Rubio: Life begins at conception

[StLucieBengal]

Posted this because the "when does life begin" question has came up in a couple of the PP threads.    

I am by no means a Rubio fan but he does a great job laying out the pro life position.   I think these new GOP senators have done a great job of flipping the script on this debate.    And this is getting traction with the public.     it will be interesting to see if walker uses this method as well.  

I will also add that Chris Cuomo is a baffoon.   He is the same guy who said the 1st amendment doesnt protect hate speech lol.  Every conservative should be trying to get on his show.   He is walks right into it  

[fredtoast]

Rubio provided nothing to back up his claim. In fact it was comical when he mentioned how soon the heart starts beating. Apparently he thinks there is a heart at the point of conception.

A glob of undifferentiated cells is not a human, by any definition. It is like saying that an acorn is an oak tree. It just is not true. They are two very different things.

I have also noticed that when people have actual facts to argue with they don't have to keep talking over the other person. Rubio was acting like a child instead of an adult having a grown up debate.

[StLucieBengal]

He is right that the science is in.... That's a human baby, a human life. It can't be anything else.

[fredtoast]

(08-07-2015, 05:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: He is right that the science is in.... That's a human baby, a human life.     It can't be anything else.

Science does not say that a lump of undifferentiated cells is a human.

Just like science does not say that an acorn is an oak tree.

This is just a lie.

[Benton]

My biggest concern with some of these fruit loop definitions is that eventually it's going to get to the point where any bullets a guy is packing are going to be considered living people. Which means in the not too distant future, my time alone in the shower is going to be considered mass murder.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 05:06 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Science does not say that a lump of undifferentiated cells is a human.

Just like science does not say that an acorn is an oak tree.

This is just a lie.

So the clump of cells do not have human dna? Don't step into it like Cuomo did ... What else can it be?

Human dna = human
Oak tree dna = oak tree

[Belsnickel]

If only the point at which it is a life made a difference in my position. The government should not be taking away any of the unalienable rights of a person not convicted of a crime. Period. And making abortion illegal does just that. The decision should be left up to those individuals directly involved, and not some elected official that is hundreds, maybe thousands of miles away that does not even know the name of the mother and will never see the child if it is born.

[*Nately120*]

So Rubio just spit out the same non-argument pro-lifers have been making for years. Is this news?

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 05:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: If only the point at which it is a life made a difference in my position. The government should not be taking away any of the unalienable rights of a person not convicted of a crime. Period. And making abortion illegal does just that. The decision should be left up to those individuals directly involved, and not some elected official that is hundreds, maybe thousands of miles away that does not even know the name of the mother and will never see the child if it is born.

So who is standing for the life of that baby?

And women have a choice on whether to have children or not. They just want to have all the enjoyment without any of the consequences.

I have always thought a reasonable compromise would be to make abortion illegal but allow the morning after pill. That way of there is an accident then women can sort it out straight away.

I also think we need to do a better job with adoption services . Lots of people want to adopt . Loads of SSM people now wanting kids, so letting mothers interact with adoptive parents and finding a home for their baby would help women who do happen to get pregnant.

[*Nately120*]

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So who is standing for the life of that baby?  

And women have a choice on whether to have children or not.   They just want to have all the enjoyment without any of the consequences.  

I have always thought a reasonable compromise would be to make abortion illegal but allow the morning after pill.   That way of there is an accident then women can sort it out straight away.    

I also think we need to do a better job with adoption services .  Lots of people want to adopt .  Loads of SSM people now wanting kids, so letting mothers interact with adoptive parents and finding a home for their baby would help women who do happen to get pregnant.

Let me say that this is a good post (in my mind) and that it brings my issue with Rubio being applauded by pro-life people for his "life begins at conception" statement.  Pro-life advocates have to stop towing this unreasonable line where they just say something like it is true and plug their ears and say science biology aren't important.

Can't they just say "life may not begin at conception, but there may be more socially pleasing manners by which to handle unwanted pregnancies."  Pro-life advocates have to step back from the all or nothing ledge because it's not working. It's a weak argument that is lapped up by a minority and easily dismissed by the rest.

EDIT: I have to admit your statement about women using abortion as a means to enjoy sex and avoid responsibility is a bit absurd, though.

[GMDino]

(08-07-2015, 05:07 PM)Benton Wrote: My biggest concern with some of these fruit loop definitions is that eventually it's going to get to the point where any bullets a guy is packing are going to be considered living people. Which means in the not too distant future, my time alone in the shower is going to be considered mass murder.

The Catholic Church already considers it a sin worthy of time in hell.

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So who is standing for the life of that baby?  

And women have a choice on whether to have children or not.   They just want to have all the enjoyment without any of the consequences.  

I have always thought a reasonable compromise would be to make abortion illegal but allow the morning after pill.   That way of there is an accident then women can sort it out straight away.    

I also think we need to do a better job with adoption services .  Lots of people want to adopt .  Loads of SSM people now wanting kids, so letting mothers interact with adoptive parents and finding a home for their baby would help women who do happen to get pregnant.

Just stop.  You sound ridiculous.  So what if women want to enjoy sex?  

[*Nately120*]

(08-07-2015, 05:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: The Catholic Church already considers it a sin worthy of time in hell.


Just stop.  You sound ridiculous.  So what if women want to enjoy sex?  

I think he's saying women can enjoy sex and then just get abortions if they have to face the consequences of such.  My biggest issue with this is that a large part of the pro-life stance involves parading out women (like the original Roe v Wade woman) who have become pro-life after dealing with the massive emotional fallout of having an abortion.

[BmorePat87]

(08-07-2015, 05:09 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So the clump of cells do not have human dna?   Don't step into it like Cuomo did ...   What else can it be?    

Human dna = human
Oak tree dna = oak tree

A lot of teenage boys are committing mass murder every day. 

[Belsnickel]

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So who is standing for the life of that baby?

This is based on the ridiculous narrative that the decision is made flippantly by the pregnant woman without any thought given to the potential child inside of them. I'm sure there are some where that is the case, but the decision is an extremely difficult one for most women out there and making the claim that no consideration is being given to the embryo/fetus/whatever is as insulting as it is outrageous.

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And women have a choice on whether to have children or not. They just want to have all the enjoyment without any of the consequences.

So do men. That's why they have condoms. The only difference is if a guy has a one night stand and gets a girl knocked up he doesn't have to deal with the consequences like the woman does.

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I have always thought a reasonable compromise would be to make abortion illegal but allow the morning after pill. That way of there is an accident then women can sort it out straight away.

Except for a lot of these situations it was a breakdown in another method that resulted in a pregnancy and is unknown until it is too late for the morning after pill. Plus the morning after pill is not 100% effective. Not all mishaps are known right away.

(08-07-2015, 05:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I also think we need to do a better job with adoption services . Lots of people want to adopt . Loads of SSM people now wanting kids, so letting mothers interact with adoptive parents and finding a home for their baby would help women who do happen to get pregnant.

We do need to do a better job of adoption services in this country. Unfortunately, we have many children that have no one to adopt them. We need more parents willing to adopt the children we have. Hopefully, with SSM laws changing and adoption services changing as well, that will change. I just doubt it will be enough of an impact.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 05:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Let me say that this is a good post (in my mind) and that it brings my issue with Rubio being applauded by pro-life people for his "life begins at conception" statement.  Pro-life advocates have to stop towing this unreasonable line where they just say something like it is true and plug their ears and say science biology aren't important.

Can't they just say "life may not begin at conception, but there may be more socially pleasing manners by which to handle unwanted pregnancies."  Pro-life advocates have to step back from the all or nothing ledge because it's not working.  It's a weak argument that is lapped up by a minority and easily dismissed by the rest.

EDIT:  I have to admit your statement about women using abortion as a means to enjoy sex and avoid responsibility is a bit absurd, though.

Wasn't meant to come off like that, all actions have consequences and getting pregnant is a possibility when you have sex. All I am saying is that there is nothing wrong with accepting responsibility for your actions. If you skydive you run a risk of your parachute not opening or a malfunction. But you accept the consequences. This happens in all walks of life.

That baby is innocent.

does unexpected pregnancy suck sometimes .... Ofc. No one is ever truly prepared.

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 05:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is based on the ridiculous narrative that the decision is made flippantly by the pregnant woman without any thought given to the potential child inside of them. I'm sure there are some where that is the case, but the decision is an extremely difficult one for most women out there and making the claim that no consideration is being given to the embryo/fetus/whatever is as insulting as it is outrageous.


So do men. That's why they have condoms. The only difference is if a guy has a one night stand and gets a girl knocked up he doesn't have to deal with the consequences like the woman does.

   

Except for a lot of these situations it was a breakdown in another method that resulted in a pregnancy and is unknown until it is too late for the morning after pill. Plus the morning after pill is not 100% effective. Not all mishaps are known right away.


We do need to do a better job of adoption services in this country. Unfortunately, we have many children that have no one to adopt them. We need more parents willing to adopt the children we have. Hopefully, with SSM laws changing and adoption services changing as well, that will change. I just doubt it will be enough of an impact.

Well I always thought that if you didn't want kids then you would pop a morning after pill regardless.

Adoption services I think are the key. And letting mothers make some money off the adoption is something I wouldn't be against either. These are things that can have a positive impact. And show there are more options. I am tired of seeing people say they gotta go overseas to adopt.

As far as the men not dealing with consequences. Yes there are good men and bad men. Funny thing is that even if a women gets stuck with a child from a bad man. There will alwags be a good man to raise that child .

[StLucieBengal]

(08-07-2015, 05:44 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: A lot of teenage boys are committing mass murder every day. 

Not in the womb. With a fertilized egg.

[CKwi88]

So the small government people want to both A) Let the government decree what people can and can't do with their bodies and B) Extend personhood to a fertilized egg at "conception?"

Sounds real small to me.

Dangerous precedents, on both counts.

[Beaker]

(08-07-2015, 06:03 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Not in the womb.  With a fertilized egg.

If you consider that fertilized egg a human baby at the point of conception, then how is the morning after pill any better than an abortion? Both terminate a pregnancy.

[Belsnickel]

(08-07-2015, 06:01 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Well I always thought that if you didn't want kids then you would pop a morning after pill regardless.

You ever priced those things? That would get expensive. What I was referring to is someone already on birth control or another contraceptive, or using a condom, and somehow there is a failure. Most people wouldn't think that after practicing safe sex they should get the morning after pill, but that can happen. Admittedly, most of the time there is a failure in the efficacy of the contraception it is a result of user error, but a surprising number of them do not realize they are doing it wrong. This is where better education needs to play a part as well.

I'm all for better access to contraceptive methods and better education. It's a proven way of reducing unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions.