Pro-Life, Pro-Science

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
From Breakpoint:

BreakPoint: Pro-Life, Pro-Science. How Advances Lift the Curtain on Roe

Writing at The Atlantic, Emma Green chronicles how breakthroughs in medical technology and advances in our understanding of pregnancy have fueled the movement to end abortion.

Forty-five years after Roe v. Wade legalized abortion nationwide, it’s become clear that this Supreme Court decision and the sexual revolution that spawned it were both based on ignorance—ignorance of what really happens inside the womb, and of what unborn human beings really are.

Since that time, a curtain has lifted. So-called “fetuses,” once shrouded in mystery, their forms hidden in what the psalmist poetically calls, “the depths of the earth,” have became visible to the world. Thanks to ultrasound technology, three-dimensional imaging, better neonatal care, and even fetal surgery, we’re able to look inside the womb.

Pro-life activist and mom Ashley McGuire tells The Atlantic that her fellow millennials grew up in “an entirely different world of science and technology than the Roe generation.” In 1973, it seemed plausible that the unborn, especially during early development, were nothing more than “blobs of tissue.” In 2018, seeing babies on ultrasound and celebrating them as babies has become a matter of course for parents.

Courtesy of science, images and even videos of children curled up, thumbs in their mouths, have been imprinted on our cultural consciousness. And no one who seriously reckons with these images or is not willfully blind can call what they depict as mere “blobs of tissue.”

And therein lies the problem for pro-choice activists. You see, the reasoning of the abortion rights movement in general and Roe v. Wade in particular, depends on two assumptions. First, that unborn babies are meaningfully different from born ones. Several decades of science have demolished this idea. We can see into the womb now and observe a baby hiccupping, sucking its thumb, clapping, practicing breathing, and even playing. The obvious question when confronted with such a spectacle is how this child differs from the one in the cradle.

Second, the reasoning of Roe specifically invoked viability—the stage at which an unborn baby can survive outside its mother’s womb. But science has changed all of that too. Advances in neonatal intensive care have pushed the point of viability back from 28 weeks to around 22, and it continues to move earlier and earlier with each year.


All of this has left the American medical system in a state of schizophrenia. Doctors and nurses will work around the clock heroically to save the life of a baby born prematurely. And yet in some cases those very same doctors and nurses will be called upon to end the life of another baby the same age or even older.

Ultimately, writes Green, the reason science has been such a powerful ally to the pro-life cause is because it resonates with the “common sense of fetal heartbeats and swelling stomachs.” It gives us permission to voice something we already know at an intuitive level: The unborn are babies, and should be treated as such.

Former Bush bioethics appointee and Notre Dame professor, O. Carter Snead, explains that science serves as a “bridge to [our] moral imagination.”

By itself, science isn’t enough. But it can lift the curtain that made it so easy to claim ignorance of what and who the unborn really are. And in that sense, those who still refuse to admit the humanity of the littlest humans are the true “science-deniers.”
 

musicalpilgrim

pilgrim on the sacred music pathway
Angels Team
Supporter
Jan 11, 2012
22,882
32,366
East of Manchester
✟2,620,944.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Dear Father, save the unborn children, move the leaders of our nations to change the laws and abolish abortion, in Jesus name
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,698
5,614
Utah
✟713,703.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
There is all this "discussion" or "debate" of "when does life begin". The human body recognizes "life has begun" at conception as at the same time it starts forming the Placenta for life support for the "life" ... the baby. No other reason for a placenta to form.
 
Upvote 0

Volante Nocturno

Active Member
Feb 6, 2018
86
51
69
Wy
✟1,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The gods these people serve, that is the prochoice people, the people who want free abortion, demands human sacrifice...He always has. so they sacrifice their babies as his followers always have, to the god Moloch...and if they do not learn, they will follow him into his reward..
 
Upvote 0

Volante Nocturno

Active Member
Feb 6, 2018
86
51
69
Wy
✟1,486.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
There is all this "discussion" or "debate" of "when does life begin". The human body recognizes "life has begun" at conception as at the same time it starts forming the Placenta for life support for the "life" ... the baby. No other reason for a placenta to form.
The life of the body is in the blood...The blood supplies oxygen and nutrients to the baby from conception to birth, then the baby is on its own and its blood is alive and supplying his needs There is no time when there is not life in the cycle.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
I am both pro-science and pro-life.

It is obvious that both the female egg and the male sperm have a form of life but no one would call either a person. When they unite to form a zygote it certainly is alive. There is a potential person there and a great many people would claim that it actually is a person. Let us grant for a moment that the zygote is a person and let us call that person Mary. I choose a female name since all embryos are female until about the sixth or seventh week.

Now, we all know that a zygote develops into an embryo through the process of cell division. Every now and again the first cell division does not produce a two celled embryo but rather a second zygote --- identical twins. Did Mary suddenly become two persons? Was Mary two persons to begin with? Was Mary even a person to begin with? Let us set those questions aside for the moment and grant that the second zygote is also a person whom we shall call Margaret. It is entirely possible that one or both of these zygotes could divide again to result in triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets etc. The same question applies as to whether one person can became two, three or more persons. When does a person become a person?

These questions might be difficult enough but now it becomes even more complex. Sometimes two eggs are fertilized to form non-identical twins. Once again, let us call them Mary and Margaret. Rarely the two zygotes merge together again to form a two celled embryo. This is called a chimera. Who is this new embryo? Is it Mary or is it Margaret? This new embryo, this chimera, let us call it Mary, develops to term and is born. There is now no question at all that Mary is indeed a person. But here is the odd thing, some of the organs of Mary carry her genes but other organs carry the genes of her twin sister Margaret. So Margaret continues to exist within Mary or perhaps it is Mary within Margaret. Do we have two persons within a single body?

These very serious questions of person-hood arise only if we assume that the soul is infused at conception and that the brand new zygote is fully a person. Is there a more reasonable understanding? I believe there is. Personally I believe that the developing fetus becomes a person only when it is able to survive outside the womb. Sentience occurs at about the same point in the pregnancy very late in the second trimester. For this reason I am against abortion beyond the twentieth week except in very rare extreme circumstances.. Otherwise I believe that abortion should be legal, it should be safe, it should be available and it should be the woman’s informed choice but most important of all --- it should be rare. In conclusion, we should always keep in mind that there is no more powerful abortifacient in the world than poverty.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: SaintlySinner
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
This is the continuing issue with your we have seen before chimera example. It's human life regardless of sex at conception.

Yes, it is human and alive but so is a sperm or an egg. Sperm are wasted in their millions and eggs almost every month. The question is not life but personhood.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yes, it is human and alive but so is a sperm or an egg. Sperm are wasted in their millions and eggs almost every month. The question is not life but personhood.
Shall we go through what happens at conception which is quite distinct from egg and sperm?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ItIsFinished!
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,698
5,614
Utah
✟713,703.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I am both pro-science and pro-life.

It is obvious that both the female egg and the male sperm have a form of life but no one would call either a person. When they unite to form a zygote it certainly is alive. There is a potential person there and a great many people would claim that it actually is a person. Let us grant for a moment that the zygote is a person and let us call that person Mary. I choose a female name since all embryos are female until about the sixth or seventh week.

Now, we all know that a zygote develops into an embryo through the process of cell division. Every now and again the first cell division does not produce a two celled embryo but rather a second zygote --- identical twins. Did Mary suddenly become two persons? Was Mary two persons to begin with? Was Mary even a person to begin with? Let us set those questions aside for the moment and grant that the second zygote is also a person whom we shall call Margaret. It is entirely possible that one or both of these zygotes could divide again to result in triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets etc. The same question applies as to whether one person can became two, three or more persons. When does a person become a person?

These questions might be difficult enough but now it becomes even more complex. Sometimes two eggs are fertilized to form non-identical twins. Once again, let us call them Mary and Margaret. Rarely the two zygotes merge together again to form a two celled embryo. This is called a chimera. Who is this new embryo? Is it Mary or is it Margaret? This new embryo, this chimera, let us call it Mary, develops to term and is born. There is now no question at all that Mary is indeed a person. But here is the odd thing, some of the organs of Mary carry her genes but other organs carry the genes of her twin sister Margaret. So Margaret continues to exist within Mary or perhaps it is Mary within Margaret. Do we have two persons within a single body?

These very serious questions of person-hood arise only if we assume that the soul is infused at conception and that the brand new zygote is fully a person. Is there a more reasonable understanding? I believe there is. Personally I believe that the developing fetus becomes a person only when it is able to survive outside the womb. Sentience occurs at about the same point in the pregnancy very late in the second trimester. For this reason I am against abortion beyond the twentieth week except in very rare extreme circumstances.. Otherwise I believe that abortion should be legal, it should be safe, it should be available and it should be the woman’s informed choice but most important of all --- it should be rare. In conclusion, we should always keep in mind that there is no more powerful abortifacient in the world than poverty.

* Definition Sentience -

1: a sentient quality or state
2: feeling or sensation as distinguished from perception and thought

Development of a Baby - up to 5-6 months

Day 1: fertilization: all human chromosomes are present; unique human life begins.

Day 6: embryo begins implantation in the uterus.

Day 22: heart begins to beat with the child's own blood, often a different type than the mothers'.

Week 3: By the end of third week the child's backbone spinal column and nervous system are forming. The liver, kidneys and intestines begin to take shape.

Week 4: By the end of week four the child is ten thousand times larger than the fertilized egg.

Week 5: Eyes, legs, and hands begin to develop.

Week 6: Brain waves are detectable; mouth and lips are present; fingernails are forming.

Week 7: Eyelids, and toes form, nose distinct. The baby is kicking and swimming.

Week 8: Every organ is in place, bones begin to replace cartilage, and fingerprints begin to form. By the 8th week the baby can begin to hear.

Weeks 9 and 10: Teeth begin to form, fingernails develop. The baby can turn his head, and frown. The baby can hiccup.

Weeks 10 and 11: The baby can "breathe" amniotic fluid and urinate.

Week 11 the baby can grasp objects placed in its hand; all organ systems are functioning. The baby has a skeletal structure, nerves, and circulation.

"I am against abortion beyond the twentieth week"

* Week 12: The baby has all of the parts necessary to experience pain, including nerves, spinal cord, and thalamus. Vocal cords are complete. The baby can suck its thumb.

Week 14: At this age, the heart pumps several quarts of blood through the body every day.
Week 15: The baby has an adult's taste buds.

Month 4: Bone Marrow is now beginning to form. The heart is pumping 25 quarts of blood a day. By the end of month 4 the baby will be 8-10 inches in length and will weigh up to half a pound.

Week 17: The baby can have dream (REM) sleep.

Week 19: Babies can routinely be saved at 21 to 22 weeks after fertilization, and sometimes they can be saved even younger.

Months 5 and 6: The baby practices breathing by inhaling amniotic fluid into its developing lungs. The baby will grasp at the umbilical cord when it feels it. Most mothers feel an increase in movement, kicking, and hiccups from the baby. Oil and sweat glands are now functioning. The baby is now twelve inches long or more, and weighs up to one and a half pounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Once again, all Jack brings to the discussion is a copy/paste of refuted material. I think we're up to topic 8 now where all Jack does is copy/paste a previous post.
I am both pro-science and pro-life.

It is obvious that both the female egg and the male sperm have a form of life but no one would call either a person. When they unite to form a zygote it certainly is alive. There is a potential person there and a great many people would claim that it actually is a person. Let us grant for a moment that the zygote is a person and let us call that person Mary. I choose a female name since all embryos are female until about the sixth or seventh week.

Now, we all know that a zygote develops into an embryo through the process of cell division. Every now and again the first cell division does not produce a two celled embryo but rather a second zygote --- identical twins. Did Mary suddenly become two persons? Was Mary two persons to begin with? Was Mary even a person to begin with? Let us set those questions aside for the moment and grant that the second zygote is also a person whom we shall call Margaret. It is entirely possible that one or both of these zygotes could divide again to result in triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets etc. The same question applies as to whether one person can became two, three or more persons. When does a person become a person?

These questions might be difficult enough but now it becomes even more complex. Sometimes two eggs are fertilized to form non-identical twins. Once again, let us call them Mary and Margaret. Rarely the two zygotes merge together again to form a two celled embryo. This is called a chimera. Who is this new embryo? Is it Mary or is it Margaret? This new embryo, this chimera, let us call it Mary, develops to term and is born. There is now no question at all that Mary is indeed a person. But here is the odd thing, some of the organs of Mary carry her genes but other organs carry the genes of her twin sister Margaret. So Margaret continues to exist within Mary or perhaps it is Mary within Margaret. Do we have two persons within a single body?

These very serious questions of person-hood arise only if we assume that the soul is infused at conception and that the brand new zygote is fully a person. Is there a more reasonable understanding? I believe there is. Personally I believe that the developing fetus becomes a person only when it is able to survive outside the womb. Sentience occurs at about the same point in the pregnancy very late in the second trimester. For this reason I am against abortion beyond the twentieth week except in very rare extreme circumstances.. Otherwise I believe that abortion should be legal, it should be safe, it should be available and it should be the woman’s informed choice but most important of all --- it should be rare. In conclusion, we should always keep in mind that there is no more powerful abortifacient in the world than poverty.
I'm glad you acknowledge that human life begins at conception. This, we know as scientific fact. The whole debate over whether abortion is morally permissible or not really does focus on the arbitrary distinction that is created between a human being and a human person.

We know that this distinction between a human being and a human person is subjective. Just look at all the different opinions. You have an opinion, but it's not based on anything objective. You've simply come up with something that makes the most sense to you. Other people disagree with you. Some say first trimester, some say second trimester, some say third trimester, some say viability, some say neuron activity, some say birth (hence partial birth abortions which Clinton supported).

Point is, all these distinctions between a human being and a human person are subjectively created. And this is the key point of importance - The only reason we create a distinction between a human being and a human person is so that we can perform some action to the human non-person that we would otherwise consider immoral. There is no other reason to create the arbitrary distinction.

As for your examples of difficult situations, there is an answer to each one. When we say that "life begins at conception", we are using the term "conception" to mean simply "at its very beginning". For a long time, conception was seen as the ultimate beginning of new human life. But as you've rightly pointed out, sometimes conception (it's very beginning) is different, ie - identical twins.

In the case of identical twins, there was only one human life at conception, but then another human life was formed. In this case, God brought into existence the younger twin by a different method than conception. But it's not a problem. Both their lives as humans had a beginning, and from that beginning they are morally valuable and created in the image of God.

In the case of the Chimera that you describe, such as fraternal twins that end up being one. This is also very simple so long as we hold onto our foundation. The fraternal twins were each unique individuals created in the image of God. Something went wrong. This would happen because there is sin in the world, and things don't always work out perfectly. In your chimera example, we would simply say that one of the humans died, and one of the humans made it. Now, certainly the human that came out was changed and affected by the death of the other, but they still have the same soul they did when they were conceived. Which one made it and which one died? I don't know, and you don't know, but that doesn't affect the principle.

I think the only way to maintain intellectual integrity as a Christian is to be pro-life from conception. We know Biblically that human life is unique amongst all creation and that we alone are created in the image of God, and that all human life is morally valuable. There is no distinction made in Scripture between a human life and a human person. In fact, everything in Scripture, though not 100% specific, would lead one to believe that the life inside a womb is indeed a person, previous discussions of Scripture should highlight that if you followed them.

But even more importantly for me is the scientific position. The distinction between a human person and a human being is a subjective and arbitrary distinction that only exists so that we can perform some action to the non-person human that we would otherwise consider immoral. I have never once heard an argument that shows what I've just said to be wrong. The distinction between a human being and a human person is as unique and subjective as people are unique from each other. The line in the sand between killing a human person and a human being is nothing more than a person's opinion on where they think that line should be. And for me, I would never gamble killing a person over my best guess as to where a fabricated line should be placed.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Now, we all know that a zygote develops into an embryo through the process of cell division. Every now and again the first cell division does not produce a two celled embryo but rather a second zygote --- identical twins. Did Mary suddenly become two persons? Was Mary two persons to begin with? Was Mary even a person to begin with? Let us set those questions aside for the moment and grant that the second zygote is also a person whom we shall call Margaret. It is entirely possible that one or both of these zygotes could divide again to result in triplets, quadruplets, quintuplets etc. The same question applies as to whether one person can became two, three or more persons. When does a person become a person?
If a person wasn't at one stage of life a person why would that stage of life not have the same dignity as any other stage of a person's life? Isn't a zygote a personal being even if it isn't yet a person?

It's odd logic to posit that because two or three can emerge from one that the one doesn't exist. There are actually sixteen cells in a zygote that can potentially become an individual human being. Aren’t the sixteen cells being an individual? Sixteen cells are not each directing their own growth independent of the whole… Does the fact that they each have the potential to direct their own growth and be a human individual mean that they are? And if twinning does take place why does that mean that the zygote conceived is not an individual human?
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
It's been years but I looked into early development and by the eleventh week every single biological element that defines us as human is functioning. I also looked into the legal history, before abortion on demand was a legal issue it was contraceptives and the Catholic church was already opposed. The precedence set was over the issue of privacy, if you know anything about the sodomy laws being cast down, the issue there was privacy. As a Protestant I may have serious theological issues with Rome but on the issue of abortion they have always been 100% consistent.

Not a well know fact but at one time a Roman father who had a daughter, could walk into a field, set her down and leave her there. The church called that murder. At one time in China, it was pretty common and perfectly permissible to drown infant girls in buckets, same reaction from the church. We have seen this before and even though now it's in clinics the issues don't change a lot.

Another forgotten fact, one of the reason Christians got really involved is at one time babies could be drowned at birth or left to starve on a gurney. Not in ancient Rome of China, but in the United States with the approval of the courts. I have always avoided this subject matter like the plague, I don't like gay rights topics either. My part in the culture war was creationism, it was good for Bible study and a fascinating exploration of cutting edge genetics. The one thing I did do for the prolife movement is I had my kids, such as it is, that was the best I had to give and it came with a price.

At any rate, that's my two cents worth.

Grace and peace,
Mark
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
There are actually sixteen cells in a zygote that can potentially become an individual human being. Aren’t the sixteen cells being an individual?

A zygote is not sixteen cells. It is one and only one cell.
 
Upvote 0

SPF

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2017
3,594
1,984
ATL
✟142,081.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
A zygote is not sixteen cells. It is one and only one cell.
I’m probably wrong as you “sound” confident.... But I thought that after cleavage and the cell divided that it was for a time still considered a zygote. So while the zygote began as one cell, it didn’t end with just one cell.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Eloy Craft
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
A zygote is not sixteen cells. It is one and only one cell.
True. Sort of. It starts as one cell. Thank you for the correction. The zygote divides three times and it's eight cells are totipotent. Then it becomes a blastocyst and the cells become pluripotent. Your response is evasive to my question.

Does the fact that they each have the potential to direct their own growth and be a human individual mean that they are? And if twinning does take place why does that mean that the zygote conceived is not an individual human?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Douglas Hendrickson

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 27, 2015
1,951
197
81
✟133,415.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
In conclusion, we should always keep in mind that there is no more powerful abortifacient in the world than poverty.

Does it not appear to any serious observer that this is pretty much FALSE?
And therefore never to have in one's mind, ever?

Or am I mistaken to think as a generalization the poor have larger families, especially in poor countries? Partly because contraception costs money.

Of course it may be that for those who have little that seems positive in their lives, except "loving times," that the women are much more often pregnant and this means there is more natural abortion, i.e., miscarriage. Is that how we are supposed to understand this claim?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟386,808.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
These very serious questions of person-hood arise only if we assume that the soul is infused at conception and that the brand new zygote is fully a person. Is there a more reasonable understanding?
You forget who is doing the soul infusing? God knows what's going to happen before it happens. Souls are created and the body or bodies receive the soul or souls in accordance to the organization of the body or bodies. The body isn't going to fool God into making some kind of soul mess.

Sentience occurs at about the same point in the pregnancy very late in the second trimester.
This reminds me of old pagan beliefs. They believed that the ability to reason was the sign that the human soul had arrived. Until then the child had no more dignity than any other animal. Children were subject to be sacrificed to the fertility god back then too. That is before they were able to reason. Sentience at least drives it back a little farther than the pagans.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0