When Does Life Begin?

Nevermind.....

They don't like pictures apparently.

Pictures are misleading to them i guess.

Ignore science and pictures too?

Sounds like an ideology.....

0 Replies

http://www.reachoutforlife.org/Life%20Begins.htm

this link is decent

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200407/ai_n9459121

0 Replies

All I'm saying is that science does not support pro-life. Doesn't really support pro-choice, either.

And as for RL's comments. You fail to grasp logic. What smokescreen? A zygote does not have a right to life. What are you getting at? What don't you understand.

What right should a zygote have and how can you justify this right? Smokescreen? That's you, RL. All this debate contains is propaganda. No real fact. I'm just glad my posts contain at least some facts, instead of the vague propaganda stances that both sides have spouted off here.

0 Replies

Wolf, Again, you are wasting your time and energies on people who equate a zygote to a living, breathing, human. It doesn't matter that it doesn't have a brain; they want the mother to carry it to full term irregardless that it's none of their business or concern. They can't see their own hypocrisy by advocating 100 percent for the zygote they call "life," but don't have any concern for all those already living. The zygote is more important.

Religion does strange things to people's brain; they lose all common sense and logic. Trying to have a discussion with them is just a battle of wills; forget logic.

0 Replies

I only posted here, because I was curious as to what Bartikus' response would be to chimeras and identical twins.

All that's managed to do is increase my distrust of pro-lifers. That RL happens to be one doesn't help either.

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

To be pro choice....one would have to be pro information would'nt they?

What would happen if I took some pictures of the unborn...big ones...up to planned parenthood, showing some various stages of an unborn human's progress at various weeks or months?

Would they say No...we are'nt posting that stuff get out or what?

Do they currently show possible patients these images?

Do they really feel these images confuse a woman?

As a pro choicer....would you have an objection to a woman being exposed to these pictures?

Why or why not?

Will a pro choicer with cahonas (so to speak) please answer!

I've got the cahonas you don't friend. Remember that survey you still haven't taken. The simple one that only requires "for" or "against" answers?

The pictures mean nothing unless accompanied with relevant information. Why posters? Could the photos be put in a three fold distributable?

I don't object to women having this inforamtion, I don't object to it being in a clinic either, but the someone has to explain the pictures. The pictures themselves are not information. When it comes to explaining the informaiton, I'd rather trust a doctor than preacher.

I don't think having the posters would matter. I don't think providing the "information" would invalidate abortion.

Would you object then to large posters of statistics of unadopted children or the numbers of children who die from starvation everyday being displayed in Planned parenthood?

I'm very pro-information.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
To be pro choice....one would have to be pro information would'nt they?

What would happen if I took some pictures of the unborn...big ones...up to planned parenthood, showing some various stages of an unborn human's progress at various weeks or months?

Would they say No...we are'nt posting that stuff get out or what?

Do they currently show possible patients these images?

Do they really feel these images confuse a woman?

As a pro choicer....would you have an objection to a woman being exposed to these pictures?

Why or why not?

Will a pro choicer with cahonas (so to speak) please answer!

I've got the cahonas you don't friend. Remember that survey you still haven't taken. The simple one that only requires "for" or "against" answers?

The pictures mean nothing unless accompanied with relevant information. Why posters? Could the photos be put in a three fold distributable?

I don't object to women having this inforamtion, I don't object to it being in a clinic either, but the someone has to explain the pictures. The pictures themselves are not information. When it comes to explaining the informaiton, I'd rather trust a doctor than preacher.

I don't think having the posters would matter. I don't think providing the "information" would invalidate abortion.

Would you object then to large posters of statistics of unadopted children or the numbers of children who die from starvation everyday being displayed in Planned parenthood?

I'm very pro-information.

T
K
O

Your response at least answers my question. I appreciate that and your point is noted and understood.

I know one thing.

All this stuff is really sad......this whole thing has me half nauseated.

Must things be this way? I would'nt mind if that information was posted no.

Their all children.

0 Replies

No; start living your own life and leave others you don't even know alone to make their own life decisions. If you are "really" interested in preserving life, start with those orphans and children starving around the world; it's a good start. Your concern for the zygote shows/proves you have no balance of information or logic in your life. It's that simple!

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

No; start living your own life and leave others you don't even know alone to make their own life decisions.

How come you don't follow this advice, Imposter?

Why are you constantly telling others that their views are wrong, their behavior is wrong, etc?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

No; start living your own life and leave others you don't even know alone to make their own life decisions. If you are "really" interested in preserving life, start with those orphans and children starving around the world; it's a good start. Your concern for the zygote shows/proves you have no balance of information or logic in your life. It's that simple!

Helping orphans and starving children cannot be considered "a bad start"

Now can it?

Can we try to do right on both ends? Is this possible?

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

Can we try to do right on both ends? Is this possible?

If we could, this issue would be a lot easier. If more women chose alternatives to abortion, namely abandoning their child for adoption, it puts a strain on the other end. Put fire to the wrong end of the candle, and it just falls over. Like it or not, the issue of the children already in need has to be addressed first.

It's been on the back burner for sometime in this discussion, but this paradox is one reason that I think the issue at hand is less abortion/anti-abortion and more about birth control, etc.

Either abortion or abandonment are reactionary steps. We would do better to be proactive. Being proactive means educating ourselves about sex and fostering a respect for sexual responcibility. It means on a community side a larger effort to educate the youth, so that when they grow up they know how to make smart choices.

Unwanted pregnancies is what should be talked about. Address solutions for preventing it, and both the pro-choice and pro-life crowds can be happy.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Good point Deist.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
Can we try to do right on both ends? Is this possible?

If we could, this issue would be a lot easier. If more women chose alternatives to abortion, namely abandoning their child for adoption, it puts a strain on the other end. Put fire to the wrong end of the candle, and it just falls over. Like it or not, the issue of the children already in need has to be addressed first.

It's been on the back burner for sometime in this discussion, but this paradox is one reason that I think the issue at hand is less abortion/anti-abortion and more about birth control, etc.

Either abortion or abandonment are reactionary steps. We would do better to be proactive. Being proactive means educating ourselves about sex and fostering a respect for sexual responcibility. It means on a community side a larger effort to educate the youth, so that when they grow up they know how to make smart choices.

Unwanted pregnancies is what should be talked about. Address solutions for preventing it, and both the pro-choice and pro-life crowds can be happy.

T
K
O

You can do all of that. Why does it have to be one and then the other? I help every month. If everyone cared enough to not just talk about it. The situation would improve! Don't ya think?

0 Replies

The numbers are against your idea. You'd have to be able to deliver a 2:1 ratio of adopting families to unwanted pregnancies. one for the unborn, and one for the already born. 2:1 is conservative at that.

Burning the candle at both ends doens't work.

T
K
O

0 Replies

You have a very pessamistic view of people.

0 Replies

I think what Deist is saying is that abortion and adoption deal with an issue that proper sexual education and contraceptives could make go away. It's like donating money to charity vs. research; charity helps deal with problems, but research can make them go away. This is why I hate Make-A-Wish.

0 Replies

Bartikus wrote:

You have a very pessamistic view of people.

On the contrary, I see people as having infinite potential. I just see the way to develop ourselves differently than you do.

T
K
O

P.s. - I've been patient and I've even been nice for a few posts. Please answer the survey. I can still go back to nasty.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Bartikus wrote:
Can we try to do right on both ends? Is this possible?

If we could, this issue would be a lot easier. If more women chose alternatives to abortion, namely abandoning their child for adoption, it puts a strain on the other end. Put fire to the wrong end of the candle, and it just falls over. Like it or not, the issue of the children already in need has to be addressed first.

It's been on the back burner for sometime in this discussion, but this paradox is one reason that I think the issue at hand is less abortion/anti-abortion and more about birth control, etc.

Either abortion or abandonment are reactionary steps. We would do better to be proactive. Being proactive means educating ourselves about sex and fostering a respect for sexual responcibility. It means on a community side a larger effort to educate the youth, so that when they grow up they know how to make smart choices.

Unwanted pregnancies is what should be talked about. Address solutions for preventing it, and both the pro-choice and pro-life crowds can be happy.

T
K
O

You, on the other hand, are an optimist; we'll still have pro-lifers trying to tell us a zygote is a human life that must be preserved no matter what.

That's where the twain will never meet.

0 Replies

I am far from an optimist! I can see the potential in people. Because life is not worth living without hope.

0 Replies

The GOP candidates on abortion.

That leaves Republicans with a conflicting set of conservative philosophies when applied to abortion and seemingly same sex marriage -- and it leaves everyone more or less in the same place when it comes to presidential action. Giuliani stands alone in his support for abortion and gay rights, but he is closer to the rest of the pack in he how he would operate as president on those issues.

Where the candidates all agree is on the kind of judges they would appoint. Giuliani has made clear that he would nominate the same kind of judges Bush has nominated -- and the same as Romney, McCain, Thompson and Huckabee would nominate. Conservatives have interpreted Giuliani's words as a sign that his judicial appointees likely would agree with them on abortion.

In short, Giuliani has sent enough reassuring signals to the right that he would do nothing dramatic to upset abortion orthodoxy within the party -- and his leading rivals have done little to suggest that they could do much to change the status quo in ways he wouldn't -- that the issue may be far less significant than believed. For all these reasons, it should not be so surprising that Giuliani remains a formidable candidate for the GOP nomination.

0 Replies

When Does Life Begin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know