gadgetlady

I was speaking hypothetically about the advances of medical technology (artificial placentas already being worked on) in the future. You are right -- life doesn't begin at 10 weeks. That's a rather arbitrary time, and was the whole point of my question. LIFE begins at conception. There is no other logical time to pinpoint. You can't count back from birth to any other time and say life exists here but not one moment before. You can argue about the VALUE of that life, but there is no question but that the life is in existence from conception.

Ah, yes, but the medical technology doesn't negate the fact that the life exists or existed (in the case of that technology's failure). The medical technology only extends or preserves the life; it doesn't generate or grant the life. The life is an entity in and of itself.

Yeah, so will a full grown adult if you draw and quarter him. Viability is a measure of medical technology. 200 years ago, "viability" was very close to 40 weeks. Now it is dramatically lower. As I pointed out before, scientists are working on an artificial placenta to lower it even more. So in the 1800's, "life" began at 40 weeks, but by the mid-21st century, "life" could begin at 10 weeks? Doesn't that seem a bit arbitrary to you, that the existence of life changes as medical technology changes?

No, because sperm, left on it's own, will die. An unborn baby will not. There is no such thing as potential life. Either it's life or it's not.

When, then, does "cell-division" end and life begin?

Where there is life, there is hope. We can certainly catch/punish/rehabilitate (or attempt to) any evil or criminal person, but we can't "un-kill" Einstein or Beethoven.

:cry Please do encourage her as much as you can to get help. Healing and forgiveness is so, so important for long-term recovery. Without it, a lot of women end up in a spiral of bad decisions and bad relationships, alcoholism, depression, self-hatred, etc. If you need any more resources please ask or PM me and I can get you whatever you need.

Can you provide her with some resources to get some counseling? There are a lot of organizations that deal with post-abortion syndrome because it is so prevalent now -- and so often overlooked. Try these: Victims of Choice http://www.noparh.org/ Or you can find a good list of local resources here: Silent No More Awareness Campaign > Resources for Help After Abortion My first personal experience with abortion was in college, when one of my best friends asked me to drive her to the abortion clinic. She knew I was very pro-life, so I have to assume this was a cry for help. Her son just turned 21. But I have had good friends choose abortion as well, one of them recently who regretted it the moment she did it and has suffered incredible emotional pain since then.

Any luck finding any early feminists who were in favor of abortion?

Do you really believe that? Because if you do, you're seriously misjudging the pro-life movement. I know these people, many of them the strongest leaders in the movement, and they have no desire to tell women they can't wear pants or work away from home. Their goal is to guarantee the right to life to all human beings and to help pregnant mothers through times of crisis. No one thinks dealing with an unplanned pregnancy is easy; we just don't think one of the solutions should be killing another human being.

The problem is no one is polling the unborn. Since they obviously can't speak for themselves (and generally won't be able to cohesively form opinions about the issue for 8-15 years depending on intelligence -- assuming they survive those 8-15 years), many of us are choosing to speak for them. This is a legal hot button issue these days. There have been many cases where hospitals have tried to force medical personnel to participate in abortions against their will. Some states have enacted or attempted to enact laws to require that the facilities allow pro-lifers to opt out of such procedures. So I don't think anyone should glibly say they can opt out -- it has not always been that easy.

The feeling's mutual, green. I always appreciate your thoughtful and honest opinions. You are willing to tackle difficult issues and really look at both sides without a knee-jerk, unthinking response.

No, actually I'm not all that surprised. I've been watching the polls trending to this over the past decades. Slowly, the public is becoming more and more pro-life. Of course, there is also the issue of how the questions are worded. You can skew a lot in a poll by using different language. Both of these polls were very well put together. What I've always found interesting is the polls that indicate a large percentage of people believe abortion is "murder" or "killing" (depending on the wording of the poll) and yet also believe it should be legal. How does anyone reconcile these two beliefs? Can you imagine, "I personally believe the killing of redheads is murder, but I also think everyone should have the right to make that choice"? I personally believe that the acceptance of such illogic is the result of the brainwashing of the abortion lobby.

Now that I have a little more time to go back and review the posts from the day, I wanted to say CONGRATULATIONS to you, Jodie! Blessings to you and your precious cargo.

Are you saying we can't know anything about the opinions of historical figures? I disagree. We can know a lot about those who expressed their opinions in writing. And I think you agree -- otherwise, you wouldn't have quoted them in the first place! Try me. I will either take them or find someone who will. Any day of the week.

It's virtually impossible to find someone without a bias in the abortion debate. To effectively navigate the issue, one has to learn to distinguish between fact and opinion.

Here's a good link; you can do all sorts of research about early and current feminists here: Feminists for Life - Women Deserve Better

THANK YOU FOR POINTING THIS OUT, JODI. I have said the same thing many times over on this board and don't ever use Wikipedia as a source. The only reason I used it this time is because SSDiva used it to somehow indicate Elizabeth Cady Stanton was in favor of abortion, and it says in her own Wikipedia source that she was not. I'm not at all surprised. In the few times I've used Wikipedia, I've found often blatant misinformation provided. It is often a re-write of history itself. Some people believe if they read it, it must be true. And some people believe if they can't find it on the internet, it must not be true.

You have to look at what she said vs. what this person writing about her said. What this "Pulizter prize winner" is missing is that Susan B. Anthony called abortion infanticide and the practice of abortion a crime against the innocent unborn. Her opinion about abortion was not based on whether the procedure was life-threatening or contraception was primitive. It was based on the undeniable humanity of the unborn. While the medical procedure becomes more safe and contraception becomes less primitive, the humanity of the unborn doesn't change. Stacy Schiff is way off base on this one.

IT'S YOUR LINK! As I said, it's the Wikipedia article that YOU posted a link to!

Oh, and in the link that you posted from the Wikipedia article about Elizabeth Cady Stanton, it says (emphasis mine), In 1868, Stanton together with Susan B. Anthony and Parker Pillsbury, a leading male feminist of his day, began publishing a weekly periodical, Revolution, with editorials by Stanton that focussed on a wide array of women's issues.[72] In a view different from many modern feminists, Stanton, who supported birth control and likely used it herself,[73] believed that abortion was infanticide, a position she discussed in Revolution.[74]

Elizabeth Cady Stanton classified abortion as a form of "infanticide." The Revolution, 1(5):1, February 5, 1868 "When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." Letter to Julia Ward Howe, October 16, 1873, recorded in Howe's diary at Harvard University Library "There must be a remedy even for such a crying evil as this. But where shall it be found, at least where begin, if not in the complete enfranchisement and elevation of women?" The Revolution, 1(10):146-7 March 12, 1868 I think her perspective on abortion is pretty clear, too.

Read this carefully. Susan B. Anthony said no matter what the motive, the woman who commits the deed (abortion) is guilty and it will burden her for life. She had stronger words for the men who pushed women into it, calling them thrice guilty, but she nevertheless CLEARLY believed that the "unborn innocent" shouldn't be killed. Thank you for posting this quote from Susan B. Anthony which demonstrates she was pro-life.

Can you name some who weren't? I can name a lot who were. Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Susan B. Anthony. Mary Wollstonecraft. Alice Paul. I could go on. Can you name one early feminist who was in favor of abortion?

Again, short on time today, but I wanted to comment on this because it is such a GROSS misrepresentation of what pro-lifers believe. We are not anti-women by ANY stretch of the imagination. Our rejection of abortion is simply predicated on the humanity of the unborn. After all, about 50% of the babies being killed are little girls, too! You have to understand -- adults did not COME FROM fetuses. They were fetuses. They did not COME FROM newborns. They were newborns. They did not COME FROM adolescents. They were adolescents. Life is a continuum and doesn't start at birth or an arbitrary assessment of medical technology (aka "viability"). Women facing unplanned pregnancies are sold a bill of goods that they have to kill their babies to be functioning members of society. All of the early feminists were pro-life.