Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree. It is absurd.I will say that believing life begins at implantation in the uterine wall is an absolutely absurd belief. What about an 8 week baby in an ectopic pregnancy? Alive or not?
. and I do not find it appealing to create fertilized eggs to begin cell division for medical research,
I don't find open heart surgery appealing but that doesn't mean I find it morally reprehensible and in fact it can be a good thing.
So do you think its morally acceptable to create and destroy as many human embryos as one wishes for scientific research as long as they have never been implanted? Again, yes or no would suffice. But if the answer is no, please give your reasoning. In particular, rectify it with the fact an unattached embryo is a lifeless piece of stuff.
HUMAN LIFE BEGINS AT IMPLANTATION
Thank you thank you for finally answering in plain english! Although I would note that a simple "No" would have sufficed!
Now that we've established a fertilized human embryo - with a unique set of human DNA from its father and mother - is NOT a human life until it implants - does this mean embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable? In fact, we can send off to the gas chambers as many billions of fertilized human embryos as we please and God won't mind, so long as they haven't implanted?
Ahhh... and the troll attempt to try and enrage further with the use of the tem 'gas chamber' to bring up visions of Nazi activity...
But you were answered before.... you did not like how the answer came about... for to call something life it must meet the criteria for life... and all of the criteria for life do not happen until implantation... you wanted a 'yes or no' answer to fit your little agenda for argument
And nice attempt to try and bring 'morally acceptable' into it with your baiting.... morally and actual are not inherently the same thing.... for example I find you to be a human life but morally I think you are sub-human
So, if the argument that life begins at implantion is absurd, then you beleive life does NOT begin at implantaion? When, then?I agree. It is absurd.I will say that believing life begins at implantation in the uterine wall is an absolutely absurd belief. What about an 8 week baby in an ectopic pregnancy? Alive or not?
The argument is absurd. ....
. and I do not find it appealing to create fertilized eggs to begin cell division for medical research,
I don't find open heart surgery appealing but that doesn't mean I find it morally reprehensible and in fact it can be a good thing.
So do you think its morally acceptable to create and destroy as many human embryos as one wishes for scientific research as long as they have never been implanted? Again, yes or no would suffice. But if the answer is no, please give your reasoning. In particular, rectify it with the fact an unattached embryo is a lifeless piece of stuff.
Again... YOU wish to make it a simple yes or no answer to fit your argument chain... when the answer is not a simple yes or no
I will not play your reindeer games
Thank you thank you for finally answering in plain english! Although I would note that a simple "No" would have sufficed!
Now that we've established a fertilized human embryo - with a unique set of human DNA from its father and mother - is NOT a human life until it implants - does this mean embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable? In fact, we can send off to the gas chambers as many billions of fertilized human embryos as we please and God won't mind, so long as they haven't implanted?
I do not believe so, for the same reasons, I am uncomfortable with the pill.
Just because I believe there is a difference between preventing implementation and surgically removing a viable implanted pregnancy does not mean, I am for artificially inseminating eggs simply for human experimentation.
It's one of the reasons I have moral objections to the fertility practice of inserting several pregnancies in the hopes one is good and then aborting several of the babies if more than one pregnancy happens.
So its OK to kill an unattached human egg for no reason other than not wanting to be pregant - but not OK to do it for medical research purposes in hopes of finding cures for such diseases as cancer?
OK. Where does it say that in the Bible?
Thank you thank you for finally answering in plain english! Although I would note that a simple "No" would have sufficed!
Now that we've established a fertilized human embryo - with a unique set of human DNA from its father and mother - is NOT a human life until it implants - does this mean embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable? In fact, we can send off to the gas chambers as many billions of fertilized human embryos as we please and God won't mind, so long as they haven't implanted?
Ahhh... and the troll attempt to try and enrage further with the use of the tem 'gas chamber' to bring up visions of Nazi activity...
But you were answered before.... you did not like how the answer came about... for to call something life it must meet the criteria for life... and all of the criteria for life do not happen until implantation... you wanted a 'yes or no' answer to fit your little agenda for argument
And nice attempt to try and bring 'morally acceptable' into it with your baiting.... morally and actual are not inherently the same thing.... for example I find you to be a human life but morally I think you are sub-human
I thought the issue of human life was black and white. Are you telling me there are gray areas, where something can not be entirely a human life, but should still be held above inanimate objects?
And where in the Bible does it say human life starts at implantation? Or is this something you trust scientists to determine for you? Does the Bible say to go with whatever the scientists say on this one?
With your last paragraph, I agree. The federal government should not be involved in it either way (restrictions or no restrictions). I am not so sure any government should be involved. This issue is a medical issue, thus between patient and physician.In the rare chance an egg is produced while a woman is on birth control, the birth control pill will often cause a fertilized egg - in other words - a HUMAN BEING - to fail to attach to the uterine wall. This results in an abortion.
Why is it OK to kill an embryo right after conception with a birth control pill, but not anything else?
After reading some of your posts in the past two days, I have become accustomed to your over politicization and biased comments; however, you are politicizing an issue that shouldn't be. Then again, it really isn't your fault; most American's have been raised to politicize almost everything. That is the failure of our two party system, but that is a different discussion. Your use of "anti-choicer" is an extreme over politicization of a person's opinion with regards to a woman's choice to abort her fetus. Pro-life and pro-choice are bad enough, but to develop your own unrecognized biased term to describe an individual who does not support abortion only demonstrates your inability to think outside of what you are told by your political party of choice.
An abortion is the removal of a fetus from the womb. According to scientific analysis and opinions of experts in the healthcare industry, a fetus, for humans, is a developing offspring from 8 weeks of gestation up until birth. Therefore, to group birth control pills into the same catagory as an abortion is just asinine. Contrary to your uneducated opinion; most birth control pills prevent embryogenises from occuring, not an abortion as you have claimed. There are, of course, birth control choices that do halt embryogenises after it has already begun (ie. morning after pill).
IMHO Roe v Wade should be overturned. I believe that the federal government should not be involved in the abortion debate and that the States and ultimately the people should be able to vote on such matters. Some of you in here will tell me that the Bill of Rights suggests that the "Right to Privacy" is understood but not mentioned and therefore the federal government has every right to rule on abortion and a women's right to choose. Beginning with President FDR, the US Constitution has been "interpreted" to assist in the passing of whatever legislation has been introduced that did not have the public's overwhelming approval. IMHO, the abortion issue was another that was politicized due to political pressures in Washington. From 1970-1973, four political women's rights groups were formed. Prior to these four groups, women's rights were only represented in civil groups. Remember also, that desegregation was still being implemented and we were recovering from the divide in the country from the Vietnam War and of course Nixon's Watergate scandle. SCOTUS was controled by President Eisenhower appointees and Republicans held a 5/4 majority over Democratic appointees. With all of the pressure from American's and the political pressure on the Republican party, SCOTUS had no other choice but to vote in favor of women's rights.
I don't find open heart surgery appealing but that doesn't mean I find it morally reprehensible and in fact it can be a good thing.
So do you think its morally acceptable to create and destroy as many human embryos as one wishes for scientific research as long as they have never been implanted? Again, yes or no would suffice. But if the answer is no, please give your reasoning. In particular, rectify it with the fact an unattached embryo is a lifeless piece of stuff.
Again... YOU wish to make it a simple yes or no answer to fit your argument chain... when the answer is not a simple yes or no
I will not play your reindeer games
How can the question of whether or not its acceptable to destroy innocent human life not be a simple yes or no? Or perhaps a "sometimes yes, sometimes no" ?
I will say that believing life begins at implantation in the uterine wall is an absolutely absurd belief. What about an 8 week baby in an ectopic pregnancy? Alive or not?
You a making the same argument that men make about miscarriage and abortion.
An eptopic pregnancy has no hopes of being born and can even kill the mother.
This is not the result of the mother (or father) doing anything.
It is not the deliberate taking of any birth control or by means of abortion.
I will say that believing life begins at implantation in the uterine wall is an absolutely absurd belief. What about an 8 week baby in an ectopic pregnancy? Alive or not?
You a making the same argument that men make about miscarriage and abortion.
An eptopic pregnancy has no hopes of being born and can even kill the mother.
This is not the result of the mother (or father) doing anything.
It is not the deliberate taking of any birth control or by means of abortion.
Did you read what I wrote? I was asking if an 8 week ectopic pregnancy is alive or not. In fact they have been taken from the fallopian tubes and successfully implanted(where they then became alive?) in the uterine wall and went on to be born.
You a making the same argument that men make about miscarriage and abortion.
An eptopic pregnancy has no hopes of being born and can even kill the mother.
This is not the result of the mother (or father) doing anything.
It is not the deliberate taking of any birth control or by means of abortion.
Did you read what I wrote? I was asking if an 8 week ectopic pregnancy is alive or not. In fact they have been taken from the fallopian tubes and successfully implanted(where they then became alive?) in the uterine wall and went on to be born.
It has implanted, started feeding, and started adapting to environment.... it is a developinging human life... and yes on occasion they have been saved and put into the womb.... but this is the very rare case... and indeed ectopic pregnancies do create a self defense/life or death situation for the mother..
Thank you thank you for finally answering in plain english! Although I would note that a simple "No" would have sufficed!
Now that we've established a fertilized human embryo - with a unique set of human DNA from its father and mother - is NOT a human life until it implants - does this mean embryonic stem cell research is morally acceptable? In fact, we can send off to the gas chambers as many billions of fertilized human embryos as we please and God won't mind, so long as they haven't implanted?
Ahhh... and the troll attempt to try and enrage further with the use of the tem 'gas chamber' to bring up visions of Nazi activity...
But you were answered before.... you did not like how the answer came about... for to call something life it must meet the criteria for life... and all of the criteria for life do not happen until implantation... you wanted a 'yes or no' answer to fit your little agenda for argument
And nice attempt to try and bring 'morally acceptable' into it with your baiting.... morally and actual are not inherently the same thing.... for example I find you to be a human life but morally I think you are sub-human
I thought the issue of human life was black and white. Are you telling me there are gray areas, where something can not be entirely a human life, but should still be held above inanimate objects?
And where in the Bible does it say human life starts at implantation? Or is this something you trust scientists to determine for you? Does the Bible say to go with whatever the scientists say on this one?
Jeremiah 1:5 (King James Version)
5Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
Did you read what I wrote? I was asking if an 8 week ectopic pregnancy is alive or not. In fact they have been taken from the fallopian tubes and successfully implanted(where they then became alive?) in the uterine wall and went on to be born.
It has implanted, started feeding, and started adapting to environment.... it is a developinging human life... and yes on occasion they have been saved and put into the womb.... but this is the very rare case... and indeed ectopic pregnancies do create a self defense/life or death situation for the mother..
You just invent your own reality as needed, don't you. How you could possibly say an ectopic pregnancy has implanted is mind-boggling.
Regardless the idea that the spark of life miraculously arrives due to a mundane event like implantation is preposterous.
My spleen is alive and it's human.Regardless the idea that the spark of life miraculously arrives due to a mundane event like implantation is preposterous.
Do you know the criteria for life?? Do you know at which stage those criteria start happening in human development??
I suggest you read into it and educate yourself
It has implanted, started feeding, and started adapting to environment.... it is a developinging human life... and yes on occasion they have been saved and put into the womb.... but this is the very rare case... and indeed ectopic pregnancies do create a self defense/life or death situation for the mother..
You just invent your own reality as needed, don't you. How you could possibly say an ectopic pregnancy has implanted is mind-boggling.
Do you know ANYTHING about an ectopic pregnancy??
The baby cannot survive and cannot be born if left in the ectopic pregnancy. It does not implant in the womb or endometrium of the uterus but IT DOES IMPLANT and start feeding off of the body of the mother
I have been around the OB/GYN and NNICU community all my life
Regardless the idea that the spark of life miraculously arrives due to a mundane event like implantation is preposterous.
Do you know the criteria for life?? Do you know at which stage those criteria start happening in human development??
My spleen is alive and it's human.Regardless the idea that the spark of life miraculously arrives due to a mundane event like implantation is preposterous.
Do you know the criteria for life?? Do you know at which stage those criteria start happening in human development??
I suggest you read into it and educate yourself
No.. it is a part of you... it in itself is not alive.... it is not feeding... it is not changing to environment.... it will never have the possibility of surviving on its own... if you cannot tell the difference between an independent or developing life and an internal organ, then you indeed need some help
