When have I used Christ? I think I've always argued this on SCIENCE and the scientific definition of life and also using examples of how premature births as early as the second trimester (21 Weeks) survived. So I'm not really "ducking the question", since I never really argue this in the context of religion. YOU are the one who always try to blame the "religious right" for forcing their religious values onto women. I'm not part of the religious right. My whole argument is, if you are going to kill an unborn fetus, don't equate it to cracking open a chicken egg for breakfast. Modern science and technology have shown a very clear picture of the inside of the womb during development, as well as the empirical evidence of viability outside the womb as early as 21 weeks. A doctor sucking the brain out of a 21 week fetus while still inside the womb or sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby. But in America, the first example is a service the second is a crime.
I know quite a few folks who have terminated a pregnancy because of 'abnormal findings'....the stats don't give definitive answers to what will come out in the end but it's the choice to either 'humanly' not allow the purported human to live or the parents doubts about their ability and society's ability to provide for an 'abnormal' human....
I'm all about the science but it is NOT a god....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
"Christ didn't talk about open heart surgery, sex reassignment surgery, or invetro fertilization." they didn't exist in his time. But abortion did exist in his time and before him. Christ didn't discuss the issue of abortion, but many who call themselves Christians claim that abortion is against their religion. If abortion is ok with Christ, it's ok with me.
This is so funny to argue just on the illogic of it. You make a claim that because Jesus wasn't specific to the types of murder, and didn't identify and condemn abortion as a type of murder separate from other murder, he must have agreed to it. So absence of mention equal implied acceptance? C'mon.
Let's see, Christ didn't mention transvestites or cross dressing either. Did those things happen in biblical times or is that new to modern times? It must have been ok with Christ, since it wasn't mentioned. Too funny.
When have I used Christ? I think I've always argued this on SCIENCE and the scientific definition of life and also using examples of how premature births as early as the second trimester (21 Weeks) survived. So I'm not really "ducking the question", since I never really argue this in the context of religion. YOU are the one who always try to blame the "religious right" for forcing their religious values onto women. I'm not part of the religious right. My whole argument is, if you are going to kill an unborn fetus, don't equate it to cracking open a chicken egg for breakfast. Modern science and technology have shown a very clear picture of the inside of the womb during development, as well as the empirical evidence of viability outside the womb as early as 21 weeks. A doctor sucking the brain out of a 21 week fetus while still inside the womb or sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby. But in America, the first example is a service the second is a crime.
I understand your point.l If we can reach some common ground then... Since your opposition isn't religious, no soul, no life from god crap.... then You compare a baby with a zygote and keep telling me that they are the same thing. I've posted pics of both and you must agree a zygote is not recognizable as anything like a human baby. They are obviously not the SAME THING. Yet you have often posted that abortion kills babies.
I don't equate cracking open an egg for breakfast in this argument, but you equate a chicken egg (fetus) as if it were a chicken (baby). We both agree they are very different things.
If 21 weeks is some magic number to you when you contend that a fetus can survive outside the womb... then you will agree to an abortion BEFORE 21 weeks, when the developing fetus is NOT a baby... but you don't. All your 21 weeks post is just more of the same scam.
A zygote is not a baby. A fetus is not a baby. And for most of all abortions preformed in the USA, the zygote/fetus is not viable outside the womb. It is a clump of cells on its way into possibly developing into a human baby.
As your fact based argument gets weaker, you resort to an emotion based case. Your post: "sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby" In order to result in a DEAD baby, you first must have a LIVE baby. The FACTS are NO BABY EXISTED.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
A zygote is not a baby. A fetus is not a baby. And for most of all abortions preformed in the USA, the zygote/fetus is not viable outside the womb. It is a clump of cells on its way into possibly developing into a human baby.
Box.
If a fetus is not a baby, and therefore not a human being, why are states like Democratic controlled California charging suspects with double murder if the murdered woman is pregnant? They did it in the Scott Peterson case and jury convicted him on both counts. Isn't that inconsistent? If the state agrees with your definition of human life, shouldn't Petersen get the conviction of the second murder overturned, because the fetus was not a human life?
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
(QUESTION 1.)If a fetus is not a baby, and therefore not a human being, why are states like Democratic controlled California charging suspects with double murder if the murdered woman is pregnant? They did it in the Scott Peterson case and jury convicted him on both counts. Isn't that inconsistent? Question 2.) If the state agrees with your definition of human life, shouldn't Petersen get the conviction of the second murder overturned, because the fetus was not human?
Answer 1. Bad legislation. Answer 2. Yes.
Note... I let you slide on your last sentence... No one contends that the fetus isn't "HUMAN", even I agree that it's human... just not a human person.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
If 21 weeks is some magic number to you when you contend that a fetus can survive outside the womb...then you will agree to an abortion BEFORE 21 weeks, when the developing fetus is NOT a baby... but you don't. All your 21 weeks post is just more of the same scam.
A zygote is not a baby. A fetus is not a baby. And for most of all abortions preformed in the USA, the zygote/fetus is not viable outside the womb. It is a clump of cells on its way into possibly developing into a human baby.
As your fact based argument gets weaker, you resort to an emotion based case. Your post: "sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby" In order to result in a DEAD baby, you first must have a LIVE baby. The FACTS are NO BABY EXISTED.
We are finding common ground, yes...And as you point out, "most" abortions are performed prior to 21 weeks. Are you saying that you would consider all abortions AFTER 21 weeks’ murder? I don't have the number available in front of me, but abortions in the second and thrid trimester are likely to number in the thousands if not tens of thousands. But still a fraction compared to the millions of first trimester abortions perfomed.
Even in the so-called "protecting the life of the mother", aborting the baby is choosing to kill one life to save another. If you do believe a 21 week old fetus is a viable human life, that would be a HUGE step in the recognition and protection of the natural rights for human life in the womb.
As 55tbird points out, you have to now protect the father that assaults a woman carrying his baby against his wishes from the charge of murder. It is now just a simple assault on the women.
My argument isn't "emotional based", it is factual based, the technique used for late term abortion is dismembering the fetus and sucking out the brains. I'm sorry you don't like that fact, but you not liking it doesn't change the fact. Supposedly that is what civilized societies do.
We are finding common ground, yes...And as you point out, "most" abortions are performed prior to 21 weeks. Are you saying that you would consider all abortions AFTER 21 weeks’ murder? I don't have the number available in front of me, but abortions in the second and thrid trimester are likely to number in the thousands if not tens of thousands. But still a fraction compared to the millions of first trimester abortions perfomed.
Even in the so-called "protecting the life of the mother", aborting the baby is choosing to kill one life to save another. If you do believe a 21 week old fetus is a viable human life, that would be a HUGE step in the recognition and protection and the natural rights for the human life in the womb.
As 55tbird points out, you have to now protect the father that assaults a woman carrying his baby against his wishes from the charge of murder. It is now just a simple assault on the women.
My argument isn't "emotional based", it is factual based, the technique used for late term abortion is dismembering the fetus and sucking out the brains. I'm sorry you don't like that fact, but you not liking it doesn't change the fact. Supposedly that is what civilized societies do.
Why to I bother???
My position is that to kill a baby, you must first have a baby. If no baby exists, then you can't kill it. A human zygote is just that... a zygote. A human fetus is just that... a fetus. Unless you join Mitt Romney in his "Corporations are people too" view... then you could name just about anything "a person".
Things start, things end. An egg is not a chicken. If a waitress brought you an egg when you ordered chicken, you'd know the difference. A fetus is not a baby. It may some day be a baby when it's born, but not until then.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
My position is that to kill a baby, you must first have a baby. If no baby exists, then you can't kill it. A human zygote is just that... a zygote. A human fetus is just that... a fetus. Unless you join Mitt Romney in his "Corporations are people too" view... then you could name just about anything "a person".
Things start, things end. An egg is not a chicken. If a waitress brought you an egg when you ordered chicken, you'd know the difference. A fetus is not a baby. It may some day be a baby when it's born, but not until then.
in our country we toss away the fertilized eggs because we don't want to eat them(some cultures eat them)
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
I am the last one to complain about grammar, but why don't you post with complete sentences? You post phrases that are often unconnected and don't seem to make a lot of sense to me. Perhaps if you posted your thoughts in complete sentences, some of us could understand your meaning instead of trying to make sense of what sometimes appears to be random thoughts.
I painted you a picture....not random thoughts just the composition of the picture....
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
Note... I let you slide on your last sentence... No one contends that the fetus isn't "HUMAN", even I agree that it's human... just not a human person.
You'll let me slide? But you call a state has a law that allows someone to get convicted of murdering a fetus while at the same allowing a mother to commit the same act and fight for her right to do it...bad legislation????? LOL.
I'm actually surprised that some attorney, that wanted to make a name for himself, hasn't filed a appeal based on this and watch to see the courts do that have no way out on the hypocrisy factor.
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
I understand your point.l If we can reach some common ground then... Since your opposition isn't religious, no soul, no life from god crap.... then You compare a baby with a zygote and keep telling me that they are the same thing. I've posted pics of both and you must agree a zygote is not recognizable as anything like a human baby. They are obviously not the SAME THING. Yet you have often posted that abortion kills babies.
I don't equate cracking open an egg for breakfast in this argument, but you equate a chicken egg (fetus) as if it were a chicken (baby). We both agree they are very different things.
If 21 weeks is some magic number to you when you contend that a fetus can survive outside the womb... then you will agree to an abortion BEFORE 21 weeks, when the developing fetus is NOT a baby... but you don't. All your 21 weeks post is just more of the same scam.
A zygote is not a baby. A fetus is not a baby. And for most of all abortions preformed in the USA, the zygote/fetus is not viable outside the womb. It is a clump of cells on its way into possibly developing into a human baby.
As your fact based argument gets weaker, you resort to an emotion based case. Your post: "sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby" In order to result in a DEAD baby, you first must have a LIVE baby. The FACTS are NO BABY EXISTED.
SO WHO DECIDES WHEN ONE IS AN ADULT?
18 ok to join armed forces 16 ok to drive 21 ok to drink 18 ok to gamble 18 ok to smoke
which one is the zygote? by what authority?
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
It's a moral issue! Some Christians are morally fickle. They say they are against abortion UNTIL it effects them personally. Then they willingly turn from GOD ALMIGHTY to GOV ALMIGHTY as their lord and savior! When a Christian wants to commit a sin against their GOD, they know they can justify their sin via GOV ALMIGHTY! Sad but true.
Ya can't have it both ways. Either you follow GOD or GOV.....remember......ya can't serve 2 masters. THAT IS CHOICE!
And let's not forget that slavery was once the law of the land at one time too and EVERYBODY was doing it. If a slave was murdered, beaten or raped, it was socially and economically acceptable and blessed by world governments....including Africa. It was morally wrong.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I understand your point.l If we can reach some common ground then... Since your opposition isn't religious, no soul, no life from god crap.... then You compare a baby with a zygote and keep telling me that they are the same thing. I've posted pics of both and you must agree a zygote is not recognizable as anything like a human baby. They are obviously not the SAME THING. Yet you have often posted that abortion kills babies.
I don't equate cracking open an egg for breakfast in this argument, but you equate a chicken egg (fetus) as if it were a chicken (baby). We both agree they are very different things.
If 21 weeks is some magic number to you when you contend that a fetus can survive outside the womb... then you will agree to an abortion BEFORE 21 weeks, when the developing fetus is NOT a baby... but you don't. All your 21 weeks post is just more of the same scam.
A zygote is not a baby. A fetus is not a baby. And for most of all abortions preformed in the USA, the zygote/fetus is not viable outside the womb. It is a clump of cells on its way into possibly developing into a human baby.
As your fact based argument gets weaker, you resort to an emotion based case. Your post: "sucking the brain out of a prematurely delivered fetus doesn’t change the end result of a dead baby" In order to result in a DEAD baby, you first must have a LIVE baby. The FACTS are NO BABY EXISTED.
that's the crux.....we always have semantics as a balm to our conscience.....let someone else label it and intercept it for me......
again,,,I'm for choice.....but the science names/rhetoric does NOT remove humaness of any process we are capable of perpetrating....
via sex/drugs/guns/food/resources etc.........
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
18 ok to join armed forces 16 ok to drive 21 ok to drink 18 ok to gamble 18 ok to smoke
which one is the zygote? by what authority?
16 isn't an adult... A zygote is an adult in 18 years and somewhere around 9 months. If he happens to be born... most aren't.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
