A Thought Experiment

[Phinehas2]

Jedi,
If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, it is not her choice, the abortion is still wrong, but the fault lies with the criminal who raped her. If the women consents to sexual intercourse pregnancy is a likely result, thats her choice and thus she has no right to terminate the baby just because she doesnt want it. She wants the sex but not the consequences, she needs to get a grasp of reality.

 

[Phinehas2]

So Jedi, having answered two of your questions with a yes/no as you asked, can i have some answers. Is the sperm which has 23 chromosomes the same human life as the adult human and the human zygote which have 46?
Yes or no?

 

[Jedi]

If you were specifying ‘killed by a person’ why did you then refer to who God had wiped out? We are not God.

Isn't God a person? Not a person like us, sure, but a person with sentience, thought, and moral character nonetheless. As such, the point remains: there are circumstances under which a person may be killed by another, as evidenced by God sanctioning this very act time and again in the Old Testament.

Correct, unlike them, for they were already part of Adam and the disobedience and had already gone against God and His people.

So... a fetus in the womb is not "part of Adam" and infants are guilty of going against God and His people? Wow, those are some pretty amazing infants! Most don't even know how to stop drooling, but here you claim they've knowingly rebelled against God and His people. Astounding!

Sarcasm aside, I find your attempt to differentiate between an unborn child and an infant on a moral level rediculous, as if the infants deserved it and the unborn child did not.

So where do you stand, if you are defending pro-choice abortion then you must have thought it ok for God to have wiped out people.

Sure.

You seem unhappy that God wiped out people because you personally don’t think they deserved it, but you don’t mind defending abortion because you don’t consider it viable life.

Not quite. I'm merely playing the devil's advocate in griping about God killing innocent people - something you think is inherently sinful. It's not. If it was, God would be pretty heavy on the sin load.

The question was whether you wished to use the argument

No, the question is whether or not you're willing to say abortion is okay in some circumstances. Is it? And if so, why? You seem to be okay with abortion in the case of rape. Great, but if this is true, then you can't continue with this nonsense blanket statement of claiming "abortion is murder" and that there is "no argument" for abortion.

And? Does that give people the right to kill? Not sure what your point is.

God sanctioned the act of people killing people. Thus people killing people can't always be wrong; else God is a sinner. If this is true, then your argument of "abortion is wrong because it's one person killing another" doesn't hold, since one person killing another isn't always wrong.

That’s what Jesus said, I merely repeated the truth.

Where? What verse? Where did Jesus ever say "Killing anyone is inherently sinful in all circumstances?"

No. They are fighting for my worldly freedom otherwise I might get killed

So it's okay for people to kill if it will save someone else's life, yes? They can kill in that situation and not be "murderers?" If so, then a woman can have an abortion if she has a medical condition in which her life is in peril by continuing the pregnancy. Another example of abortion not being murder.

No, by my definition God is God, it is people who should not murder as none are without sin enough to carry out punishment themselves.

You said "those who aborte the child are murderers." You seem to love blanket statements like this, without consideration to exceptions that ultimately make the statements untrue.

abortion is murder, anyone who has an abortion or performs it can repent and be forgiven in Christ, no different for anyone and any sin.

Abortion is murder, huh? Period and end of sentence, huh? Then if your wife gets raped and has an abortion, she is a murderer? If she gets pregnant and finds she has a medical condition that will claim her life if the pregnancy continues and decides to have an abortion, she is a murderer? I thought you indicated it was okay to kill to preserve someone else's life. Uh-oh... someone's statements are conflicting...

Yes of course, abortion is still killing the child, in what ever circumstances

So your wife is a murderer even in that circumstance. I see. Then we have nothing to discuss. Your blatant disregard for the well being and life of the prospective mother by insisting that abortion not be an option under any circumstance because it's always "murder" (and murder should be avoided at all times, yes?) is sickening. I wonder if you came home some time next week and found that your wife had been raped and impregnated if you would really continue threatening her with the wrath of God if she got an abortion, labeling her a "murderer" if she got rid of the fetus. I wonder if you would have the stomach to stand with the atrocious claims you've made here.

Your dazzling inability to distinguish between "killing" and "murder" prevents this discussion from moving forward. Additionally, your arbitrary choice of placing the well being of the fetus above the well being of the pregnant woman is unwarranted and without thought. You might as well have flipped a coin over who you were going to defend.

but she isnt the one who caused the problem, that would be the criminal who raped her.

Irrelevant - the woman has the power to abort or not abort and as such, she's responsible for that decision.

 

[Jedi]

So Jedi, having answered two of your questions with a yes/no as you asked, can i have some answers. Is the sperm which has 23 chromosomes the same human life as the adult human and the human zygote which have 46?
Yes or no?

Sure, it could very well be that God just hasn't added those extra 23 chromosomes to the "human life" yet, just like He hasn't added its brain, heart, cardiovascular system, etc. C'mon, buddy. You like using your imagination.

In truth, I've been playing the devil's advocate in this respect to get you to see that there are a LOT of possibilities for when God places a soul into the biological apparatus. Your refusal to consider anything other than the moment of conception is unwarranted. It could be before; it could be after. I would submit God places a soul into the apparatus at a point later than conception, probably when the cells can no longer divide and the entity becomes a set individual or when brain activity begins (hard to have a person with a personality without a mind).

 

[Phinehas2]

Jedi,
Ok thanks, by sure I assume yes.

Sure, it could very well be that God just hasn't added those extra 23 chromosomes to the "human life" yet,

Um the adult human has the same 46 chromosomes as the zygote, but twice as many as the sperm. So the human adult in that respect is the same as the zygote but not the same as the sperm. Furthermore the human zygote with its 46 chromosomes is developing into the adult in the mother’s womb, the sperm isnt. We are in reality check time now.

He hasn't added its brain, heart, cardiovascular system, etc. C'mon, buddy. You like using your imagination.

Umm, hello? God is adding the brain, heart and cardiovascular system to the zygote, not so the sperm.

Your refusal to consider anything other than the moment of conception is unwarranted.

To me its reality, I can tell the difference between a human zygote that is developing into a human adult and a male sperm which will never do so unless it becomes a zygote.

I would submit God places a soul into the apparatus at a point later than conception, probably when the cells can no longer divide and the entity becomes a set individual or when brain activity begins (hard to have a person with a personality without a mind).

Thanks for the submission, but God knows people before they are in the womb and knits them together in the womb…. I go with God’s truth rather than your submission

 

[Jedi]

Um the adult human has the same 46 chromosomes as the zygote, but twice as many as the sperm. So the human adult in that respect is the same as the zygote but not the same as the sperm.

The same could be said for many parts of it – what makes you think chromosomes indicate the presence of a soul? The zygote lacks a brain, cardiovascular system, immune system, arms, legs, a heart, liver, lungs, stomach, and the list goes on. Why don’t any of THOSE parts of biological composition dictate when a soul is placed into the apparatus? Of the many physical points of development, you’re just picking at random which one is the point at which a soul enters the body when the truth is you just don’t know. You have never observed a soul entering a body and scripture never tells us at what point of our physical creation a soul is given to the biological matter developing into our bodies. This being true, your insistence that it happens at the point of conception is baseless; it could be a great number of possibilities during the development of organic matter into a human being.

Furthermore the human zygote with its 46 chromosomes is developing into the adult in the mother’s womb, the sperm isnt. We are in reality check time now.

But you don’t know the sperm isn’t, nor do you know the zygote is. Both cells or group of cells may become a thinking, breathing human. It has potential, not certainty. If it was certain, then every zygote should have become an adult, but that’s just not true; the proper conditions aren’t always met and if they aren’t always met, then the zygote’s fate isn’t certain like you suggest.

It could also be the case that God has chosen a particular sperm to create an individual. That you don’t know which one He chose is irrelevant; it’s entirely possible that, if God so chose, a particular sperm would be a “person in development.” Again, just pointing out the possibilities here that are just as much an option as saying a soul is granted upon conception.

Umm, hello? God is adding the brain, heart and cardiovascular system to the zygote, not so the sperm.

And what came before the zygote? Hmmm? Sperm and the egg, right? So if the sperm and egg are the parts of the zygote, then all the additional parts – the brain, heart, etc. are being added to them. They didn’t just disappear, you know; they merely joined forces.

Thanks for the submission, but God knows people before they are in the womb and knits them together in the womb…. I go with God’s truth rather than your submission

Oh my gosh. You’re not seriously hopping on this merry-go-round again. God saying “I knew you before I formed you in the womb,” does NOT (NOT NOT NOT) dictate at what point God placed a soul into the biological apparatus and in no way supports your assertion that personhood begins at conception. You might as well say “The grass is green, therefore it’s wrong to play video games.” It would make just as much sense.

 

[Phinehas2]

Jedi,

The same could be said for many parts of it – what makes you think chromosomes indicate the presence of a soul?

I didn’t mention soul with chromosomes, but yes of course chromosomes do indicate the presence of a soul as I said the adult human has the same 46 chromosomes as the zygote.
So the human adult in that respect is the same as the zygote but not the same as the sperm.
Agreed?

The zygote lacks a brain, cardiovascular system, immune system, arms, legs, a heart, liver, lungs, stomach, and the list goes on.

So does the sperm so why were you suggesting they were the same. The reality is that all those develop with the zygote, they don’t develop with the sperm.

But you don’t know the sperm isn’t, nor do you know the zygote is.

Everyone knows it, how come you don’t? If you cant acknowledge that human zygote with its 46 chromosomes is developing into the adult in the mother’s womb, the sperm isnt. We are in reality check time now.

Both cells or group of cells may become a thinking, breathing human.

Of course they wont, the zygote is the amalgamation of sperm and egg, the sperm as a set of cells will never become a thinking breathing human, it may become a zygote, but then it will be a zygote and not a sperm.

And what came before the zygote? Hmmm?

Of course they wont, the zygote is the amalgamation of sperm and egg, the sperm as a set of cells will never become a thinking breathing human, it may become a zygote, but then it will be a zygote and not a sperm.

Oh my gosh.

oh my goodness.

You’re not seriously hopping on this merry-go-round again.

How come you don’t believe the word of God?

God saying “I knew you before I formed you in the womb,” does NOT (NOT NOT NOT) dictate at what point God placed a soul into the biological apparatus and in no way supports your assertion that personhood begins at conception. You might as well say “The grass is green, therefore it’s wrong to play video games.” It would make just as much sense.

Of course it does, I am me and I have a soul, God knew me before I was born. Of course it was my soul !
BUT, if I know when I was formed I could know not to abort what God has created! Your pro-choice position however says it doesn’t know and then in that ignorance makes it own mind up to abort.

 

[Phinehas2]

Jedi,
So I asked you if the zygote as a cluster of cells, the amalgamation of sperm and egg with 46 chromosomes, is the same as the sperm as a cluster of cells with 23 chromosomes. Your answer seems to indicate you think it is.
I would propose therefore that it would be reasonable to call pro-choice people sperm on the grounds that they are a cluster of cells.

 

[Jedi]

So it seems we've come full circle and we're back to the "But God knew me before I was formed in the womb!" nonsense as some kind of indication when, exactly, a soul enters a biological apparatus. Destroying what God created is not the issue - we do that all the time, from eating plants to having a McDonald's hamburger to smashing a roach or killing skin cells. The issue is when a soul is joined with a body and nowhere in this entire discussion have you even come close to providing any scientific, observable, or scriptural evidence for your assertion that it must be at conception instead of any of the many other parts of human development. You've only said "You don't believe the Bible! I am me with a soul;" a dazzling display of begging the question.

This conversation has been fruitless and shows no promise of change. At the very least, I got you to state that a raped woman should be punished for murder if she chose to have an abortion (post 80). The same for a woman who's life is in peril should the pregnancy continue. It is clear your persective on the issue is not balanced or in sync with any kind of biblical morality.

I tried explaining the problems of the 100% pro-life position, but even when its stance was reduced to moral absurdity, you clung to it. It's true what they say: none are as deaf as those who do not wish to hear.

 

[Phinehas2]

Jedi,

So it seems we've come full circle and we're back to the "But God knew me before I was formed in the womb!" nonsense

Well that’s what the scripture says, call God’s word nonsense if you like.

as some kind of indication when, exactly, a soul enters a biological apparatus.

So if you don’t know when a soul exists you couldn’t possibly defend abortion as you have no idea whether it is the soul is also being destroyed.

Destroying what God created is not the issue –

Agreed that some time ago, we are instructed to kill animals for food for example. You are deliberately avoiding the issue.

nowhere in this entire discussion have you even come close to providing any scientific, observable, or scriptural evidence for your assertion that it must be at conception instead of any of the many other parts of human development.

well that’s exactly what I have done. The problem with the liberal worldview is that it demands everyone else and God dance to its tune. Pro-choice is under examination on this issue, NOT pro-life because pro-choice is taking the action in aborting whatever we are claiming the baby/foetus to be. So pro-life does not need to justify, pro-choice does.
Now I have explained the nature of the zygote and sperm concerning chromosomes, and given passages from Isaiah, Jeremiah and Psalms, so don’t you dare say I haven’t provided any scientific, observable, or scriptural evidence, that is a plain lie on your part .. but this debate has been fruitful, it has shown why abortion is murder and the extent that the pro-choice argument will go to deny and accuse in order to justify its selfish desires.