The Abortion Question

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 04:15 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: So you accept one small portion of reality?

Is that one of those "loaded questions" you refuse to answer?

Hell maybe that one was; we may never know.

[SteelCitySouth]

(10-09-2015, 04:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I detest the act of abortion as much as anyone; however, I do not classify it as murder. Simply because it is legal.

Change the law; then those that perform the act are committing murder.

(10-09-2015, 04:15 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: So you accept one small portion of reality?

I don't know man...I thought his post was quite reasonable.  It's quite close to my stance on abortion.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 04:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is that one of those "loaded questions" you refuse to answer?

Hell maybe that one was; we may never know.

Are you autistic? Because you seem to be unable to detect obvious sarcasm.

Or maybe it's my fault and you asked how long a "child" is a zygote rhetorically.

Na. My guess is that you don't know why you said it at all; thinking before talking doesn't seem your style.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 04:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is that one of those "loaded questions" you refuse to answer?

Hell maybe that one was; we may never know.

(10-09-2015, 04:20 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Are you autistic? Because you seem to be unable to detect obvious sarcasm.

Or maybe it's my fault and you asked how long a "child" is a zygote rhetorically.

Na. My guess is that you don't know why you said it at all; thinking before talking doesn't seem your style.

Must have been loaded.

I asked you how long an unborn child is a zygote.

Don't play coy. If you don't know ask that guy that went to science school; I'll bet he knows.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-07-2015, 05:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: most likely pointing to the "force our religious views on others" line when I was pointing to the hyperbole.

That's funny coming from the guy who claimed, "you don't believe the unborn child has a right to life."  Actually, my belief is I don't have the right to impose my values, morals, and beliefs on others whose values, morals, and beliefs are different than mine in this situation.  I believe you need to balance the rights of the mother with the right of the fetus.  Basically, it's a complicated situation and I have a nuanced position that tends to frustrate others when they can't make it completely black and white. 

Quote:No. My religion is not what I point to when I feel it is morally wrong to kill an innocent unborn child. I would like to think if I had no faith at all, I would still find the action reprehensible.

I might believe you if you didn't parrot the same position as conservative Christians and then misconstrue "simple" biology.

(10-07-2015, 06:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You mean links like this:

https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html

Yeah, I've never saw a pro lifer point to any biological facts. They always seem to want to get into a debate of when "viable" life begins...........Hey wait a minute. 

Perfect example of a pro-life organization misconstruing science by providing quotes without the proper context while intentionally substituting the wrong context.  They already made you look foolish by tricking you into believing they aren’t a pro-life organization with their “.edu” deception.  Deception is what organizations like this do best.  First, we already discussed how they deceive the gullible with their “.edu” web address.  Second, to get the BS article you posted you need to click on the “Academic Articles” hyperlink and then look under “Compendiums.”  However, that isn’t an academic article.  "Life Begins at Fertilization" is the name of the hyperlink, the title of the article, and the very first thing you read.  So they have already introduced that as the context before reading any of the quotes.
 
Let's take a closer look . . .
 
 

Quote:Quote #1: "Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."

 
 
This is true.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but rather the “Development of the embryo begins . . .”
 

Quote:Quote #2:  "Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."

 
 
Also true.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but rather “Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes . . .”
 

Quote:Quote #3:  "Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."

 
True.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but gives a definition for embryo.
 

Quote:Quote #4:  "Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."

 
 
True.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but again gives a definition for embryo.
 

Quote:Quote #5:  "Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."

 
True.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but gives a definition for embryo.
 

Quote:Quote #6:  "The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

 
True.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization.  Do spermatozoa and oocytes just magically appear or do they develop during spermatogenesis and oogenesis both of which happen prior to fertilization.  Fertilization will not occur without spermatogenesis and oogenesis.
 

Quote:Quote #7:  "Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."

 
Mostly true.  It's not a "new life," but rather the development of a new organism from two living cells.  This is the first quote that even sorta, kinda, maybe implies the title of this pro-life “compendium.”  A spermatozoa and an oocyte are required for fertilization to occur.  Both must be alive for fertilization to occur.  If either gamete isn’t alive fertilization will not occur and a zygote will not be formed.  Over the course of humanity, there is only one documented case history in which this is not the case.  His name was Jesus Christ.  Maybe you heard of him?
 

Quote:Quote #8:  "I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."

 
Mostly true.  Notice the quote does not state life begins at fertilization, but address a time frame. A zygote is one cell.  An embryo is multicellular.  When a single celled zygote divides once to become two cells it is an embryo.
 

Quote:Quote #9:  "The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

 
Mostly true.  It states the development of a human begins with fertilization, it does not state life begins with fertilization.  Once again a cycle is cyclical.  It is a continuum.  During the study of a cycle you pick a starting point by convention to start the study of the cycle but that doesn't mean that is the start point.  As I pointed out fertilization can’t occur without a spermatozoa and an oocyte which develop during spermatogenesis and oogenesis which occur in the adults of the previous generation.  The development of a new human “begins” with the development of the gametes needed to make a new human, but you need adult humans to produce gametes.  It’s the classic which came first, the chicken or the egg.
 

Quote:Quote #10: "The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."

 
Mostly true, but an embryo exists once a zygote undergoes mitosis once is more technically correct.  However, these “sciency folk” at Princeton let this one slip by because it says exactly what I have told you over and over and over and over and over, “in development, life is a continuum.”
 

Quote:Quote #11:  "Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."

 
Mostly true.  A zygote does represent the beginning of a human being.  A zygote also represents the beginning of any organism undergoing sexual reproduction including plants.  Notice it doesn’t state life begins at fertilization.
 
 
 
Summary:  Typical of these types of unethical organizations, they claim quotes state something they don’t in order to trick the gullible like you.  Now they have tricked you twice.  Trick me once, shame on you.  Trick me twice, shame on me.

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 04:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: an unborn child is a zygote.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-09-2015, 04:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Must have been loaded.

I asked you how long an unborn child is a zygote.

Don't play coy. If you don't know ask that guy that went to science school; I'll bet he knows.

As a matter of fact, I do know.  A zygote is formed at fertilization during the fusion of a spermatozoa with an oocyte.  A zygote transforms into an embryo when it divides into two cells after the first mitosis.  An embryo develops into a fetus after approximately 8-10 week of gestation.  A fetus becomes a child after it is born.

Why do you have so much disdain for education and knowledge?  Why do you belittle those who are educated and knowledgeable?

Your question is as silly as asking how long is a child a born zygote.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 04:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: As a matter of fact, I do know.  A zygote is formed at fertilization during the fusion of a spermatozoa with an oocyte.  A zygote transforms into an embryo when it divides into two cells after the first mitosis.  An embryo develops into a fetus after approximately 8-10 week of gestation.  A fetus becomes a child after it is born.

Why do you have so much disdain for education and knowledge?  Why do you belittle those who are educated and knowledgeable?

Your question is as silly as asking how long is a child a born zygote.

You might know the answer, but you didn't provide it. I'd imagine it's a fairly simple question for someone as educated and knowledgeable as you.  

How long is an unborn child (or whatever you want to call the "bag of cells" that will one day become a human child after birth) a zygote?

I do not have disdain for education and knowledge; as I have plenty of both.

I just hate it when folk force their education and knowledge on others. 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-09-2015, 05:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You might know the answer, but you didn't provide it. I'd imagine it's a fairly simple question for someone as educated and knowledgeable as you.  

How long is an unborn child (or whatever you want to call the "bag of cells" that will one day become a human child after birth) a zygote?

I do not have disdain for education and knowledge; as I have plenty of both.

I just hate it when folk force their education and knowledge on others. 

A:  zero seconds

Better?

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 05:34 PM)bfine32 Wrote: How long is an unborn child (or whatever you want to call the "bag of cells" that will one day become a human child after birth) a zygote?

Virtually the same amount of time a born zygote is a child.

(Don't bother trying to understand, it's just there for the amusement of others.)

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 05:53 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: A:  zero seconds

Better?

I hope you don't mind if I seek a 2nd opinion. 

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 06:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hope you don't mind if I seek a 2nd opinion. 

Roughly 30 hours after conception.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 06:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Roughly 30 hours after conception.

Yeah, it's kind of a gray area so we can forgive the other 2 for saying zero (hope that wasn't on the quiz ).

According to this site the unborn baby (their words not mine) is considered a zygote for about 7 days (not sure how many seconds that is, but I'm thinking more than 0); at that point the unborn baby (their words not mine) becomes known as a blastocyst. 

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Pregnancy_week_by_week?open  

[Belsnickel]

(10-09-2015, 06:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, it's kind of a gray area so we can forgive the other 2 for saying zero (hope that wasn't on the quiz ).

According to this site the unborn baby (their words not mine) is considered a zygote for about 7 days (not sure how many seconds that is, but I'm thinking more than 0); at that point the unborn baby (their words not mine) becomes known as a blastocyst. 

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Pregnancy_week_by_week?open  

I was taught that once the zygote split into two diploid cells it was no longer a zygote but in the early morula stages. But I've seen different interpretations.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-09-2015, 06:57 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, it's kind of a gray area so we can forgive the other 2 for saying zero (hope that wasn't on the quiz ).

According to this site the unborn baby (their words not mine) is considered a zygote for about 7 days (not sure how many seconds that is, but I'm thinking more than 0); at that point the unborn baby (their words not mine) becomes known as a blastocyst. 

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Pregnancy_week_by_week?open  

A zygote is a stage of development in humans from fertilization until it becomes an embryo.  A child is a stage of development in humans from childbirth until adulthood.    They are distinct and do not overlap.  People don't call a child a born zygote, born embryo, or a born fetus because a child isn't any of those things.  People call a zygote, embryo, and fetus an unborn child so the can sensationalize abortion.  An unborn child isn't a zygote, because it isn't a child until after childbirth approximately 38 weeks later.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 08:56 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: An unborn child isn't a zygote, because it isn't a child until after childbirth approximately 38 weeks later.

Websters disagrees

Quote:plural
 chil·dren \ˈchil-drən, -dərn\


Full Definition of CHILD
1
a :  an unborn or recently born person

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

Quick tell everybody about your time in dictionary school

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-09-2015, 09:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Websters disagrees



http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

Quick tell everybody about your time in dictionary school

One of those is for embryonic and fetal development and the other is for childhood development.  Which one do you think is which?

I've never known anyone as resentful towards education as you.

[*bfine32*]

(10-09-2015, 09:56 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: One of those is for embryonic and fetal development and the other is for childhood development.  Which one do you think is which?

I've never known anyone as resentful towards education as you.

So you disagree with Webster's definition of Child. Go figure. 

I did notice the first little picture you posted was titled: The developing human, embryonic and fetal as you called it (I wonder why you left out the 0 seconds as a zygote). So as an olive branch I will now refer to the unborn child as a developing human. Would that be more in line with your scientific nature? 

Any resentment I have toward education is that those who get a small taste thinks it makes them smarter and always have to try and prove it to themselves and others. 

I'm educated and knowledgeable. I just don't insist on posting my resume continuously on a football themed message board Doc. 

[GodHatesBengals]

(10-09-2015, 10:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'm educated and knowledgeable.

Go ahead, continue.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-09-2015, 10:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So you disagree with Webster's definition of Child. Go figure. 

I did notice the first little picture you posted was titled: The developing human, embryonic and fetal as you called it (I wonder why you left out the 0 seconds as a zygote). So as an olive branch I will now refer to the unborn child as a developing human. Would that be more in line with your scientific nature? 

Any resentment I have toward education is that those who get a small taste thinks it makes them smarter and always have to try and prove it to themselves and others. 

I'm educated and knowledgeable. I just don't insist on posting my resume continuously on a football themed message board Doc. 

Eat a snickers. 

I didn't call "it" embryonic and fetal. I called the type of development embryonic and fetal. I used them as adjectives to describe development, not nouns. Of course it is human, you *******!  It's not another species. I've never denied a human zygote was human.

An education doesn't make someone more intelligent. It makes them more educated. Do I think I'm smarter than you?  Without a doubt. It has nothing to do with my education and everything to do with your stupid responses like this one where I find myself explaining basic English to your ass. If you would like to share your science background feel free.