When Does Life Begin?

But not in spelling. LOL

0 Replies

OK. IF you have presumed.

I am not totally in line with the political aspect of the pro life movement. I post only because of my reverence for life. Dealing with human embryos is a subject not to be taken lightly.

0 Replies

neo, Most doctors follow ethical rules/standards concerning embryos. Why not let them decide what is right or wrong? Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions? Aren't there more pressing human needs over how embryos are treated?

0 Replies

"All life is precious" has a more global meaning than "embryos" only.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

neo, Most doctors follow ethical rules/standards concerning embryos. Why not let them decide what is right or wrong? Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions? Aren't there more pressing human needs over how embryos are treated?

Well, you are right about one thing. Most doctors have higher ethical standards than most preachers.

But you already know I believe that, right?

I'll strive to find God's opinion every time.

0 Replies

baddog1 wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
So to be clear, because "where-with-all" is ambiguous.

Under the circumstances I posted.

You would support live embryo extraction?

Please reply with only a yes or no.

T
K
One word answer requested.

Nice spin-attempt. Your post in reference is equally ambiguous. My answer remains the same.

Deist: You are attempting to persuade me (and presumably others) to provide you with the answer(s) you want to hear, regardless of our position. It is unfair to continue tightening your criteria in hopes that we will provide your specific answer. Despite clear evidence - you maintain your emotion-based position. That's fine - but you cannot cry foul when we do the same.

1) The only persuasion I am attempting is to persude you to answer a clear question.
2) The only answers I want to hear are clear ones. For example a yes-no question recieving a "yes" or a "no."
3) My criteria has not become more "tight." You were trying avoid answering my question out of the arguement that experiments needed to be done. I provided a senario in which removed this block from you answering and you still refused.
4) Despite what clear evidence?
5) My position is not emotionally based, it is based on the ethical balance and distribution of power between a government and it's citizens. My position is based on historic preceedence. My position is based on trends social science. My stance has been very objective, and very fair from the start.
6) I only cry foul, when it's a foul. I've answered RL's strawman about proving the unborn is some other species than human several times over from several perspectives, and yet I have to struggle to get simple questions answered?

FOUL!

I'll break it down for you.

P1) If the Pro-life stance is that from conception you have the full right to life independant of the mother.
P2) The Pro-life stance is for the preservation of life.
P3) If cryostasis does not destroy an embryo, then P2 and P3 are still upheld.

Then by logic, you should be for the alternative over abortion.

Ethically, you are challenged to depart from this logical path, so what's the struggle?

So here is the question: If abortion were illegal tomorrow and next week science provided an alternative to abortion, what would you do?

T
K
O

0 Replies

neo, What you have acknowledged is the simple fact that all professions have some who's practice is not ethical. That's the human condition not limited to the priesthood or doctors. Trying to control other people's life is also not realistic.

0 Replies

srsly lets go back to those times when the parents owned the children and could kill them when they were 2, then theres no problem

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions?

AMEN!

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

. . . P3) If cryostasis does not destroy an embryo, then P2 and P3 are still upheld. . .

You should add the words 'harm', or 'place at risk', don't you think?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

I'll strive to find God's opinion every time.

Why does god need opinions? Surely your omnipotent being has no needs.

0 Replies

It seems neo and Bush has a special line to the big man himself.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
. . . P3) If cryostasis does not destroy an embryo, then P2 and P3 are still upheld. . .

You should add the words 'harm', or 'place at risk', don't you think?

I will except "harm" but "place at risk" is out of bounds.

We do many things of mortal risk for the benifit of life. All surgeries involve a risk exchange such as this.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Chumly wrote:

neologist wrote:
I'll strive to find God's opinion every time.
Why does god need opinions? Surely your omnipotent being has no needs.

True. His requirements are for our benefit, not his.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

neologist wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
. . . P3) If cryostasis does not destroy an embryo, then P2 and P3 are still upheld. . .

You should add the words 'harm', or 'place at risk', don't you think?

I will except "harm" but "place at risk" is out of bounds.

We do many things of mortal risk for the benifit of life. All surgeries involve a risk exchange such as this.

I don't get it. Is this procedure necessary?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions?

You say this as you argue for the right of an abortionist to slice the unborn limb from limb with a scalpel and throw the bloody pieces in the trash can.

Killing is the ultimate control, is it not?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions?

You say this as you argue for the right of an abortionist to slice the unborn limb from limb with a scalpel and throw the bloody pieces in the trash can.

Killing is the ultimate control, is it not?

Exactly!

ci: Speaking of controlling others - why do you feel it would be fine for the mother of this 'fetus' to kill it if she chose to while on the surgical table? http://www.michaelclancy.com/

Given that the fetus shown has no rights (having not yet been born) that is your loud and clear position - right?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions?

You say this as you argue for the right of an abortionist to slice the unborn limb from limb with a scalpel and throw the bloody pieces in the trash can.

Killing is the ultimate control, is it not?

Apparently, CI does not consider the unborn to be among the 'other people' he speaks for.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
neologist wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
. . . P3) If cryostasis does not destroy an embryo, then P2 and P3 are still upheld. . .

You should add the words 'harm', or 'place at risk', don't you think?

I will except "harm" but "place at risk" is out of bounds.

We do many things of mortal risk for the benifit of life. All surgeries involve a risk exchange such as this.

I don't get it. Is this procedure necessary?

Certainly not nessisary, but there are several elective surgeries/operations, and preventitive surgeries/operations that are certainly acceptable. I don't see how this would be any different.

T
K
O

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
Why must people have a need to control other people's life and their decisions?

You say this as you argue for the right of an abortionist to slice the unborn limb from limb with a scalpel and throw the bloody pieces in the trash can.

Killing is the ultimate control, is it not?
Apparently, CI does not consider the unborn to be among the 'other people' he speaks for.

No, what you and other pro lifers are doing is spending an inordinate time and energy for the embryo, but do nothing for those children already alive. They are suffering from lack of food, shelter and medicine. Help them first, then follow that by your interest in saving the embryo. Otherwise it's the choice of the mother and her doctor- not your's.

0 Replies

When Does Life Begin?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know