Child support in the Womb

In that case, I’m 100% on board.

 

That is your absurd claim that a single human cell is a human being with rights including the right to life that should be protected, not mine friend. I suggest you take your own advice and "Bone up on some biology" .. not realizing that flushing the toilet after morning bio break kills a large number of these poor human beings you wish so much to protect.

Biology .. single human cell is not A human friend. Is not classified as Homo Sapiens . lacking all the requisite characteristics cept being a eukaryote.

Sorry Blue -- not all human eukaryotic organisms are Humans .. more a question of understanding the difference between a noun and descriptive adjective rather than a biology question ... so another fail in that respect .. wrong subject matter domain .. like with your appeal to Embryology fallacy.

Got some logs to pull out of own eye prior to going around telling others to "Bone up on some biology" there boy Blue

 

Good grief mate --- human cells are not Children of Humans .. then you run around and tell others to bone up on Biology ?? Where are you getting this from.. because it is not a biology book.

Sure when a cell divides .. producing 2 identical copies of itself we can call those cells children of the parent cell. but these human cells are not Humans - not babies .. not the children of a human .. OK .. basic Biology .. try taking that log out of own eye.

 

OK. I can't listen to that anymore. You're just spewing misogynist hate.

Women are at least as important as men, having full rights of bodily autonomy.

 

The problem is that the government took it from its mother.

We already have child protective services, with the mission of dealing with cases where the child is in an unsafe environment.

What has been proposed here has nothing to do with safety for the child.

 

yes, never denied that, are you admitting you want families to pay a needless fee to store medical waste after paying thousands to have a baby

why is the right trying to make in-vitro so expensive of an option?

 

I find it odd that you are complaining about the Right's desire to "control women" in a thread that is about the Right allowing women to get money from men for being pregnant and giving birth.

 

Who said they didn't ? clearly you have mis-understood

 

I was responding to a specific post that put a lot of caveats on that “allowance”. Caveats that translate as controlling behaviours

 

And unless you have a nationwide database of male DNA that might be a useless intervention

 

Yes you did you questioned whether the companies should be able to charge for their services msg# 34.

Why are the cost to do so "needless" are the companies supposed to do it for free?

What here makes it more expensive? What just happened ensured it would be less expensive because of a possible liability.

 

Yes HHS removes children routinely you don't believe this should happen in any case at all? Yes when the mother cannot properly provide for the child, including refusing to disclose it's father so the state can step in and hold the father responsible, amongst here SEVERAL other children then is is a matter of safety for the child and the child's future well being. Mothers do not OWN their children, they are not property. What is more important to you the happiness of the mother or the well being of the child? Do you believe it is the OBLIGATION of the rest of us to support this mother's desire to have and more children she cannot provide a proper home environment threatening the well being of the child and how that will effect us ALL when with the likelihood that child will grow up an become a criminal and an even higher cost on our society?

You tell me what is your answer.

 

Good grief bubba.............not all cells are the same...........yes I run around with the biology you should try to read some. Yes there are one celled children of humans, they are one celled for about 24 hours as I have cited to you.

The science has long ago answered the question why do you ignore the science?

https://www.epm.org/resources/2011/Apr/27/when-does-life-begin-quotes-many-sources/

From medical textbooks:
What do the scientists who are most familiar with genetics and embryology say?

The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 6th ed. Keith L. Moore, Ph.D. & T.V.N. Persaud, Md., (Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 199, 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."

From Human Embryology & Teratology, Ronan R. O'Rahilly, Fabiola Muller, (New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996), 5-55:
"Fertilization is an important landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed... Fertilization is the procession of events that begins when a spermatozoon makes contact with a secondary oocyte or its investments... The zygote ... is a unicellular embryo.."

Essentials of Human Embryology, William J. Larsen, (New York: Churchill Livingstone, 199, 1-17:
"In this text, we begin our description of the developing human with the formation and differentiation of the male and female sex cells or gametes, which will unite at fertilization to initiate the embryonic development of a new individual. ... Fertilization takes place in the oviduct ... resulting in the formation of a zygote containing a single diploid nucleus. Embryonic development is considered to begin at this point... This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."

Human Embryology, 3rd ed. Bradley M. Patten, (New York: McGraw Hill, 196, 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."

Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2:
(updated, still the same)
"Human begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual." "A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."

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."

J.P. Greenhill and E.A. Friedman Biological Principles and Modern Practice of Obstetrics (Philadelphia: W.B. Sanders, 1974), 17:
"The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life."

Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Miller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8:
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization... is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte."

William J. Larsen, Essentials of Human Embryology. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1998. pp. 1, 14:
"Human embryos begin development following the fusion of definitive male and female gametes during fertilization... This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."

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."

E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3d ed. (Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975), vii:
"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."

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, 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."

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..."


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."

Turner, J.S., and Helms, D.B., Lifespan Developmental, 2nd ed., CBS College Publishing (Holt, Rhinehart, Winston), 1983, page 53:
"A zygote (a single fertilized egg cell) represents the onset of pregnancy and the genesis of new life."

Clark, J. ed., The Nervous System: Circuits of Communication in the Human Body, Torstar Books Inc., Toronto, 1985, page 99:
"Each human begins life as a combination of two cells, a female ovum and a much smaller male sperm. This tiny unit, no bigger than a period on this page, contains all the information needed to enable it to grow into the complex ...structure of the human body. The mother has only to provide nutrition and protection."


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."

DeCoursey, R.M., The Human Organism, 4th edition McGraw Hill Inc., Toronto, 1974. page 584:
"The zygote therefore contains a new arrangement of genes on the chromosomes never before duplicated in any other individual. The offspring destined to develop from the fertilized ovum will have a genetic constitution different from anyone else in the world."

In the Womb, National Geographic, 2005 (Prenatal Development Video):
"The two cells gradually and gracefully become one. This is the moment of conception, when an individual's unique set of DNA is created, a human signature that never existed before and will never be repeated."

The Biology of Prenatal Development, National Geographic, 2006. (Video):
"Biologically speaking, human development begins at fertilization."

Encyclopedia Britannica, "Pregnancy," page 968, 15th Edition. Chicago 1974:
"A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg."

Leslie Brainerd Arey, "Developmental Anatomy" seventh edition (Philadelphia: Saunders, 1974), 55:
"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."

From scientists:
From California Medicine 113, no.3 (1970), reprinted in The Human Life Review 1, no.1 (1975): 103-4:
"...since the old ethic has not been fully displaced it has been necessary to separate the idea of abortion from the idea of killing, which continues to be socially abhorrent. The result has been a curious avoidance of the scientific fact, which everyone really knows, that human life begins at conception and is continuous whether intra- or extra-uterine until death. The very considerable semantic gymnastics which are required to rationalize abortion as anything but taking a human life would be ludicrous if they were not often put forth under socially impeccable auspices. It is suggested that this schizophrenic sort of subterfuge is necessary because while a new ethic is being accepted the old one has not yet been rejected."
"...each of us has a unique beginning, the moment of conception...As soon as the twenty-three chromosomes carried by the sperm encounter the twenty-three chromosomes carried by the ovum, the whole information necessary and sufficient to spell out all the characteristics of the new being is gathered...(W)hen this information carried by the sperm and by the ovum has encountered each other, then a new human being is defined which has never occurred before and will never occur again...[the zygote, and the cells produced in the succeeding divisions] is not just simply a non-descript cell, or a "population" or loose "collection" of cells, but a very specialized individual, i.e., someone who will build himself according to his own rule." (As quoted in Linacre Quarterly, February, 1993)

And I have not even touch on the international science which only reiterates the above.

They are cells of the new human being with an entirely different DNA..........anyone who ever studied ANY biology would know that. You became an entirely new and unique human being the moment you were created not at some other time.......Biology 101.

I cited it here
http://politicalforum.com/index.php...s-are-children.616875/page-19#post-1074703638

Then what genus and species are they?

 

Ahhhh we were discussing the first............are you now conceding the human being is created at conception and now just claiming that human being has no rights? Is that your new argument?

 

I find nothing flawed about holding fathers responsible for their children's wellbeing.

I think it might be a good incentive for the mother to not kill her baby if she knows she will bear the entire cost should the father NOT want his son or daughter killed. Do not conflate babies who are killed in an abortion and those who do not make it through to birth due to natural causes.

 

Read my post.

Child protective services steps in when a significant problem exists - not when the government guesses at future happiness.

Everyone is allowed to have a child.

Not divulging the father can not possibly be used as an excuse for government action against the woman, let alone taking her children.

 

What was that spaghetti on the war you posted as a rational your tired crucified claim that a single human cell is a living human .. We don't need 10 different justifications for your claim that don't work .. just one that does .. rather than trying to hide the fact that you don't have one that does .. in a big pile of those that don't

Give us One (1) - justification that works .. .. and no a Human-Being is not created at conception .. any more than a sperm is a Human-Being.
The hyphen means using the compound word definition .. in case you were yet to upgrade those English skills to include being able to distinguish between a noun and a descriptive adjective use of the word .. "Human" .

This has nothing to do with what I think on the issue .. no need to deflect from your failing with such tactic. This is about you coming up with support for your claim .. .. one piece of evidence that shows your claim is true .. one valid justification .. to try to resurrect previously and utterly crucified positions

and also tell us how many appeal to authority fallacies were committed in your spaghetti post .. such that we can be assured you know what that one is .. in hopes to avoid in the future .. at least pare down the volume of spaghetti ... removing those nasty fallacies..

Anyhow .. come on now .. one solid justification/ rational for why your crucified claim should be considered for resurrection .. something showing you have the ability to distinguish between the living human beings in a Turd .. and a living humans wandering around planet earth in hopes of passing the "which one is not like the other" test.

 

re-read post #34, I never said any such thing, if the CUSTOMER wants that service, they should pay for it - f the government wants is, they can pay for it

the company should not have to do it if the customer does not want the service

should one have to pay for an anal ultrasound to get your teeth cleaned.... no, they did not request it, this is an unneeded procedure

 

The assumption that there is a father who is able to pay today's healthcare costs is nonsense. There is no assurance that there is a responsible, living, father. Also, women aren't barred by law from pregnancy - regardless of circumstance.

As for healthcare, that is a general problem, as not everybody gets healthcare coverage and those who don't often can not afford to pay what the healthcare costs. Remember that Republicans worked hard against the idea of coverage for all. They more or less won that point, sad to say.

 

.

 

You're assumption they are not sexist towards men. And ALL men should get a past because of a FEW............your attempt at some kind of logic here is absurd. Should we pay for EVERY persons healthcare because a few struggle? GET A JOB get your own healthcare it is widely available and stop with the excuse making. The Republicans worked hard against a government take over of the health system why do you conflated with some claim they do not want people to have coverage at all?

 

WHAT are you talking about the government wanting the abortion, who is being forced to get an abortion and having to pay for it too?

 

I cited you the medical textbooks, the accepted science. Refute it. Your uninformed layman's fallacious beliefs notwithstanding nor rebuttal of anything. I cited the science you got nothing.

Is this some appeal to your Christian faith or something? And again such an uninformed, almost primitive belief that a turd is the same as a human being simply because it came out of one..........quite the outrageous hilarious statement for those of us who even had a sprinkling of Biology in school.

 

People who can pay ARE paying. They buy insurance, with insurers figuring out what healthcare costs an average individual.

The issue concerns those who can not pay.

Our healthcare system is based on capitalism. There wasn't a takeover. There WERE new rules concerning whether an insurance company could charge ridiculous fees, can drop their customers who get sick, deny well known life saving health solutions, and offer policies to all who apply.

Also, insurance companies stated that if those are the rules, then they need everyone to buy insurance. Their fear was that people would not buy insurance and then buy insurance when a serious health issue occurred.

Republicans refused this last rule, so we now have people who aren't insured.

 

they are being forced to save the extra in-vitro cells, try to keep up, that has a cost