Abortion to prevent increased suffering

[disciple Clint]

You have posted 12 times in this thread and I have checked each and every one of them. At no point have you posted anything links at all, let alone a link to some science article that shows that a fertilized egg is scientifically a person.

So I ask again, please provide a scientific source to back up your claim that "the science is still there to prove that a fertilized egg is a person."

My apologizes I thought it was in this string but it was in another string. Religion and Moral Status of the Pre-born

 

[Kylie]

My apologizes I thought it was in this string but it was in another string. Religion and Moral Status of the Pre-born

That's a scientist expressing his personal opinion. That does not make it science.

Additionally, those articles are not science articles, and something does not become science just because there's a law about it.

 

[disciple Clint]

That's a scientist expressing his personal opinion. That does not make it science.

Additionally, those articles are not science articles, and something does not become science just because there's a law about it.

OK there are two separate questions. 1. Does conception begin a human life, that is a medical question, the answer is YES. Is that life a person, that is a legal question and the answer is Yes. I have provided the evidence from medical authorities and from legal authorities. Case closed.

 

[Kylie]

OK there are two separate questions. 1. Does conception begin a human life, that is a medical question, the answer is YES. Is that life a person, that is a legal question and the answer is Yes. I have provided the evidence from medical authorities and from legal authorities. Case closed.

Does life start at conception? I would say NO. Both the egg and the sperm are alive prior to that point. If abortion is wrong because it ends a life, then the same argument can be made for when a male masturbates or a woman menstruates (since this results in the loss of an egg).

As for the law question, it is entirely irrelevant, since you claimed to have scientific evidence, which you so far have not provided. But even apart from that, the same logic would have us conclude that an acorn is an oak tree, and by crushing an acorn under my foot I should be charged with illegally removing a tree without council permission.

 

[disciple Clint]

Does life start at conception? I would say NO. Both the egg and the sperm are alive prior to that point. If abortion is wrong because it ends a life, then the same argument can be made for when a male masturbates or a woman menstruates (since this results in the loss of an egg).

As for the law question, it is entirely irrelevant, since you claimed to have scientific evidence, which you so far have not provided. But even apart from that, the same logic would have us conclude that an acorn is an oak tree, and by crushing an acorn under my foot I should be charged with illegally removing a tree without council permission.

I am not going to argue with the opinion of the doctors or the courts in the evidence I provided nor am I going to debate silly hypothetical arguments.

 

[o_mlly]

Then I can assume you will be happy to proceed in this discussion without using the Bible in any way?

When debating atheists, appeals to the bible are useless. Why did you appeal to the bible? Would not your appeal to the bible be the same as me citing a debunked study as being authoritative?

 

[o_mlly]

Does life start at conception? I would say NO. Both the egg and the sperm are alive prior to that point.

The science reports otherwise. Human life is not synonymous with human being.

Scientifically something very radical occurs that differentiates the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization. The radical change observed is that a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living "human being" (a single-cell embryonic human zygote).

THE FACTS AND DOUBTS ABOUT BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN LIFE AND PERSONALITY

Reproduction is a mean of creating new life by transferring forms of old one into newly formed human being.​

 

[Chriliman]

The science reports otherwise. Human life is not synonymous with human being.

Scientifically something very radical occurs that differentiates the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization. The radical change observed is that a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living "human being" (a single-cell embryonic human zygote).

THE FACTS AND DOUBTS ABOUT BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN LIFE AND PERSONALITY

Reproduction is a mean of creating new life by transferring forms of old one into newly formed human being.​

Again, even if we say abortion is murder, we’re left with the problem I outlined here.

Can you address those problems please?

A valid critic of saying “abortion is murder”, is not addressing the implications of that accusation.

 

[Kylie]

I am not going to argue with the opinion of the doctors or the courts in the evidence I provided nor am I going to debate silly hypothetical arguments.

Okay, so you just want to make claims and not support them?

 

[Kylie]

When debating atheists, appeals to the bible are useless. Why did you appeal to the bible? Would not your appeal to the bible be the same as me citing a debunked study as being authoritative?

Do you not hold the Bible to be authoritative in this case, even if I do not?

 

[Kylie]

The science reports otherwise. Human life is not synonymous with human being.

Scientifically something very radical occurs that differentiates the processes of gametogenesis and fertilization. The radical change observed is that a simple part of one human being (i.e., a sperm) and a simple part of another human being (i.e., an oocyte usually referred to as an "ovum" or "egg"), which simply possess "human life", to a new, genetically unique, newly existing, individual, whole living "human being" (a single-cell embryonic human zygote).

THE FACTS AND DOUBTS ABOUT BEGINNING OF THE HUMAN LIFE AND PERSONALITY

Reproduction is a mean of creating new life by transferring forms of old one into newly formed human being.​

So why can't we say a sperm is Human life? After all, it is alive, isn't it? It is Human, isn't it?

 

[Chriliman]

the fact the abortion is the killing of an innocent child is not rationalization

Agreed, now address the implications I brought up, what’s the solution? Prosecution of possibly millions of people or influx of possibly millions of unwanted kids?

 

[Ken-1122]

Ok, lets say abortion is murder, what would you rather do?
1. Prosecute anyone involved in unnecessary abortions, which is likely millions of people.
2. Bring back to life the aborted as if they were never aborted(over 60million) and flood the foster/adoption system, which is already busting at the seems with over 400,000 kids.

To me, both options are not ideal, which is a reason why I'd rather have an option 3. where we let things continue as they have been, where early abortion is legal(not considered murder), but a last resort when all else fails.

If you had to pick 1, 2 or 3, what would it be? Or another option I'm not thinking of?

How's this for an option you are not thinking of:
Not 1: You can’t prosecute anyone who had abortions while they were legal
Not 2: You can’t bring back to life those aborted because it’s impossible
Not 3: Don’t continue doing as have been, that’s what they are complaining about!
But 4: Immediately make it illegal, and prosecute anyone who has abortions from now on

 

[disciple Clint]

When debating atheists, appeals to the bible are useless. Why did you appeal to the bible? Would not your appeal to the bible be the same as me citing a debunked study as being authoritative?

I would point out that there fulfilled prophesies in the bible that can be verified by history and used as evidence.

 

[disciple Clint]

Okay, so you just want to make claims and not support them?

I can only provide evidence that most reasonable persons would be willing to accept, I have do that I am leaving this discussion now

 

[disciple Clint]

Agreed, now address the implications I brought up, what’s the solution? Prosecution of possibly millions of people or influx of possibly millions of unwanted kids?

simply I do not accept those as being the only options.

 

[Kylie]

I can only provide evidence that most reasonable persons would be willing to accept, I have do that I am leaving this discussion now

Let the record state that you chose to leave rather than back up your claim of post 72 that there is science which conclusively shows that a fertilized egg is a person.

 

[disciple Clint]

Let the record state that you chose to leave rather than back up your claim of post 72 that there is science which conclusively shows that a fertilized egg is a person.

let the record show that I could not care less what the record shows, those who want to see the evidence will see it and those who do not make no difference.

 

[Kylie]

let the record show that I could not care less what the record shows, those who want to see the evidence will see it and those who do not make no difference.

You made a claim, you were unable to support it, and no instead of supporting it, you are leaving the discussion (so you said). What will be seen is that you have provided no evidence to support your claims.

Your attempt to belittle those who disagree with you by saying they make no difference is immature.

 

[disciple Clint]

You made a claim, you were unable to support it, and no instead of supporting it, you are leaving the discussion (so you said). What will be seen is that you have provided no evidence to support your claims.

Your attempt to belittle those who disagree with you by saying they make no difference is immature.

Have a nice day