I have in the past agreed that a mother killing her baby in the womb IS LEGAL. Why do you keep arguing about points I do not contest?
It is human it is living and again how many abortions involve zygotes? And once again comparing a a zygote or fetus of any living being to a later specialized cell of that being shows a lack of knowledge on your part not mine.
Again showing your lack of knowledge taxonomy only classified what type of life not when that life begins. What makes u Schumann fro. The moment of conception is that it was a human sperm and a human egg that created that new human life. No the a subject is it is a human life in the womb something that is indisputable. And again the zygote stage is less than 120 hours. How many abortions occur during this one single stage of a human life you are so fixated upon? And again proving the OP point you refuse to even discuss what IS an abortion.
FoxHastings said: ↑ Why can't you accept the fact that no matter what you call it ( you choose the general term), it is legal for the woman to kill it.... That wasn't the point of the post of mine you quoted. The point was it doesn't matter what you call a fetus.....call it anything you want, nothing will change Hey, go to the Supreme Court and say abortion should be banned because you call a fetus a baby....those old farts could use a good LAUGH!!!
That has been your ONLY point and one not in dispute so stop repeating it as if it refutes anything I have said.
I didn't post it as a refutation but as a fact....abortion is legal....and it makes no difference what the fetus is called. The fact that it's legal is hardly my only point, just the one you focused on since you were so wrong about the other. Here's the uncherry picked post : That wasn't the point of the post of mine you quoted. The point was it doesn't matter what you call a fetus.....call it anything you want, nothing will change Hey, go to the Supreme Court and say abortion should be banned because you call a fetus a baby....those old farts could use a good LAUGH!!! Talked to the Supreme Court yet ??
Yes I agree it is legal. But that has nothing to do with refuting what I have stated. And no I don't the life in the womb anything I want I use proper words to do so a fact you refuse to admit even though demonstrated over and over and over. I don't pretend something else I discuss what actually happens in a abortion, what the is the purpose of the abortion. Something you tried to hide from with your "IT'S Legal IT'S Legal IT'S Legal IT'S Legal IT'S Legal IT'S Legal IT'S Legal " rants.
Of course a zygote is human. Same with every other living human cell. This does not make it a living human. Do you not know the difference between a descriptive adjective (human cell, human heart and so on ) and a noun ? (a human) Your attempts to move the goalposts "how many abortions involve zygotes" are noted. Your claim that the zygote is a human and you can not back up this claim. Then you build a strawman - putting words in my mouth. I did not compare a fetus to a later specialized cell. I did compare the DNA in the zygote to that of other cells - because you tried to claim that the zygote having human DNA made it a human) My comparison of the DNA was correct. Don't blame me for your ignorance. Further - the first 200 or so cells are totipotent (as is the Zygote) does this make all of those cells "humans" ?
Don't blame me for your lack of reading comprehension. I stated correctly that taxonomy gives the characteristic required for an organism to be classified as "Homo sapiens" not when life begins. Another laughable strawman - have you nothing but fallacy to contribute ? I previously gave you the 5 different scientific perspectives when human life begins. Metabolic, Genetic, Embryological, Neurological, Ecological. Only one of these perspectives puts the beginning of human life at conception which proves your defacto claim "life begins at conception" is fallacy. The reason it is fallacy is because you have not given any valid evidence that proves your defacto claim true. In order to prove your claim true (same with your laughable quotes from embryology textbook) you must refute the 4 scientific claims that contradict your claim. I did respond to your question "what is an abortion" despite the fact that this question is a red herring as it has nothing to do with your claim that a zygote is a human. An abortion stops the human creation process. You are the one who is avoiding questions - " would you save the 5 yr old child or the jar of embryo's" This question relates directly to your claim. That you avoid answering the question shows the depth of your lack of credibility and disingenuous denial of the obvious.
This does not make it a living human. Do you not know the difference between a descriptive adjective (human cell, human heart and so on ) and a noun ? (a human)[/QUOTE] Yes it does, a unique new human being at that stage of life every human being who has ever existed and every human being who will in the future will. And again why do you only focus on the first 4 days? No goal post moved my position has always been the same, the life in the womb is a human life, a baby. YOU are the one that wants to limit the entire discussion of abortion to just the zygote stage of life. So how many abortions are performed when the baby in the womb is still in the zygote stage of life? That you do not understand embryology and human development is not my problem. That you make the uninformed comparison of a zygote or fetus to a single heart cell and equate them is not my problem.
Oh my! You seem upset! No, despite your "comment" I have never denied what happens in an abortion, a fetus is killed....THAT is the purpose of an abortion, what the heck else would it be?? I have NEVER said otherwise....and you cannot prove I did.
ROFL no that would be you and Gift getting upset that I use correct and proper English when I discuss abortion. Yep a baby, that is what the pro-abortion side supports, mothers killing their babies.
We have several medical terms for a developing human in science, none of which are baby. That term is reserved for a developed human, typically after it is no longer in gestation and is more a casual statement than medical description. We also have terminology expressing the stages after birth that also are more familial than data driven...baby, infant, toddler, and child are examples. Calling anything within a mother "Baby" is nomenclature and irrelevant to rational discussion outside of casual conversation, it is also disingenuous in any Abortion debate.
Agree but screaming hysterically that "mothers are killing their BAAAAAAAABIES! " is so much more dramatic than "pregnant women kill their fetuses which they have a right to do even if I don't like it"""
Maybe that's why Anti-Rights people want laws against abortion so women do die in unsafe abortions...
Perhaps...myself I am under the impression the majority have replaced rational thought with willful ignorance. When we consider that all the data I have used to evaluate this issue is also free to them, and that I have even made it simple for them by providing it on request yet they do not choose to envelope it into their understanding I see no other possibility that can be stated here without infraction.
No, it's not useless. It's really very important. It's part of the debate over the separation of Church and State and part of the ongoing effort by several Christian Churches to take over the government of the USA. It has only a peripheral connection to any "life of the unborn" bushwa. It's mainly about establishing legal precedent for laws based on religion which would eventually be used to overthrow the Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_theology
Abortion is not about sexuality, sexuality is what the pro-abortion side wants the issue to be, but that's a distraction from the real issue. The real issue is the status of the unborn baby, is it a human with rights and deserving protection or not? No matter what you conclude about sexuality, the issue of the status of the unborn baby still remains. If the unborn is not a person, then there is no abortion issue at all.
, NO, it isn't. It's the Anti-Choice side that wants women punished for having sex. The Pro-Choice side is all about the woman's right to choose no matter how she got pregnant. No it doesn't....the unborn are NOT legal person's with rights. . The unborn is not a person and abortion wouldn't be an issue if nosy busy bodies would quit trying to take away women's right to their own bodies.
If men had the babies we wouldn't even be asking this question. Try telling a man he can't remove a wart.
You will never, ever have a society in which there are never any unwanted pregnancies. The USA has about as much sex education as is possible, it saturates the media and schools, yet there are a huge number of unwanted babies and abortions, and plenty of STDs. There will always be irresponsible people, women pressured into sex, failure of birth control, there will always be rapists, and there will always be medical defects in babies. Sex has consequences, and even of you want to reduce sex to recreation, you still have to address those consequences.
The act of sex and the act of becoming pregnant are two different acts. How a woman becomes pregnant has nothing to do with her right to her own body.
