who supports right to choose

[gadgetlady 4]

I have a book that is pro-slavery. It was written in the mid 1800s. Do you know what they base their rights to own slaves? The bible. The bible said it was okay and THAT is what they based their beliefs.

I can't speak to how people fallaciously used the Bible as an argument for slavery, but, curiously, it was people of faith (Christians) who fought quite hard to end slavery in the US.

And, yet again I will state, my position on abortion has nothing to do with faith, religion, the presence or lack of a soul. It is 100% based on the humanity of the unborn. You don't have to be a Christian to be pro-life. There are many athiests who are also pro-life.

[gadgetlady 4]

Before you were Christian then you wouldn't have believed in a soul so it wouldn't have been a *real* human being. Kinda like a canine pregnancy, right? Same difference?

It is not the presence of a soul that defines one as human. A pregnant canine will always give birth to a canine. A pregnant human being will always give birth to a human being. The scientific makeup of the unborn baby is what makes that baby human, not whether or not the baby has a soul.

[gadgetlady 4]

Have you ever heard a scientist refer to a newborn as a fetus? The terms are there for a reason.

They define a spectrum of development. Do you know of any scientists who claim a human "fetus" isn't human? If a scientist calls a newborn a "newborn" instead of a human being, does that make the newborn NOT a human being? A rose by any other name . . .

[BJean 16]

So a sperm and an egg are human beings as far as you're concerned? Not just human parts? We should show deference to every sperm and egg that humans create because they are actual human beings? Not the promise of human beings, but actual human beings?

[gadgetlady 4]

So a sperm and an egg are human beings as far as you're concerned? Not just human parts? We should show deference to every sperm and egg that humans create because they are actual human beings? Not the promise of human beings, but actual human beings?

Don't put ridiculous words in my mouth. I did not say that whatsoever and you know it. A sperm is not a human being. An egg is not a human being. Just in case you don't understand simple human biology, when a sperm and egg join together they form a new human being with separate DNA from the parents. Prior to that, they are just a sperm and an egg which, left alone, will die.

[gadgetlady 4]

Let me see if I can help you out a little more with this concept, in case you never took a science class in school. The sperm has 100% of the father's DNA, just like his arm or his liver or any other body part. The egg has 100% of the mother's DNA, just like HER arm or HER liver or any other body part. When the sperm and egg come together during sexual intercourse (I'm not going to explain that one; you'll have to look it up yourself), they create a wholly different entity with his or her OWN DNA. A different egg and sperm combination would create a DIFFERENT human being. That newly created human being has all of his or her own blueprints for all of his or her own traits -- hair color, eye color, height, etc. -- that are separate from the mother's and the father's and also any other siblings that have been or might be created through the same process of sexual intercourse and conception. The baby is not a clone of one parent, nor is the baby a clone of his or her siblings. The baby is not an egg and the baby is not a sperm. He or she is the unique and unreproducible result of the combination between the two.

Imagine if we all were able to be the deciders on when human life begins. You've got a group of 20-somethings standing around. One says, "My mother thought I was a human being when she felt me kick at 5 months in the womb, so that's when my life began." Another, "My mom didn't consider me a human being until my feet exited the vaginal canal, so that's when I was a human being." Another, "My dad was the Nobel prize laureate James D. Watson, who doesn't believe human life begins until 3 days after birth, so that's when I was a human being." Another, "My dad was a Nobel prize laureate too, Francis Crick, and he said a baby shouldn't be declared human until it passes certain genetic tests, so I wasn't a human life until I passed those tests."

How ridiculous! Human life begins when human life begins, at conception. We can argue about the VALUE of that human life (which is precisely what the abortion debate is about), but to argue that it doesn't exist is ludicrous.

[BJean 16]

What? I think you misunderstood me gadget. I just asked a couple of questions. How does what you said "...put ridiculous words in my mouth" make any sense? I was in absolutely no way putting words in your mouth.

I do find it interesting that you say that a sperm and an egg aren't human beings themselves but that the minute they are joined they instantly become human beings. Then you go on to say that before that they are just a sperm and an egg that when left alone they will die.

In fact if you have a joined sperm and egg and you say they are now a human being, how do you account for the fact that left alone, even if joined, they will die? They don't automatically grow into a fetus or a baby or an adult. They must have a womb and all of the nourishment and continued growth required, for them to ever become actual beings.

If a medical professional gleans a sperm from a male doner and they glean an egg from a female doner and takes them to the lab and with certain scientific procedures, joins them in a petri dish, by your statement you seem to be saying that at that point in time, it is a human being. But let's face it, if the joined egg and sperm aren't implanted into a ready, willing and able womb (i.e., "left alone"), that little bit of brand new DNA will die.

How do you plan to go about saving all those fertilized eggs that are attempts at life by in vitro fertilization? Your statements about caring about and speaking for all of the unborn human beings in this world would make it incumbent upon you to do something about all these in vitro procedures that are causing the deaths of "human beings" every day. Yes, I'm being a little sarcastic here.

But honestly, I don't see how you rationalize your argument that once an egg is fertilized with a sperm it becomes a human being.

It seems perfectly rational to me that a sperm is a promise of a human being just as an egg is the promise of a human being just as a tiny fertilized egg is the promise of a human being. Yes, in all cases they are human in nature, but they are not actual beings until they are able to survive by not relying on their hosts' wombs. In other words, in your terms, "which, left alone they will die", then they are not actual human beings. Just human, with the promise of being.

And if we can't agree on when a sperm and an egg become a human being, and the religious and scientific communities don't agree either, why do you expect me to live by your definition of when a sperm and egg become a human being?

Unfortunately it appears to have a bearing on my rights as a woman to control my reproductive organs, according to you. I believe that you should not be able to control my life and beliefs in this way.

I believe that you should be responsible for your reproductive organs and I should be responsible for mine.

[SlimTarnishedDiva 1]

I can't speak to how people fallaciously used the Bible as an argument for slavery, but, curiously, it was people of faith (Christians) who fought quite hard to end slavery in the US.

And, yet again I will state, my position on abortion has nothing to do with faith, religion, the presence or lack of a soul. It is 100% based on the humanity of the unborn. You don't have to be a Christian to be pro-life. There are many athiests who are also pro-life.

About 20 pages back when I said that people used the Bible to justify slavery..you told me I was making things up. No a few people of faith, might have tried or wanted to end slavery. However, there were A LOT of Christians who owned, whipped, raped, and purchased slaves--slaves to work their tobacco fields, cotton fields, little slave kids had to play with the masters kids...Where was the outcry..

Bottom line, abortion isn't an immoral thing to have to all people. It's just a few people who feel they should tell someone what to do with what's growing inside of their body...that they actually have ownership over. Like we didn't give up enough civil liberties already, let the crazy republican Presidential candidates have their way!! I don't understand a President who is Pro-life, but cut's funding to WIC to exclude over 500,000 woman and children. So, yes let's take away abortion rights, cut health care funding to kids, cut WIC... Hey we don't care how they live or are taken care of as long as their moms don't ABORT them, right!!

[BJean 16]

P.S. I posted mine before I read your last post.

Your last entry is an attempt to insult my education and my intelligence. I think it is a ploy you've stooped to because I disagree with you about your definitions as well as whether you should be able to make choices for me when it comes to my womb.

You're usually less personal and hateful. I am sorry you felt it was necessary to take that direction in this discussion.

[gadgetlady 4]

In fact if you have a joined sperm and egg and you say they are now a human being, how do you account for the fact that left alone, even if joined, they will die? They don't automatically grow into a fetus or a baby or an adult. They must have a womb and all of the nourishment and continued growth required, for them to ever become actual beings.

If you don't feed or nourish a newborn, he or she will die. Does that mean he or she wasn't a human life before that death?

[gadgetlady 4]

It's just a few people who feel they should tell someone what to do with what's growing inside of their body...that they actually have ownership over. Like we didn't give up enough civil liberties already

You know, there are a lot of things the government doesn't allow us to do with our bodies. If you go to a hospital and ask them to chop off your arm, they won't. You can't take certain drugs or drive while intoxicated. So we really don't "own" our bodies, as much as we might like to think we do. We certainly can't sell them in most parts of the US. In the case of abortion, not only are we not talking about our "own" bodies (which we don't "own"), there's another person's body involved.

[BJean 16]

SSDiva: All of the people who are anti-choice that I've come in close contact with are not concerned with adult human beings and their lives, they are only concerned with the "unborn". They presume to "speak" for unborn babies who according to them all wish to be brought into the world no matter what circumstances they may be subjected to, once born.

Most of the loudest of these anti-choice people seem to think their idea of bringing all fertilized eggs to fruition is what is right and good for the entire world. Many of those same people are totally against welfare and for capital punishment. I mean really! Go figure.

It's hard to believe that they genuinely care about humankind, isn't it? Sometimes I wonder if these people have some kind of adoption scam going on whereby they stand to make more money if they have more available babies they can sell. Yeah that may sound harsh, but then I think what is really harsh is using slavery and grisly photos of bloody babies to make their point.

[SlimTarnishedDiva 1]

Let me see if I can help you out a little more with this concept, in case you never took a science class in school. The sperm has 100% of the father's DNA, just like his arm or his liver or any other body part. The egg has 100% of the mother's DNA, just like HER arm or HER liver or any other body part. When the sperm and egg come together during sexual intercourse (I'm not going to explain that one; you'll have to look it up yourself), they create a wholly different entity with his or her OWN DNA. A different egg and sperm combination would create a DIFFERENT human being. That newly created human being has all of his or her own blueprints for all of his or her own traits -- hair color, eye color, height, etc. -- that are separate from the mother's and the father's and also any other siblings that have been or might be created through the same process of sexual intercourse and conception. The baby is not a clone of one parent, nor is the baby a clone of his or her siblings. The baby is not an egg and the baby is not a sperm. He or she is the unique and unreproducible result of the combination between the two.

Imagine if we all were able to be the deciders on when human life begins. You've got a group of 20-somethings standing around. One says, "My mother thought I was a human being when she felt me kick at 5 months in the womb, so that's when my life began." Another, "My mom didn't consider me a human being until my feet exited the vaginal canal, so that's when I was a human being." Another, "My dad was the Nobel prize laureate James D. Watson, who doesn't believe human life begins until 3 days after birth, so that's when I was a human being." Another, "My dad was a Nobel prize laureate too, Francis Crick, and he said a baby shouldn't be declared human until it passes certain genetic tests, so I wasn't a human life until I passed those tests."

How ridiculous! Human life begins when human life begins, at conception. We can argue about the VALUE of that human life (which is precisely what the abortion debate is about), but to argue that it doesn't exist is ludicrous.

Yes, how ridiculous indeed!! Human life begins at Birth...When it doesn't need the mothers WOMB to survive! Fertilized eggs that are frozen until they are implanted in a woman's uterus is not considered a human being, and the sane goes for other fertilized eggs...They're embryo's...

[gadgetlady 4]

P.S. I posted mine before I read your last post.

Your last entry is an attempt to insult my education and my intelligence. I think it is a ploy you've stooped to because I disagree with you about your definitions as well as whether you should be able to make choices for me when it comes to my womb.

And implying that I believe a sperm and an egg separately are human beings isn't an attempt to insult me? Give me a break. Make whatever decisions you'd like about your own womb. Just don't do it when there's another person in there.

[BJean 16]

Nope, I never said that sperm and eggs, joined or unjoined, are not human. I suggested that they are not human beings. There is a distinction.