LIVE STREAM OF ABORTION CASE that Could OVERRULE ROE

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by DEFinning, Dec 1, 2021.

  1. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    132,037
    Likes Received:
    30,372
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is the accepted science as taught in our universities and colleges and it is the only logical conclusion. It's not my view it is biology. The autonomy and viability assertions are merely self-serving justifications.

    "Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."
    [Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]

    The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that corroborates that a unique human life starts when the sperm and egg bind to each other in a process of fusion of their respective membranes and a single hybrid cell called a zygote, or one-cell embryo, is created.

    As physicians dedicated both to scientific truth and to the Hippocratic tradition, the College values all human lives equally from the moment of conception (fertilization) until natural death. Consistent with its mission to “enable all children to reach their optimal physical and emotional health and well-being,” the College, therefore, opposes active measures23 that would prematurely end the life of any child at any stage of development from conception to natural death.

    Original author: Fred de Miranda, MD, March 2004
    Updated: Dr. Patricia Lee June, MD, March 2017
    https://acpeds.org/position-statements/when-human-life-begins
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2021
  2. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    4,375
    Likes Received:
    1,939
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The emboldened words, above, are NOT the equivalent of, "human being," just because they include those two words. I will give you an example: "the forearm of a human being," is not the same thing as, "a human being." Likewise, something that, "represents the beginning of a human being," is NOT another way of saying "a person." Despite your previous denial of the fact (which your quote, here, confirms), you are judging a fetus, not by what it IS, but by what it WILL (or may) BECOME. FYI, that is what is implied by the words, "the BEGINNING of..." For a final time (I pray), you can consider an egg, from the moment of its fertilization, to be a complete human, in spirit, or whatever other measure you may be using (including genetically); but you CANNOT claim that science confirms your pronouncement. Scientifically, a human being DEVELOPS, in the womb, through a PROCESS. As it was found, in the Roe v. Wade decision, doctors tend to draw that line of personhood, somewhere in-between conception, and birth.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2021
    FoxHastings likes this.
  3. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,384
    Likes Received:
    3,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    People who end up with a kid that they never wanted, regardless of how adorable the child might be, will invariable kill the kid. Happens everyday in America. Sometimes the kid is just weeks or months old. In some cases the kid is a teen.

    The birthrate around the world is falling and it is expected that humanity will become extinct in a couple hundred years. That is the ultimate abortion. It would be interesting to see it happen but it will happen.
     
  4. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    132,037
    Likes Received:
    30,372
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes a human being BEGINS at creation not some other arbitrary time. A human being. It doesn't become a human being later it BEGINS at conception. The human life, the human being doesn't being at a so-called viability point, it doesn't being at birth. It is as complete a human being at that stage of it's life as every human being who has ever existed. RvW is NOT a scientific determination of life it is an example of the most strained legal reasoning in our history.

    A New, Distinct Human Organism Comes into Being at Fertilization

    It is undisputed that a new, distinct human organism comes into existence during the process of fertilization.[1] Scientific literature states the following:

    • “The fusion of sperm and egg membranes initiates the life of a sexually reproducing organism.”[2]

    • “The life cycle of mammals begins when a sperm enters an egg.”[3]

    • “Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.”[4]

    • “The oviduct or Fallopian tube is the anatomical region where every new life begins in mammalian species. After a long journey, the spermatozoa meet the oocyte in the specific site of the oviduct named ampulla, and fertilization takes place.”[5]

    • “Fertilization – the fusion of gametes to produce a new organism – is the culmination of a multitude of intricately regulated cellular processes.”[6]

    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.”[7] Thus, in the context of human life, a new individual human organism is initiated at the union of ovum and sperm. One textbook similarly explains: Human development begins at fertilization when a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoon) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to produce a single cell – a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.[8]

    Thus, a new human organism is created before the developing embryo implants in the uterus – i.e., before that time at which some people consider a woman “pregnant.”

    [1] See, e.g., Condic, When Does Human Life Begin? A Scientific Perspective (The Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person Oct. 200, http://bdfund.org/wordpress/wpconten...ife_print.pdf; George & Tollefsen, EMBRYO 39 (200.

    [2] Marsden et al., Model systems for membrane fusion, CHEM. SOC. REV. 40(3):1572 (Mar. 2011) (emphasis added).

    [3] Okada et al., A role for the elongator complex in zygotic paternal genome demethylation, NATURE 463:554 (Jan. 28, 2010) (emphasis added).

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

    [5] Coy et al., Roles of the oviduct in mammalian fertilization, REPRODUCTION 144(6):649 (Oct. 1, 2012) (emphasis added).

    [6] Marcello et al., Fertilization, ADV. EXP. BIOL. 757:321 (2013) (emphasis added).

    [7] National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (2013), http://www.merriamwebster.com/medlineplus/fertilization (emphasis added).
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2021
  5. The Wyrd of Gawd

    The Wyrd of Gawd Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2012
    Messages:
    29,384
    Likes Received:
    3,889
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Some State constitutions include the right of the people to overthrow the government by whatever means necessary if the government won't respond to their desires. Since there is always at least two opposing sides that means there will always be conflict. If people are forced to give birth to a kid they don't want, they will eventually kill the kid no matter how many years have passed since its birth. That happens everyday in America.

    How about this solution?

    "All abortions are prohibited.

    The State will pay all medical charges involving the birth of a child, for the child and its mother.

    The State will provide free medical care for the child until its 18th birthdate.

    The State will pay the mother a yearly stipend of $30,000 for care of the child the first year of its birth and increasing each year thereafter for the next 17 years at the consumer rate of inflation.

    All of the above provisions will apply to all children born in the territorial limits of the United States of America, regardless of race, ethnicity, national origin, status of citizenship. So, if a foreign woman has her baby in America, she and her child are entitled to all of the specified benefits and privileges without exception.

    All States are prohibited from passing any laws that conflict in any way with the provisions of this law.

    This law is not subject to judicial review by any local, State, or federal court, including the Supreme Court, in the United States of America and can only be altered or revoked by a vote of two-thirds of each chamber of Congress."
     
  6. DEFinning

    DEFinning Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2020
    Messages:
    4,375
    Likes Received:
    1,939
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Once more, you are conflating the ideas of something, "beginning," or "initiat(ed)," with it being, therefore, complete. You are presenting, in essence, the phrase, "Once upon a time," and calling it a fully formed, "story." This may be the view of The Westchester Institute for Ethics & the Human Person, but it is not mainstream scientific thought. Being genetically "complete," is not the measure that is, or has been, generally used for making this determination, either by doctors, or the public. As one example of this fact, I will cite the widely accepted, and completely legal, process of fertility doctors, freezing embryos. If those were all considered human beings, that would be a problem, don't you think?

    I do not have time to wade through a bunch of legal summaries, at the moment, to show you the evidence of that you already know, & of what, we both know, you will never accept, regardless. But in one of the current abortion threads, I already quoted a breakdown of the decision-making process of the Court, in Roe. They looked at both prior legal tradition, and considered the prevailing opinion of the medical establishment. How you consider this, "the most strained legal reasoning in our history," you leave with no explanation. But it certainly is, "a scientific determination..." The Justices noted that Jewish tradition considers life to begin at birth, while the Christian view considers it, from conception. The preponderance of medical opinion, places it somewhere within the pregnancy; this is how the line of viability came to be. And one need not be a doctor to understand that, until the fetus had developed all or most of the parts of a human being, it is not truly a human being. You may feel that if a person's entire brain, except it's brain stem, is removed, it is still a "person," in an unqualified sense. I do not think that most will agree with you. At the current point of viability, the fetus has developed all the necessary organs, at least to the point, even if they are not yet fully operational, to where they possibly could become so, after a premature birth-- should it survive, long-term, with all the assistance that modern medicine could provide it.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2021
  7. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    41,309
    Likes Received:
    20,460
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Or the voters in each state can decide for themselves?

    Neither one will address the constitutional issues facing the Court and Roe.
     
  8. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    132,037
    Likes Received:
    30,372
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Once again you are attempting strained semantics. The human life BEGINS at conception, nothing else is required to BEGIN the human life from that point as the peer-reviewed, medical textbooks state. You have provide nothing but uninformed opinion to refute the science. It's not "once upon a time' it is EVERY TIME. This isn't about religion it is about the SCIENCE. What do you believe our laws should be based upon the SCIENCE or religious faith? And yes RvW is probably the worst legal decision every announce by the SCOTUS, a totally strained legal reasoning as authorities in legal matters on both sides agree. And the "vialbilty" argument is just as strained. Science cannot even determine what that would be and I would remind you that a just born baby is not viable to live on it's own it will die unless someone else cares for it.

    "After fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being...[this] is no longer a matter of taste or opinion, it is not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence...." - Dr Jerome LeJeune, Professor of Genetics at the University of Descartes, Paris, discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down's Syndrome, and Nobel Prize Winner, Report, Subcommittee on Separation of Powers to Senate Judiciary Committee S-158, 97th Congress, 1st Session 1981

    What science do you have to refute that?
     
  9. Pollycy

    Pollycy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2008
    Messages:
    26,917
    Likes Received:
    11,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That wouldn't work, Wyrd.

    Over and over in this country, year after year, we've seen that voters can put a law in place -- and then some federal judge somewhere decides to overrule the majority of voters and use his own individual power to put in place what HE thinks the law should be!

    Perfect example: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gaymarriage-idUSTRE6735XI20100804 . Thus, U.S. District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, himself an admitted homosexual in a 'relationship' with another man, decided single-handedly to overturn the will of California voters regarding homosexual "marriage"! And, it was all done in a perfectly 'legal' way....

    NOW... just imagine what would happen if the people of the United States decided to ban or restrict abortion to a certain period of time! It would be a matter of days (if not hours) before some federal judge somewhere would overturn, overrule, or otherwise throw the whole damn thing right back in front of the Supreme Court -- AGAIN!

    And who would gain anything from this entire debacle? The hyperliberal, America-hating, radical Left -- which always is delighted when the 10th Amendment of our Constitution is savaged even more than it already is, and the 'will-of-the-people' is thrown in the trash!

    No, it's far better to just let women get abortions if that's what they want, any way, anytime they like, and LEAVE THIS WHOLE DAMN THING ALONE! :frustrated:
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2021
  10. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    57,298
    Likes Received:
    36,510
    Trophy Points:
    113

Share This Page