Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I see nothing in there that address the "unique DNA" that I presented.Post #802
You would have if you read the linked article. We've already determined the definition of a person in Post #785 changing the language doesn't change the facts. Every question you've asked can be answered by an embryologist. Read the link, it gives you very detailed answers.I see nothing in there that address the "unique DNA" that I presented.
Please tell me, which of those addresses the question of whether personhood is granted by unique DNA?
The objective/subjective debate of morality is another hotly contested area of this forum. Afraid we will likely disagree there as well. I have yet to see a good argument for basing morality on anything objective. If you wish to start a separate thread on it I will be happy to debate it.Because we need something foundational to determine morality, it has to be objective, not subjective. If religion is not the foundation for lawmakers then science should be.
Oh come on. You posted a list of myths that you claimed "answers every argument" about abortion.You would have if you read the linked article. We've already determined the definition of a person in Post #785 changing the language doesn't change the facts. Every question you've asked can be answered by an embryologist. Read the link, it gives you very detailed answers.
Personhood
noun
The state or condition of being a person, especially having those qualities that confer distinct individuality.
The state or period of being a person.
being a person.
Why would I need to do that?The objective/subjective debate of morality is another hotly contested area of this forum. Afraid we will likely disagree there as well. I have yet to see a good argument for basing morality on anything objective. If you wish to start a separate thread on it I will be happy to debate it.
I said, (if you kept reading the post) the scientific facts that answered the myths listed, were too detailed to add to the post. I'm not opening the link and doing the reading and explaining for you. You can do that for yourself. It absolutely answers the question you posed:You posted a list of myths that you claimed "answers every argument" about abortion
If a group of cells/tissue/whatever you want to call it has UNIQUE DNA, is it considered a separate human/person/homo sapiens/any other word you want to use that means person?
That is not what objective is. Everyone can agree and it still be subjective.Why would I need to do that?
If morality cannot be objective (everyone agreeing what "morality" is),
Our laws are not objective. Hence why we when we try people we use words like "Beyond reasonable doubt" and "Preponderance of evidence".what foundation do we base our laws on? Hence, my inclusion of scientific facts on this thread. Bye.
Okay, let's see what your source says (BTW, it's horrendously formatted, you might find THIS version is much easier to read.)I said, (if you kept reading the post) the scientific facts that answered the myths listed, were too detailed to add to the post. I'm not opening the link and doing the reading and explaining for you. You can do that for yourself. It absolutely answers the question you posed:
Myth 8: "Pregnancy begins with the implantation of the blastocyst (i.e., about 5-7 days)."
I don’t see why the question disqualifies the fact that an embryo is genetically a human being, or that editing DNA is equal to abortion. It's unethical perhaps, but show me the evidence where this has been done successfully without a negative result?Now, if I could somehow go in and change every example of DNA set B to match DNA set A, the person would still be alive, they would have an uninterrupted experience,. But have I committed a murder? If you believe that a unique set of DNA is sufficient to grant personhood (and your own source supports that position), then yes, I must have committed a murder.
So, who is the dead person?
This is what kids are required to learn at school. I assume the reason is most zygotes are naturally miscarried without anyone knowing they existed except God. What people need to understand is the definitions of pregnancy and fertilizat5ion are different.
I don’t see why the question disqualifies the fact that an embryo is genetically a human being, or that editing DNA is equal to abortion. It's unethical perhaps, but show me the evidence where this has been done successfully without a negative result?
During twin absorption
Fraternal (dizygotic) twins are the twins generated from two zygotes. Two zygotes can be formed from two ova being simultaneously released and fertilized by two sperm cells. On the other hand, identical twins (monozygotic) are twins generated when one zygote divides into two (or three) before implantation in the uterus.
View attachment 325796
Quite often, one of the fraternal twins dies inside the mother’s womb. The portion of this twin that was already formed is absorbed by the other remaining twin. The individual, when born, is a human chimera, as it has the DNA of two organisms inside it.
More often than not, this does not create any problems, and the individual continues to live a normal life.
In some cases, such as when the sex of twins was different, complications may arise. If the surviving female still has cells containing the Y chromosome (found only in men) in her body, it could lead to the development of certain masculine characteristics, such as rudimentary testes.
From: Chimerism: What Is A Human Chimera?
I thought you understood objective reality? (Post #758). If the scientific evidence is not enough for you, then that just means you're operating under your own emotional biases and in denial about the facts. Why would I continue to debate someone who is selective with the evidence that proves a human beings existence begins at fertilisation? I've been around this LOOP with you before and I'm not interested in doing it again. You would probably argue with a doorpost. 》BYE.Your source says that "Unique DNA" = "Unique Human." A person with TWO sets of unique DNA is, by your logic, two people.
Onan "spilled his seed on the ground" and we are told: Genesis 38:9 "What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so the LORD put him to death also." (NIV)So prolifers would also have to agree that the destruction of human sperms and human ova are no different from abortions and that is ridiculous!"
My Daughter never made it to the Uterus. But I had a dream about her in Heaven and she is alive and well there. Although she is a little confused about why she did not get to live her life here on Earth.Finally, the fertilized egg, now properly called an embryo, must make its way into the uterus
Can't use that as a valid argument against abortion though.Onan "spilled his seed on the ground" and we are told: Genesis 38:9 "What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so the LORD put him to death also." (NIV)
Are you implying that all such matters suddenly became immediately clear at one moment? The absurdity of that question should refute any notion of an Age of Accountability.when did you learn right from wrong?
I'm going to take a look at this over the next day or two. I've quickly read thru a few of the arguments and found them lacking and out of date. The response to "myth 9" is blatantly false regarding the Morning After Pill, for example. Last week's headlines:For the pro-choicers on this thread, anyone I've missed, count yourself included in this post.
@ChristianForCats
@NxNW
@Kylie
@jayem
@Belk
This answers every argument you have regarding abortion of a human being. The detailed scientific facts can be found in the link provided, they're too in-depth to add in this post, but they demolish the myths.
If you think about it logically: Given that the vast majority of Heaven's inhabitants must be embryos that miscarried, she would have plenty of company.My Daughter never made it to the Uterus. But I had a dream about her in Heaven and she is alive and well there. Although she is a little confused about why she did not get to live her life here on Earth.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?