Christians and Pro-Choice

[steen]

Look, a gamete is a haploid cell.

Really? It is a cell? How about that, a real, live, genuine cell. That's what I said. So what's the problem?

It has one set of chromosomes. By contrast, a fertilized egg is (or rather, quickly becomes) a diploid cell, meaning it contains two sets of chromosomes: one from the mother, and the other from the father.

So?

THAT is what determines our personal identity.

Really? The fully-formed chromosomes? In that case, a Hydatidiform Mole has a personal identity. Are you really sure you want to stand behind that claim?

A gamete, by comparison, is only half of what is required to construct a human being.

As there is no "being" until birth anyway, the zygote really isn't much more significant here.

As such, a gamete is not human,

Ah, gametes are cats? Or fish?

It most certainly is of the species designation "human." I am shocked that you don't know this.

and has no identity in respect to the other gametes.

Ah, so you claim that the DNA in a gamete is identical to the DNA in other gametes? That is about as ignorant a claim as the one about its species designation.

 

[JGG]

Look dude, a gamete is a haploid cell. It has one set of chromosomes. By contrast, a fertilized egg is (or rather, quickly becomes) a diploid cell, meaning it contains two sets of chromosomes: one from the mother, and the other from the father. THAT is what determines our personal identity.

Each of my arm hairs contain more than a few diploid cells, and each cell has two sets of chromosomes. does that mean that my arm hairs have a personal identity? What should I do to protect my arm hair from death?

 

[Monica02]

Here are some scientific, peer-reviewed studies looking at contraceptive use and abortions/unwanted pregnancies:


Well, that ought to do it.

Nope, not a single study to show a lower abortion rate after the development of the BC pill.

Regardless, the use of artificial contraception is sinful.

An abortion is the interruption of a pregnancy, which is the implantation of the products of conception. I would like to see where the BCP actually results in the loss of an implanted embryo.

So your claim of a "fact" seems to be a vastly exaggerated claim form your personal conviction, rather than an actual Fact. Perhaps you ought to exhibit more care in the use of that term?

One method the BC pill employs is to make the uterine environment unfriendly to implantation of a fetilized egg, which is a human being. This makes the BC pill an abortofacient.

Ah, keep the women ignorant. yeah, the patriarchy of the oppression of ignorant women. Sure, why not. If that is what your Church revels in, then so be it.

Women are free to learn whatever they wish. The Church is required to teach the Word of God.

But then, nobody are talking about killing children, your revisionist linguistic hyperbole none withstanding.

Abortion kills a women's unborn child - this is a fact.

 

[Charlie V]

Are you playing dumb or something?

Look dude, a gamete is a haploid cell. It has one set of chromosomes. By contrast, a fertilized egg is (or rather, quickly becomes) a diploid cell, meaning it contains two sets of chromosomes:

Gamete, haploid, diploid, triploid, quadruploid. Whatever. You can call it any name.

I call it, "a beautiful unfertilized little baby."

Charlie

 

[Aimee30]

Would you be willing to adopt all these potential babies that otherwise will be aborted?

I can agree with this part actually. I, for one, wish that Christians would think of this fact before they support any position in this case.
I'm not of the opinion, however, that the baby is a part of anyone's body. It depends on the mother for survival, more like, as it is made up of genes from both parents. I think it would be more accurate to say "something living in a part of her body" as it would recognize that all the genes are not her own. That's my opinion though. I am just trying to say here that I don't believe the situation is cut and paste, and we should actually think of the other options too.
After all, even if one doesn't believe in God or spiritual things, one has to consider the fact their child might have had a genius IQ and gone on to solve more mysteries of the universe, the child might have been a doctor that healed many sick, the child might have been the scientist that discovered a cure for cancer, or such other things. All I ask is that the whole thing be thought through before assuming such and such as an opinion is the only right one.
I'm not trying to complain about your first sentence--I'm just trying to use it to express my concern for humanity and where it's going if we do not make decisions based on all available information.

 

[Charlie V]

My beliefs come from God. What more can I say?

My beliefs come from God, too. What more can I say?

Charlie

 

[Charlie V]

one has to consider the fact their child might have had a genius IQ and gone on to solve more mysteries of the universe, the child might have been a doctor that healed many sick, the child might have been the scientist that discovered a cure for cancer, or such other things.

Or, alternatively, the child might have had a poor IQ or have been mentally unstable, the child might have been a serial killer, the child might have been the scientist that discovered a bomb so powerful it destroyed the world, or other things.

Another possibility is that the mother might have a genius IQ and might have become a doctor that healed many sick, the scientist that discovered a cure for cancer, if only she had terminated the pregancy when it was a single-celled zygote, but instead, having the baby, she had to drop out of school, never finishing her education, and took a job as a part-time waitress, a job she really wasn't very good at, a job that lead to many conflicts with her mother who had to watch the baby, and she finally left home hating the mother she would have loved in the alternate universe where she had the abortion, and moved in with the drunken boyfriend she never would have dated in the alternate universe, and, in a tragic development, she left the child with her irresponsible boyfriend, and he neglected the child who went playing on the 12th floor balcony, falling to his death, leading to the girl's depression and eventual suicide.

If we're looking at hypothetical possibilities, there are many to explore.

Charlie

 

[flicka]

If we're looking at hypothetical possibilities, there are many to explore.

Again....

 

[levi501]

If every sperm is sacred... then Hitler can't hold a candle to me.

 

[Aimee30]

Or, alternatively, the child might have had a poor IQ or have been mentally unstable, the child might have been a serial killer, the child might have been the scientist that discovered a bomb so powerful it destroyed the world, or other things.

Another possibility is that the mother might have a genius IQ and might have become a doctor that healed many sick, the scientist that discovered a cure for cancer, if only she had terminated the pregancy when it was a single-celled zygote, but instead, having the baby, she had to drop out of school, never finishing her education, and took a job as a part-time waitress, a job she really wasn't very good at, a job that lead to many conflicts with her mother who had to watch the baby, and she finally left home hating the mother she would have loved in the alternate universe where she had the abortion, and moved in with the drunken boyfriend she never would have dated in the alternate universe, and, in a tragic development, she left the child with her irresponsible boyfriend, and he neglected the child who went playing on the 12th floor balcony, falling to his death, leading to the girl's depression and eventual suicide.

If we're looking at hypothetical possibilities, there are many to explore.

Charlie

I was trying to encourage thinking over positions, instead of just choosing one as the ultimate cure for everything. To show people where pausing to think helps you must show the opposite of what they are saying. I already stated that I do not oppose an abortion that might save someone's life. I am more for it in situations of both mother and baby dying. When it's the mother could die, a rational decision must be reached before proceeding with any course of action.
This is my point--pausing to think about a situation is good--not considering the details and pushing an ultimate cure all is not good.

 

[Charlie V]

I was trying to encourage thinking over positions,

So was I.

Edit: (I figured out what you were saying afterward so my question was moot.)

Charlie

 

[steen]

Nope, not a single study to show a lower abortion rate after the development of the BC pill.

Studies show that where BCP are used, the abortion rate goes down. Your attempt at denying this merely shows that you are more interested in dogma than in facts.

Regardless, the use of artificial contraception is sinful.

Nonsense.

One method the BC pill employs is to make the uterine environment unfriendly to implantation of a fetilized egg,

And as such, no pregnancy occurs, and therefore no abortion. So your claim is outright false.

which is a human being.

Ah, an absolutist "just because I believe so" postulation with no foundation in reality. Pro-life revisionist linguistic hyperbole sure is tiresome and silly.

This makes the BC pill an abortofacient.

An outright falsehood.

Women are free to learn whatever they wish. The Church is required to teach the Word of God.

And what was God's word against actual abortions again? Oh, that's right, the Bible doesn't mention abortions. Ah, so you say that the Church's job is to teach your INTERPRETATION of God's word, then. Hmm....

Abortion kills a women's unborn child - this is a fact.

Actually, that is not a fact, only a belief. So your claim is a falsehood. Pro-life emotional histrionics sure is tiresome and silly.

BTW, how are you doing with being an undead corpse?

 

[steen]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Charlie V again.

Great example of the "what-if" game that pro-lifers are so fond off.

 

[Charlie V]

Abortion kills a women's unborn child - this is a fact.

Once again.. Abstinance kills a woman's unborn child through the menstral cycle (or menstrabortion/murder.)

An unfertilized egg is a cute, unborn little baby. This is a fact.

And if you think this is the most extreme version (I think it's almost exactly the same as saying a fertilized egg or zygote is a baby, which many anti-choicers say) I actually heard an even more extreme version from an anti-choicer once.

One anti-choicer on these boards once told me that an abortion is actually genocide. It's mass murder. Because you're killing the baby, and the baby's future children, and the baby's future grandchildren, and the entire line, thousands of generations of potentially infinite people are murdered.

If you think "the unfertilized egg is baby murder" is extreme, how about all the hypothetical future eggs that might have some day existed from now till the end of eternity, are all human beings that have been mass-murdered, getting an entire line of infinite generations of murders from the death of a single zygote? That's even more extreme than the unfertized egg -- the not yet existing eggs are humans! -- but I kid you not, I heard it here!

Charlie

 

[crumbs2000]

Great example of the "what-if" game that pro-lifers are so fond off.

I hate them 'what if' scenerios.

 

[crumbs2000]

deleted post

 

[ChristianCenturion]

*MOD HAT ON*

This thread is closed for review.

*MOD HAT OFF*