life? And why is that? Because Life has not been established in the womb from a scientific interpretation. You would tell us it is life based on your own convenient interpretation, but you have zero proof. Therefore, no one can accurately claim life, children, or kid while the fetus is in the womb.

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

 

[emilynghiem]

Keep your legs closed and you won't have to decide

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Dear BWK and Ambivalent1
Perhaps better terms are "personhood" and when does the "conscious will" of a person
enter the body or develop as a separate identity from the mother.

Either way, this spiritual process of when does a separate consciousness enter the body
becomes FAITH BASED, so BWK is basically justified in contesting this as not something
Govt or laws can regulate or legislate because it involves personal beliefs.

Since this issue is going to get into personal beliefs and conflicts, regardless,
we might as well ask these questions BEFORE anyone gets involved with sexual
relations with anyone else.

Let's not wait until AFTER the point of pregnancy to discuss conflicting beliefs!

By acknowledging IN ADVANCE there are conflicts in beliefs BEFORE sexual relations are engaged in,
this can prevent people from engaging in sex to begin with if they don't agree on
the spiritual process and the terms of the sexual relations.

The more we get nowhere with comparing beliefs, the more
clear it is that people should be addressing these issues in advance, outside of govt.

We'd have to form agreements how to AVOID this whole situation from EVER coming up
in the first place, since we cannot agree how to define or manage the process AFTER pregnancy.

 

[BWK]

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

No, it is not a "human" at conception, and "Life" has not been proven as I already linked earlier. What we have, is a developing fetus that develops into a fully developed human being at birth.

www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/human-being

You make this too easy. I'm actually embarrassed for you.


“….it is scientifically correct to say that human life begins at conception.”

Dr. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard Medical School: Quoted by Public Affairs Council

*********

“Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D. was first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization:

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

From Landrum B. Shettles “Rites of Life: The Scientific Evidence for Life Before Birth” Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1983 p 40

*********

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”

Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

*********

National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/...

The government’s own definition attests to the fact that life begins at fertilization. According to the National Institutes of Health, “fertilization” is the process of union of two gametes (i.e., ovum and sperm) “whereby the somatic chromosome number is restored and the development of a new individual is initiated.”

Steven Ertelt “Undisputed Scientific Fact: Human Life Begins at Conception, or Fertilization” 11/18/13

*********

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a sperm and the resulting mingling of nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the initiation of the life of a new individual.”

Clark Edward and Corliss Patten’s Human Embryology, McGraw – Hill Inc., 30

*********


Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.
“[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being.”

*********

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

*********

Rand McNally, Atlas of the Body (New York: Rand McNally, 1980) 139, 144
“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”
Quoted in Randy Alcorn “Pro-life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments” (Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2000)

*********


“The formation, maturation and meeting of a male and female sex cell are all preliminary to their actual union into a combined cell, or zygote, which definitely marks the beginning of a new individual. The penetration of the ovum by the spermatozoon, and the coming together and pooling of their respective nuclei, constitutes the process of fertilization.”

Leslie Brainerd Arey, “Developmental Anatomy” seventh edition space (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55

*********

Thibodeau, G.A., and Anthony, C.P., Structure and Function of the Body, 8th edition, St. Louis: Times Mirror/Mosby College Publishers, St. Louis, 1988. pages 409-419

“The science of the development of the individual before birth is called embryology. It is the story of miracles, describing the means by which a single microscopic cell is transformed into a complex human being. Genetically the zygote is complete. It represents a new single celled individual.”

*********

Carlson, Bruce M. Patten’s Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3
“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.”

*********

Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943

“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. ”

*********

Lennart Nilsson A Child is Born: Completely Revised Edition (Dell Publishing Co.: New York) 1986

“but the whole story does not begin with delivery. The baby has existed for months before – at first signaling its presence only with small outer signs, later on as a somewhat foreign little being which has been growing and gradually affecting the lives of those close by…”

*********

Kaluger, G., and Kaluger, M., Human Development: The Span of Life, page 28-29, The C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, 1974

“In that fraction of a second when the chromosomes form pairs, [at conception] the sex of the new child will be determined, hereditary characteristics received from each parent will be set, and a new life will have begun.”

*********

Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3

“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.”

*********

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 1968), 43.

“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and 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."

*********

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1998), 2-18:

“[The Zygote] results from the union of an oocyte and a sperm. A zygote is the beginning of a new human being. Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm … unites with a female gamete or oocyte … to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

We already went over this before, and there is only one's own definition of life. There is currently no consensus regarding the definition of life. That comes straight from Wikipedia.

 

[Vel]

This is a sincere poll. I would appreciate honest answers. If you're willing, I would also appreciate your reasons. I will not criticize your choice. I would just honestly like to know where USMB posters stand on this issue.

NOTE: I know there are many possible variables, but this poll assumes "typical" circumstances. In other words, this is a superficial poll that assumes "normal/average" circumstances - meaning no rape, incest, health, deformity, financial, or other extenuating issues.

I'm not interested in your poll but would love to know where to find the disagree icon that someone rated your post with.

 

[BWK]

Shit happens - including rape and incest.

It's odd how you people can kill children without a care in the world

When and how did they become fully developed children in the womb again?

They are children. They are human. I'll bet you think that there really are 64 "genders".

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Dear BWK and Ambivalent1
Perhaps better terms are "personhood" and when does the "conscious will" of a person
enter the body or develop as a separate identity from the mother.

Either way, this spiritual process of when does a separate consciousness enter the body
becomes FAITH BASED, so BWK is basically justified in contesting this as not something
Govt or laws can regulate or legislate because it involves personal beliefs.

Since this issue is going to get into personal beliefs and conflicts, regardless,
we might as well ask these questions BEFORE anyone gets involved with sexual
relations with anyone else.

Let's not wait until AFTER the point of pregnancy to discuss conflicting beliefs!

By acknowledging IN ADVANCE there are conflicts in beliefs BEFORE sexual relations are engaged in,
this can prevent people from engaging in sex to begin with if they don't agree on
the spiritual process and the terms of the sexual relations.

The more we get nowhere with comparing beliefs, the more
clear it is that people should be addressing these issues in advance, outside of govt.

We'd have to form agreements how to AVOID this whole situation from EVER coming up
in the first place, since we cannot agree how to define or manage the process AFTER pregnancy.

While I agree that it is best for the problem not to occur, it's going to occur whether we like it or not, as long as humans walk. Rape is never far off in the world of humans. And that's reality.

My issue with beliefs, is the fact that pro-lifers pretend to use their beliefs as a cover for factual information. I do not. I just use the information provided by publications from a scientific acknowledgement. I don't let my personal feelings or emotions cloud my visions for the truth, just so I can push my desired narrative. And pro-lifers do just that. That's the big difference between the two concepts.

 

[BWK]

You aren't proving they are fully developed children. You are saying they are. Who are you to make that decision? God?

What scientific proof can you present that tells us they are fully developed children?

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

Posters on here are claiming that abortion kills children or kids, which is a lie, because there is no established Biological evidence that a fetus in the womb is either one. They hijack the narrative to feed everyone inaccurate information. The same that you are doing.

And as my previous post points out, the definition of human being, says it is a man, woman, or child. It does not reference the pre-born. Why? Because it can't? And why is that? Because the definition has not established that it is a human being in the womb that is experiencing life? And why is that? Because Life has not been established in the womb from a scientific interpretation. You would tell us it is life based on your own convenient interpretation, but you have zero proof. Therefore, no one can accurately claim life, children, or kid while the fetus is in the womb.

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

Your biggest problem you have, is understanding your own publication. I already linked the definition of "life" to you through Wikipedia. What your publication is offering to you is this, that the zygote/embryo/ fetus will develop into a fully developed human being, while calling it a human being. It still is not a fully developed human being. And that is what you struggle to understand.You are simply desperate to inject an argument for your desired narrative, when you fail to understand the totality of the meanings from your own publications that you post. You don't get it, because you don't want to get it. You want to call it a human being? Knock yourself out. But even your own publication does not do that. You need to know how to understand the difference between a developing hb and a fully developed human being. Which is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you.

 

[buttercup]

Where did he claim that they were "fully developed children" ? You're making a fool of yourself by repeating that inane phrase that has nothing to do with whether or not the preborn is a human, which it is, and only an ignorant fool would claim otherwise.

The definition of "children" or "kid"is not included in any scientific publications describing a fetus in the womb. The only one making the fool, is you. If I'm the fool, show me where the fetus is described as Children or kid. If you can't, then you just walked into your own foolish nonsense proving nothing. So, for these posters to tell us we are "killing children or kids" is just a liar.

I don't want to speak for him, but to me it was obvious he was using that word as a synonym for baby or offspring. You're either being dense or intentionally dishonest by focusing on that word ("child") instead of the actual point. The bottom line is, the preborn is a brand new, genetically unique individual, a living human being. Forget the word "children" and address the actual point. It seems you can't, because you know (as you were shown) it's an inescapable scientific fact that the preborn is a human being, simply in a different stage of life than you and I.

Posters on here are claiming that abortion kills children or kids, which is a lie, because there is no established Biological evidence that a fetus in the womb is either one. They hijack the narrative to feed everyone inaccurate information. The same that you are doing.

And as my previous post points out, the definition of human being, says it is a man, woman, or child. It does not reference the pre-born. Why? Because it can't? And why is that? Because the definition has not established that it is a human being in the womb that is experiencing life? And why is that? Because Life has not been established in the womb from a scientific interpretation. You would tell us it is life based on your own convenient interpretation, but you have zero proof. Therefore, no one can accurately claim life, children, or kid while the fetus is in the womb.

Open your eyes and look at the post right above your last one. Once again, you are making a fool of yourself by denying the scientific fact that the zygote/embryo/fetus is a brand new human being, regardless of age, size or location.

You can argue that the preborn is not a person (which would also be incorrect) but to claim the preborn is not a human is blatantly ignorant and false.

Your biggest problem you have, is understanding your own publication. I already linked the definition of "life" to you through Wikipedia. What your publication is offering to you is this, that the zygote/embryo/ fetus will develop into a fully developed human being, while calling it a human being. It still is not a fully developed human being. And that is what you struggle to understand.You are simply desperate to inject an argument for your desired narrative, when you fail to understand the totality of the meanings from your own publications that you post. You don't get it, because you don't want to get it. You want to call it a human being? Knock yourself out. But even your own publication does not do that. You need to know how to understand the difference between a developing hb and a fully developed human being. Which is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you.

There you go again, using that ridiculous phrase "fully developed human being" which just shows that you STILL don't get it, and you're still putting forth your own confused ideas as fact.

No, the quotes are clear. They're all saying basically the same thing: human life begins at conception. There are numerous different stages of life - but in each of those stages, you have a genetically unique individual, living human being. And I didn't post a "publication" - I posted a variety of quotes, from different people, quotes from medical textbooks.

Again, a zygote or embryo is not supposed to look like a newborn or a child, it looks exactly like a human being is supposed to look at that stage of life.

It's getting boring trying to discuss this with you, because you're being repetitive, ignoring quotes from scientists and medical textbooks, and putting forth your own confused, politically-driven misguided ideas as fact.