Frank Apisa wrote:
And of course, you can show without question that there is a God -- and that the God gives souls -- and that the fetus has a soul -- is that correct?
If you can -- I am sure we would all appreciate your sharing your information with us.
Yes, there is "Life" (God,) That "Life" gives souls (the human spirit to live,) and that the fetus has this "will to survive."
Your argument was too quick to split hairs rather than deal with the intent of the article.
New Haven simply wrote "It? Since when is a human being with a God-given human soul referred to as "it"?
I can easily translate that to, "It? Since when is a human being with a Life-given human soul (Will to survive) referred to as "it"?
My answer was directed to mis-definitions or Genital deformities
I do not accept the Christian dogma of God given Life, but can easily understand and accept their beliefs.
Your argument, on the other hand, I reject, as purposely being directed to argue something that can well be suited, being discussed in a proper venue.
Burden of proof: Whether "God-given" or "Life-given," human beings at some point in time, are provided equal protection under the law. All I'm asking, is a clearer definition of when these rights begin. The question purposed is: "Why does Federal Law states after birth, while some States regulate it in the womb."
The issue is at hand, and I dismiss your argument, as not dealing with the context of this article, rather than arguing an isolated personal belief, based in faith. I am not saying that your argument in not valid, only that it is mis-directed and digresses from the issue of this article.
The point is, stay focused.