Christianity requires fear, guilt, and conformity

[Romanov2488]

I'm educated enough to know math and if you are at all concerned about saving female lives because of abortion, you will not sacrifice 50% of the millions of females aborted to the admitted possible .00000000000001% "saved."

And I have a driver’s license. Does that mean I know how to drive?

 

[Wrangler]

It’s not a baby, it’s a fetus.

Semantics. You say tomato but the fetus is still human.

 

[Wrangler]

Your birthday is not when you were conceived

In China, Your birthday is when you were conceived.

Your birthday does not mark transitioning from one species to another. It does not mark the day you become human. That day was conception.

 

[FlySwatter]

@Wrangler

What is it that makes a human alive in your opinion?

Doesn't your doctrine say that it is the spirit of god?

 

[FlySwatter]

Semantics. You say tomato but the fetus is still human.

It's only semantics in your bizarre interpretation of the world

We say grain of wheat, you say loaf of bread

We say tomato seed, you say tomato

Neither science or the medical industry is with you.

A tomato seed is not a tomato. Such a notion is absurd

A fertilised egg is not a human being. Such a notion is equally absurd. It is human (species) most definitely but it is not a human being.

 

[FlySwatter]

In China, Your birthday is when you were conceived.

Your birthday does not mark transitioning from one species to another. It does not mark the day you become human. That day was conception.

Can we ditch this repetitive reference to species.

EVERYONE here agrees that a fertilised egg, zygote, blastocyst, fetus and embryo are human species.

Having the DNA of species "Human" is not the same as being a "human being" as I have laboured to explain.

A big toe has human DNA and thus IS HUMAN, but it is clearly not a human being.

If you can accept this simple fact you'd gain a lot more credibility

 

[Rita]

Not aware that this thread is about abortion, so perhaps you can get back on topic.

 

[Wrangler]

@Wrangler

What is it that makes a human alive in your opinion?

Doesn't your doctrine say that it is the spirit of god?

For those born again, yes.

In the context of our conversation, you seem to be truly struggling with the notion that a young baby in its earliest stages of development is:

1. fully human - and not some other species
2. a fully alive human - life does not begin with the acquisition of a brain but upon conception.

 

[Wrangler]

We say grain of wheat, you say loaf of bread

This is false analogy because wheat makes up bread in part. A baby is fully human - just in an early stage of development.

 

[Wrangler]

Neither science or the medical industry is with you.

That is where you are 100% wrong. Science and the medical industry are with me.

Used to be that "viability" was the line baby killers wanted to hold. Science and the medical industry are constantly pushing that line earlier and earlier to the point of making the abortion argument based on viability evaporate.

And there is one other very important thing that is not with you; morality. The justification to kill ones own offspring goes against survival of the species. Fact is the vast majority of abortions are done for convenience, a might poor moral argument to kill babies.

So, to avoid the losing moral argument, you invent this distraction of semantics and pretend the scientific terms of biological development matter at all. They don't.

For me, I would rather my wife have an abortion that her die trying to have the baby. There are movies where mother's chose to die so their baby could live. That is heroic. Killing your own baby out of convenience is not heroic but contemptible - if anything is.

 

[Wrangler]

We say tomato seed, you say tomato

We are not talking about a seed but a fertilized egg, a baby.

 

[Wrangler]

Can we ditch this repetitive reference to species.

EVERYONE here agrees that a fertilised egg, zygote, blastocyst, fetus and embryo are human species.

Having the DNA of species "Human" is not he same as being a "human being" as I have laboured to explain.

No. You are struggling not to twist what we are talking about by taking the converse. "All men die." is true but its converse is NOT true. "All humans who die are men."

You are fundamentally denying we are dealing with a 100% living human being. The fact that it has a unique human DNA proves this. You are appealing to Strawman in taking the converse. Pretending that I am claiming that DNA is a human. That is the converse of what I am claiming. DNA can be from a dead human. It is still human DNA.

We are talking about a 100% living human being. The baby will go through stages of development but it is NOT transforming from a nonhuman to a human. It starts off at conception as human. No scientific term for humans early stages of development will make it not human. So, until you abandon your Appeal to Diversion with fertilised egg, zygote, blastocyst, fetus and embryo, I'll keep reminding you of the species, human.

 

[FlySwatter]

For those born again, yes.

In the context of our conversation, you seem to be truly struggling with the notion that a young baby in its earliest stages of development is:

1. fully human - and not some other species
2. a fully alive human - life does not begin with the acquisition of a brain but upon conception.

You're not listening, seemingly deliberately. How many times do I need to say it?

All stages of growth from a fertilised egg to a baby ARE OF HUMAN SPECIES. No-one is denying this.

As for your second point I see you've now switched terminology again because your previous terminology of referring to the growth stages as "humans" and "beings" are obviously now debunked. So now you're using the term "life" but sadly this doesn't get you anywhere.

So just to be clear:

YES, ALL STAGES OF GROWTH FROM FERTILISED EGG TO EVENTUAL BABY ARE LIFE, THEY ARE FORMS OF LIFE

However this does not change the fact that the early stages of growth/life ARE NOT A HUMAN BEING yet.

Life begins at conception, yes

A "human being" begins at the point there is a brain, a heart and a nervous system which happens later on

Until then what you have is a LIVING organism of human species.

 

[FlySwatter]

For those born again, yes.

So what about those that are not born again. You've begun talking about LIFE, You have said that every stage of growth from conception is LIFE.

So I ask again, what is it that makes those things alive? Rather than just flesh and blood dolls? What is it that animates the body?

If it is not the spirit of god, described as the "breath of god" in Genesis then what are you claiming it to be?

 

[Patrick1966]

Not aware that this thread is about abortion, so perhaps you can get back on topic.

 

[FlySwatter]

For me, I would rather my wife have an abortion that her die trying to have the baby. There are movies where mother's chose to die so their baby could live. That is heroic. Killing your own baby out of convenience is not heroic but contemptible - if anything is.

In ALL such movies the pregnancy is at the stage where there exists a baby in the womb. So there's absolutely no issue with this on my part. I totally support saving thee life once it has become baby.

There is no movie in existence where a woman kills herself to protect the life of a 2 week organism. And if you knew your science you would realise why that is. It's because the organism in those early weeks is a parasite. It can not live of its own accord because it is not yet a "human being" with brain, heart and other required parts. Thus if a woman dies in those early weeks of pregnancy the life inside her would also die.

 

[FlySwatter]

We are not talking about a seed but a fertilized egg, a baby.

We are talking about all stages of growth from fertilised egg through to eventual baby in the womb.

 

[Patrick1966]

Abortion terminates a human life at its earliest stage of development.

 

[FlySwatter]

Abortion terminates a human life at its earliest stage of development.

Where does that "life" come from Patrick? Does it just magically appear out of nowhere ?

Or is it the case that the life already existed in the form of a LIVING sperm and a LIVING egg?

 

[Patrick1966]

Where does that "life" come from Patrick? Does it just magically appear out of nowhere ?

Or is it the case that the life already existed in the form of a LIVING sperm and a LIVING egg?

I believe that a human life is created when sperm fertilizes an egg.