Can people who disagree on abortion stop attacking each other?

[Aaron112]

That is why I keep telling people no unborn babies suffer at all during their abortions unless the mom is having a medical emergency after the sixth month, so viability should be the point that elective abortions become illegal.

Nope, no defense for your post here.... it is even worse in full than just the little I quoted earlier.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Nope, no defense for your post here. It is even worse in full than just the little I quoted earlier.

How can an unborn baby who has no ability to think or perceive anything be capable of suffering? That idea makes no sense. Before a certain gestational week, an unborn baby does not even know about his/her own existence. It has none of the five senses when most abortions happen. The longer a pregnancy continues, the less likely an expecting mother is to have an abortion, with a big drop after the 12th gestational week, according to the Guttmacher Institute. So, it is extremely unlikely an unborn baby will suffer in any way during the abortion itself.

I am only correcting people who say abortions cause the unborn baby to suffer, not defending abortion as a solution to fixable problems. If I am wrong about embryonic and fetal development, please post a completely unbiased scientific link about the subject.

 

[Aaron112]

From online definition
"Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP), also known as congenital analgesia, is one or more extraordinarily rare conditions in which a person cannot feel (and has never felt) physical pain."

No one ever claims they are not human.

 

[Kylie]

From online definition
"Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP), also known as congenital analgesia, is one or more extraordinarily rare conditions in which a person cannot feel (and has never felt) physical pain."

No one ever claims they are not human.

They can still think and perceive other things, and they are aware of their own existence.

Please read post 988 again, and don't use strawman arguments.

 

[YahuahSaves]

Slightly different DNA actually.

Many Identical Twins Actually Have Slightly Different DNA

In a new study of over 300 pairs of identical twins, only 38 had perfectly identical DNA

www.smithsonianmag.com

Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.

"There are two basic types of twins: monozygotic (also known as "identical") and dizygotic (also known as "fraternal").

"There's no doubt that identical twins stand out more and are more easily recognized. However, they are not the most prevalent type of twins. In fact, you might be surprised to find that two thirds of all twins are dizygotic. Dizygotic twins occur when two sperm fertilize two distinct eggs. In this instance, rather than releasing one egg during ovulation, the mother has released two. (For higher multiple births, more eggs are released - for example, in trizygotic triplets, three eggs are fertilized by three sperm.)

Dizygotic (DZ), or fraternal twins, can be one of three combinations:

Two males (represents about one-fourth of all DZ twin sets)
Two females (represents about one-fourth of all DZ twin sets)
One male and one female (represents one-half of all DZ twin sets)
The fertilization of two eggs by two sperm results in two separate embryos — each with its own chorion (outer membrane of the amniotic sac), amnion (inner membrane of the amniotic sac) and placenta. In some instances, if the embryos implant very nearby each other along the uterine wall, the placentas can become fused.

Because they are formed from two distinct eggs and two distinct sperm, DZ twins are genetically no more similar than regular siblings are, sharing 50 percent of their DNA."

From: How Twins Work - Baby Making 101

Those poster you replied to is correct. There are "identical" twins who actually have some genetic differences. In addition, there is something called tin-in-twin syndrome, which is literally a pregnant fetus. Only arithmetic matters when determining when life begins for an identical twin, so it is never conception.

Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.


Perhaps you need to do some more study, since you didn't get the basic understanding of embryology in school like you claim. The site quoted below has a ton of books. That would be a good place to start.

"Some people argue that science does not say that life begins at conception. For example, NARAL has asserted that “Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact.”1

However, this is simply not sure. Scientific sources, including textbooks and medial experts, are essentially unanimous in saying that human life begins at conception and fertilization."

From: 25 Scientific Sources: Life Begins at Conception

 

[GodLovesCats]

Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.

I always said 1 ovum + 1 sperm = 1 zygote for a reason: that is true 100% of the time. It is biologically impossible for two zygotes to be created during fertilization. You have still not explained to me how fertilization can be the moment life begins for "identical" twins who have the same DNA or different DNA because you can't do it. You are the emotionally biased one, not me.

 

[YahuahSaves]

I always said 1 ovum + 1 sperm = 1 zygote for a reason: that is true 100% of the time. It is biologically impossible for two zygotes to be created during fertilization. You have still not explained to me how fertilization can be the moment life begins for "identical" twins.

Read my post in full. I don't need to explain something to you that you claim to have learned in school. You cannot dispute the science. You have formed an opinion based on a bias that the preborn are not "babies" and a zygote is not classed as a "human being", which is incorrect according to the science of embryology. Twinning does not make a zygote any less human than twinning makes the 2 individual human beings another species based on the fact they can split from 1 zygote. (From the quoted link above on twinning)

"If the one egg released during ovulation is fertilized by a male's sperm, here's what happens next:

Sometime around day one-and-a-half, conception occurs; the fertillized egg, now called a zygote divides one time, resulting in two cells.
By approximately four days after fertilization, the zygote has about 100 cells and is called a blastocyst.
By the sixth day after fertilization, the blastocyst implants itself in the uterine wall where it will continue to develop for approximately nine months."

"Now that you know how a singleton (single baby) is created, let's look at how twins form."

 

[Belk]

Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.

What opinion would that be? I simply responded to your claim that the DNA is the same, it is not as my link shows. Why are you going off on this screed? Are you so eager to argue that you don't even bother to check what my opinion is prior to trying to straw man it?

"There are two basic types of twins: monozygotic (also known as "identical") and dizygotic (also known as "fraternal").

View attachment 326184

"There's no doubt that identical twins stand out more and are more easily recognized. However, they are not the most prevalent type of twins. In fact, you might be surprised to find that two thirds of all twins are dizygotic. Dizygotic twins occur when two sperm fertilize two distinct eggs. In this instance, rather than releasing one egg during ovulation, the mother has released two. (For higher multiple births, more eggs are released - for example, in trizygotic triplets, three eggs are fertilized by three sperm.)

Dizygotic (DZ), or fraternal twins, can be one of three combinations:

Two males (represents about one-fourth of all DZ twin sets)
Two females (represents about one-fourth of all DZ twin sets)
One male and one female (represents one-half of all DZ twin sets)
The fertilization of two eggs by two sperm results in two separate embryos — each with its own chorion (outer membrane of the amniotic sac), amnion (inner membrane of the amniotic sac) and placenta. In some instances, if the embryos implant very nearby each other along the uterine wall, the placentas can become fused.

Because they are formed from two distinct eggs and two distinct sperm, DZ twins are genetically no more similar than regular siblings are, sharing 50 percent of their DNA."

From: How Twins Work - Baby Making 101



Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.


Perhaps you need to do some more study, since you didn't get the basic understanding of embryology in school like you claim. The site quoted below has a ton of books. That would be a good place to start.

"Some people argue that science does not say that life begins at conception. For example, NARAL has asserted that “Personhood at conception is a religious belief, not a provable biological fact.”1

However, this is simply not sure. Scientific sources, including textbooks and medial experts, are essentially unanimous in saying that human life begins at conception and fertilization."

From: 25 Scientific Sources: Life Begins at Conception

That's nice.

 

[YahuahSaves]

What opinion would that be? I simply responded to your claim that the DNA is the same, it is not as my link shows. Why are you going off on this screed? Are you so eager to argue that you don't even bother to check what my opinion is prior to trying to straw man it?

Is your opinion that life begins at conception and that life is a human being?

 

[Belk]

Is your opinion that life begins at conception and that life is a human being?

So no acknowledgment of anything I have said and just jump to the question? No thanks, I feel no need to waste time on someone who simply wants to be argumentative. Your point about identical twins is incorrect. Deal with it or not, up to you.

 

[YahuahSaves]

So no acknowledgment of anything I have said and just jump to the question? No thanks, I feel no need to waste time on someone who simply wants to be argumentative. Your point about identical twins is incorrect. Deal with it or not, up to you.

I'm going to take that as a "no", you don't believe life begins at conception and that life is a human being. Way to prove my point.
My point about twins according to the science is correct.

 

[Belk]

So no acknowledgment of anything I have said and just jump to the question? No thanks, I feel no need to waste time on someone who simply wants to be argumentative. Your point about identical twins is incorrect. Deal with it or not, up to you.

I'm going to take that as a "no", you don't believe life begins at conception and that life is a human being. Way to prove my point.
My point about twins according to the science is correct.

QED

BTW, using a laughing emoji to respond to a post not intended to be funny is against forum rules.

 

[NxNW]

Yes they can.

No, you can't. You can't have two human beings in a single cell. I thought we were talking about biology here.

 

[NxNW]

The babies suffer often... sometimes just because of pollution or mom's diet.....

How often?

 

[NxNW]

Show me the evidence where a human being does not begin at conception, otherwise your opinion is based on emotional bias.

Identical twins. At conception, you have one single cell.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Identical twins. At conception, you have one single cell.

That is what I have been saying. Emotional bias is denying extremely obvious, repeatedly proven biological facts everyone is taught in middle school.

I believe in facts. Scientific proof is going to win every single time.

 

[coffee4u]

Impossible. Conception hasn't even occured yet. You can't grant permission to "someone" who does not yet exist.


Pregnancy = punishment isn't the persuasive argument you think it is.

Would you ban abortion under these circumstances as well?


Why would anyone be happy catering to rape?


Once again, you presume to know my thoughts.


As I've explained above, it's clearly not, since you can't give consent to an embryo that does not yet exist.

"Impossible. Conception hasn't even occured yet. You can't grant permission to "someone" who does not yet exist."
We all know what a sequence of events are. If someone jumps off a roof they should not be surprised if they land up in hospital with broken legs.
Pregnancy is the logical conclusion to sexual activity as broken bones are to jumping off a roof. Did you grant permition to your bones to break upon jumping off the roof? Yes, unless you are 3 and have no idea. We assume as an adult you understand cause and effect.

"Pregnancy = punishment isn't the persuasive argument you think it is."
Quote where I said pregnancy is a punishment. It is a logical consequence. How does a person get fit? By exercising. Will you get fit by eating MacDonalds while sitting on the couch for the majority of the day? No. A logical consequence to an action can be good or bad. If you don't change your actions to a known consequence that you do not wish to experience you have nobody to blame but yourself.
"Would you ban abortion under these circumstances as well? Why would anyone be happy catering to rape?"
I asked first.

Would you ban every case of abortion that was not proven to be by rape? Meaning would you ban 98-99% of abortions caused by casual sex?

"Once again, you presume to know my thoughts."
Which is why I asked the above question. The fact that you dodged it to ask a question back indicates that my thoughts about you are indeed correct.

 

[rturner76]

I'm sure you are able to comprehend a simple sentence:
A zygote is a human life.

That's the biological consensus, there is no way around that.

Now, do you agree that killing an innocent human life is wrong?

A zygote has the potential to become a human but it does not become a human (technically) until he/she is given the breath of life.

 

[Friedrich Rubinstein]

A zygote has the potential to become a human but it does not become a human (technically) until he/she is given the breath of life.

I have already provided evidence in this thread that according to the consensus among biologists a human life begins at fertilization, as well as direct quotes from well-respected textbooks on embryology stating that "an embryo is the first stage of development of every single one of us."

A zygote is a human, just like a fetus, an infant, a baby, a kid, a teen and an adult. All of these are simply stages of development of human life.

 

[rturner76]

I have already provided evidence in this thread that according to the consensus among biologists a human life begins at fertilization, as well as direct quotes from well-respected textbooks on embryology stating that "an embryo is the first stage of development of every single one of us."

A zygote is a human, just like a fetus, an infant, a baby, a kid, a teen and an adult. All of these are simply stages of development of human life.

Begins, is not completed. When I plant a tomato seed, the life of a new tomato begins but the life is not completely formed until I am eating a BLT