The Abortion Question

[Brownshoe]

(10-01-2015, 10:19 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: A zygote is alive before it develops a heartbeat and a pulse.   Are you going to assign individual rights to a single cell without a heartbeat or brain activity which supersedes the rights of the parent?

When have I said that? Do you not remember my stance on the subject?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-01-2015, 10:21 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: When have I said that? Do you not remember my stance on the subject?

It's a question, not a statement.

[Brownshoe]

(10-01-2015, 10:32 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's a question, not a statement.

I think it should have individual rights when it has a heartbeat.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-01-2015, 10:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I think it should have individual rights when it has a heartbeat.

Given that heartbeat does not even determine whether we are alive or not after birth, why would it determine it prior to birth?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-01-2015, 10:38 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: I think it should have individual rights when it has a heartbeat.

Is a zygote alive before it develops a heartbeat?

[Brownshoe]

(10-01-2015, 10:39 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Given that heartbeat does not even determine whether we are alive or not after birth, why would it determine it prior to birth?

Because at the time they have a beating heart they have brain activity too.

[Brownshoe]

(10-01-2015, 10:41 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Is a zygote alive before it develops a heartbeat?

It's living but not alive. It doesn't have a heartbeat or brain activity. If you say someone is dead when they don't have brain activity and a beating heart then it only makes sense to say they're alive and their own individual at that point also.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-01-2015, 10:52 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Because at the time they have a beating heart they have brain activity too.

Inaccurate. Also irrelevant.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-01-2015, 11:01 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's living but not alive.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-01-2015, 11:01 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: It's living but not alive. It doesn't have a heartbeat or brain activity. If you say someone is dead when they don't have brain activity and a beating heart then it only makes sense to say they're alive and their own individual at that point also.

I don't understand any of this.

It's living but not alive? Please explain.

[fredtoast]

(10-01-2015, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I can't find a single example of a woman having an elective abortion after one day of pregnancy. 

Some people argue that the morning after pill is the same as an abortion.

And some people make the argument that "life begins at conception" means that a clump of cells should have individual rights superior to the mothers.

[Sovereign Nation]

(10-01-2015, 05:38 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: alt accounts are cute.

You would know...

As I have asked someone else.

Who am I an Alt for?

I can assure you that I am not an alt account.  Just because I don't post a lot, doesn't mean I am an alt.

I just know from the previous board, how futile it is to argue with you and others on here, due to your egos.

[*bfine32*]

(10-02-2015, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: And some people make the argument that "life begins at conception" 

Folks don't argue that; it's a biological fact. 

Folks try to argue that it doesn't. 

[Sovereign Nation]

(10-01-2015, 10:20 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Actually, pretty much everything bfine says is empirically, demonstrably wrong; the  only people who think he's "owning" me are a. other people who can't read very well and b. troll accounts like yours.

That's the last I have to say to this "Sovereign Nation" account of yours. You'll have to try create a better fake than this for any further interaction.

Yep.  I was pretty much accurate on how you would respond.

I could care less what you think I am.

Not an Alt account.  He pointed out very early that scientifically life begins at conception.  Then he went on to establish that some would muddy the waters concerning this question.

He has been correct on both so far.

Again, who am I an alt for?

BTW... a troll would take on the opposite of what he/she believes to get a reaction out of you.  So are you suggesting that I am actually for abortion? 

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(10-02-2015, 12:42 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Some people argue that the morning after pill is the same as an abortion.

And some people make the argument that "life begins at conception" means that a clump of cells should have individual rights superior to the mothers.

(10-02-2015, 12:53 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Folks don't argue that; it's a biological fact. 

Folks try to argue that it doesn't. 

You really got to stop arguing things out of context.  His sentence that you quoted (and cut short) says something entirely different.

[*bfine32*]

(10-02-2015, 01:14 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: You really got to stop arguing things out of context.  His sentence that you quoted (and cut short) says something entirely different.

What was out of context. Quote the whole sentence and he still says "Some folks argue that life begins at conception". 

After second read I suppose I can see what you (he) was saying; perhaps a because in front of life would have made it more clear. 

Do you disagree with my assertion that it is a biological fact and that folks will argue the converse?

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(10-02-2015, 01:20 AM)bfine32 Wrote: What was out of context. Quote the whole sentence and he still says "Some folks argue that life begins at conception". 

After second read I suppose I can see what you (he) was saying; perhaps a because in front of life would have made it more clear. 

Do you disagree with my assertion that it is a biological fact and that folks will argue the converse?

Yes I disagree with your assertion that life begins at conception. At a certain point a embryo does take on a life of it's own. However the cells dividing in the early stages, though living, are no more a "life" than the billions of cells in my body.  They certainly wouldn't supersede the rights of the mother at that point.   Even late term abortions happen to save the mothers life.  Note: this does not mean that I agree with late term abortions, but it is at times necessary to save the mothers life.  This is also why this decision should be between the mother and the doctor and others directly involved such has father and/or husband (if they're involved) or even a parent.  It is not up to me or you whether some random woman has an abortion or not.

[fredtoast]

(10-02-2015, 12:53 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Folks don't argue that; it's a biological fact. 

Where did I say it was not a fact?

My comment was about what it was used to justify. 

Maybe you should have read my entire comment before posting a response.

[*bfine32*]

(10-02-2015, 01:41 AM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: Yes I disagree with your assertion that life begins at conception. 

Sorry for cutting it short, but you told me all I needed to know here. 

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(10-02-2015, 01:51 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Sorry for cutting it short, but you told me all I needed to know here. 

It's cool, I knew I shouldn't have typed out such a lengthy reply.  This is kinda your MO. 









































Have fun storming the castle!