Abortions and the bible.

#527
#527
Roustabout said:
Yes, and an infant isn’t an adolescent. An adolescent isn’t an adult. Which one has no value? And no we aren’t constantly developing. You and I will not develop any more. We are decaying.
When you abort you rob and destroy the course of human life, period. That’s a fact, not an opinion. It i not a part of the women’s body. I suggest you Take biology. In fact a pregnant women’s body will naturally focus itself to protect and nurture that unique, developing human life. A women does not have two DNA profiles.
Click to expand...

Correct. In fact, my sister and her unborn child had 2 different Rh factors for their totally separate bloodstreams. She has one of the rarest, A-...his was O+...the most common. So. her immune system began attacking her unborn child, as it would a pathogen. It would have continued until it killed the baby or birth happened, whichever came 1st. They put her on special medication to get her immune system to chill out. These libs would have you believe that her immune system was attacking her own body...and that she had 2 different blood types with different +/-.....of course, that is medically impossible...but they do not care about facts. This was evidenced when hard numbers showed that their excuses for abortion are 1 in a million, literally, 1 in 1 million ABORTIONS, not people, is because of incest.
Septic said:
I dunno, so long as the fetus isn't viable on its own and is supported through the womans placenta via the umbilical cord - the woman does have two DNA profiles.
Click to expand...

You know this is bullcrap but still typed it.wow...

No living creature has 2 DNA profiles. None.

The mother/baby relationship is somewhat like a whale with a suckerfish attached. Some would say the fish is parasitic in nature, because it relies on the whale to survive from feeding it..but it is a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship. Just as the whale is free from parasites because the suckerfish eats them all, a pregnant mom has a stronger immune system than a normal woman because it is boosted during pregnancy, IIRC, her bones are also reinforced to be stronger than normal so that she can carry the extra weight. Probably why pregnant women take extra calcium in prenatal vitamins. I could look up what other benefits to health there are for pregnant women, but there are several. You can look them up yourself. Huge boobs is certainly not a downside either, i had a great time with my set...for both kids. Yum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T-TownVol
#528
#528
marcusluvsvols said:
Correct. In fact, my sister and her unborn child had 2 different Rh factors for their totally separate bloodstreams. She has one of the rarest, A-...his was O+...the most common. So. her immune system began attacking her unborn child, as it would a pathogen. It would have continued until it killed the baby or birth happened, whichever came 1st. They put her on special medication to get her immune system to chill out. These libs would have you believe that her immune system was attacking her own body...and that she had 2 different blood types with different +/-.....of course, that is medically impossible...but they do not care about facts. This was evidenced when hard numbers showed that their excuses for abortion are 1 in a million, literally, 1 in 1 million ABORTIONS, not people, is because of incest.


You know this is bullcrap but still typed it.wow...

No living creature has 2 DNA profiles. None.

The mother/baby relationship is somewhat like a whale with a suckerfish attached. Some would say the fish is parasitic in nature, because it relies on the whale to survive from feeding it..but it is a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship. Just as the whale is free from parasites because the suckerfish eats them all, a pregnant mom has a stronger immune system than a normal woman because it is boosted during pregnancy, IIRC, her bones are also reinforced to be stronger than normal so that she can carry the extra weight. Probably why pregnant women take extra calcium in prenatal vitamins. I could look up what other benefits to health there are for pregnant women, but there are several. You can look them up yourself. Huge boobs is certainly not a downside either, i had a great time with my set...for both kids. Yum.
Click to expand...

If you want to make the case that they're two living organisms, induce delivery and let the best man win. Frankly, I hate the idea of aborting - but I'm in no position to tell another person what to do with their body.
 
#530
#530
Septic i hate it, too...but you cannot legislate morality. As i have said before, i think there should be mandatory education beforehand, as in depth as possible about what the baby looks like at each week of development etc, so they know exactly what they are terminating...and also a 72 hour waiting period post education to give them time to deliberate before doong something that cannot be undone. I also dont think it sjould be legal after the 1st trimester...thats 12 or 13 weeks...that is a long time to figure out youre pregnant, and plan accordingly. My wife knew she was pregenant within 2 weeks both times, even though she was only 18 the first time and didnt know what it felt like to be pregnant. Later, when we had a tubal pregnancy, she didnt know for sure, but had taken a test earlier and it said not pregnant...so she didnt give it more thought...until she was doubled over in pain, and we lost the baby. We still mourn that baby. We always will.
 
#531
#531
marcusluvsvols said:
Correct. In fact, my sister and her unborn child had 2 different Rh factors for their totally separate bloodstreams. She has one of the rarest, A-...his was O+...the most common. So. her immune system began attacking her unborn child, as it would a pathogen. It would have continued until it killed the baby or birth happened, whichever came 1st. They put her on special medication to get her immune system to chill out. These libs would have you believe that her immune system was attacking her own body...and that she had 2 different blood types with different +/-.....of course, that is medically impossible...but they do not care about facts. This was evidenced when hard numbers showed that their excuses for abortion are 1 in a million, literally, 1 in 1 million ABORTIONS, not people, is because of incest.


You know this is bullcrap but still typed it.wow...

No living creature has 2 DNA profiles. None.

The mother/baby relationship is somewhat like a whale with a suckerfish attached. Some would say the fish is parasitic in nature, because it relies on the whale to survive from feeding it..but it is a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship. Just as the whale is free from parasites because the suckerfish eats them all, a pregnant mom has a stronger immune system than a normal woman because it is boosted during pregnancy, IIRC, her bones are also reinforced to be stronger than normal so that she can carry the extra weight. Probably why pregnant women take extra calcium in prenatal vitamins. I could look up what other benefits to health there are for pregnant women, but there are several. You can look them up yourself. Huge boobs is certainly not a downside either, i had a great time with my set...for both kids. Yum.
Click to expand...

Whether it is beneficial to the host is a question that only the host can answer.
 
#532
#532
marcusluvsvols said:
Septic i hate it, too...but you cannot legislate morality. As i have said before, i think there should be mandatory education beforehand, as in depth as possible about what the baby looks like at each week of development etc, so they know exactly what they are terminating...and also a 72 hour waiting period post education to give them time to deliberate before doong something that cannot be undone. I also dont think it sjould be legal after the 1st trimester...thats 12 or 13 weeks...that is a long time to figure out youre pregnant, and plan accordingly. My wife knew she was pregenant within 2 weeks both times, even though she was only 18 the first time and didnt know what it felt like to be pregnant. Later, when we had a tubal pregnancy, she didnt know for sure, but had taken a test earlier and it said not pregnant...so she didnt give it more thought...until she was doubled over in pain, and we lost the baby. We still mourn that baby. We always will.
Click to expand...
This needs to be done in high school IMO. There simply can't be enough education with regard to the consequences of what can be defined as risky behavior. If you aren't ready to be a parent, don't have sex. For the most part, conventional birth control works extremely well when used correctly. Be wise on the front end and you likely won't have to worry about that "choice".
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#533
#533
Septic said:
I dunno, so long as the fetus isn't viable on its own and is supported through the womans placenta via the umbilical cord - the woman does have two DNA profiles.
Click to expand...
So she has two hearts, four legs, four arms.....,
The women does not have two dna profiles. She has hers and the developing child has its own. If you want to link some scientific support I’m all ears.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T-TownVol
#534
#534
rjd970 said:
I very clearly stated once capacity for feeling, thinking, reacting, etc is when that value is placed. We can disagree, but simple DNA material is not a person before that in my opinion.

And I knew you would argue semantics here. Personally, I feel like I am still developing - emotionally, intellectually, socially...however, that said, since you say I should take a biology course (which I have, multiple college level ones) I would like your expert answer on when the cutoff from development to decay happens. You are making that semantic distinction, and I would like to know the biological fact on where that line is.



Look at the bold. I stated in an earlier post, you may be ending the course of a human life, but you are not destroying a person. Do I know when that happens, biologically? No. And neither do you. The only thing we know is we have unique DNA at conception. That's it. Unique DNA =/= person. If your position is what really matters is just having unique DNA and that defines a person than that is your opinion and that is fine. My opinion is a person is made up of more than just DNA. The only biological fact you can state is we have unique DNA and a DEVELOPING human. Everything else is opinion.
Click to expand...
No, value is placed much sooner. You are simply marking inevitable milestones that confirm the path of realized development. Pregnancy begins the phase of motherhood. That is incontrovertible. Your just trying to assuage responsibility and justify the destruction of human life.

Of course it matters. It’s an inseparable fact of human life. It’s part of your own and EVERY human.
You are absolutely destroying a person. You are destroying the course of their future reality. That is EXACTLY what abortion seeks to do. It isn’t to remove a glob of cells. It is to destroy the course of human development and prevent a person from entering the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#535
#535
Roustabout said:
No, value is placed much sooner. You are simply marking inevitable milestones that confirm the path of realized development. Pregnancy begins the phase of motherhood. That is incontrovertible. Your just trying to assuage responsibility and justify the destruction of human life.

Of course it matters. It’s an inseparable fact of human life. It’s part of your own and EVERY human.
You are absolutely destroying a person. You are destroying the course of their future reality. That is EXACTLY what abortion seeks to do. It isn’t to remove a glob of cells. It is to destroy the course of human development and prevent a person from entering the world.
Click to expand...

It is also to remove a glob of cells. It is illegal to kill a human being, but you still have to qualify as a human being. My personal line is still in order to be classified as a human being it must be capable of surviving outside the womb. Until such a time, it merely has the potential of being a human being.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
#539
#539
Roustabout said:
No, value is placed much sooner.
Click to expand...

OK. I disagree. For reason already stated. We have our opinions, but lets not mince any sort of biological fact from this statement.

Also - since you stated I should take a biology course - I would like to know the demarcation in the human lifecycle on when decay starts and development ends. It isn't surprising you just left that out of your response. Please educate me since you think I need it.

Roustabout said:
You are simply marking inevitable milestones that confirm the path of realized development. Pregnancy begins the phase of motherhood. That is incontrovertible. Your just trying to assuage responsibility and justify the destruction of human life.
Click to expand...

So? I'm not trying to assuage anything. I am placing value at the realization of a person. I don't consider genetic material a person. At some point in the development process that material becomes a real person with real capacity and that is where my moral concern starts.

Roustabout said:
Of course it matters. It’s an inseparable fact of human life. It’s part of your own and EVERY human.
You are absolutely destroying a person. You are destroying the course of their future reality. That is EXACTLY what abortion seeks to do. It isn’t to remove a glob of cells. It is to destroy the course of human development and prevent a person from entering the world.
Click to expand...

I am not destroying a person. I may be destroying potential, and to that I say so what. I have no moral qualms with destroying something that is not a person. Even if there is a chance it will be a person, the simple fact remains until a certain point it isn't. When you murder someone, you are destroying a person AND potential.
 
#540
#540
Roustabout said:
So she has two hearts, four legs, four arms.....,
The women does not have two dna profiles. She has hers and the developing child has its own. If you want to link some scientific support I’m all ears.
Click to expand...

Maybe you're right, perhaps the second DNA profile should be set free immediately. Or maybe we could mind our own business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClearwaterVol
#542
#542
NorthDallas40 said:
So what was the full context of each of those events as compared to a women who just decides she doesn’t want to be pregnant anymore? 🤔
Click to expand...

Now see that’s an intelligent post!!! People aren’t out here advocating abortion as a means of birth control but if a woman is forced against her will to have sex with another man (rape) or a woman is in danger of dying due to complications from pregnancy then she should have the option to terminate the pregnancy.
 
#543
#543
ClearwaterVol said:
It is also to remove a glob of cells. It is illegal to kill a human being, but you still have to qualify as a human being. My personal line is still in order to be classified as a human being it must be capable of surviving outside the womb. Until such a time, it merely has the potential of being a human being.
Click to expand...
Technically, we are all a glob of cells.
The problem with this assessment is it’s been a moving bar. Survivability has changed as Medicine has changed. Newborns are completely dependent for survival. Nurturing this is part of our humanity. We have an obligation to care for and meet the needs of the helpless infant that could not survive on its own. Somehow you think it’s ok to destroy an earlier phase of this developing human.

The other issue is human being describes ALL the phases of human development, which includes prenatal. All a human being has is its potential. The past has already gone. You are currently actualizing your future reality. It would be preposterous for me to justify your murder because your future hasn’t happened yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T-TownVol
#544
#544
ClearwaterVol said:
It is also to remove a glob of cells. It is illegal to kill a human being, but you still have to qualify as a human being. My personal line is still in order to be classified as a human being it must be capable of surviving outside the womb. Until such a time, it merely has the potential of being a human being.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
#545
#545
Septic said:
Maybe you're right, perhaps the second DNA profile should be set free immediately. Or maybe we could mind our own business.
Click to expand...
So, you think we don’t have a moral obligation to provide for and care for children?
I’d hardly call the legalized destruction of this unique, developing human child minding our business.
Get real with your arguments.
 
#547
#547
Roustabout said:
Technically, we are all a glob of cells.
The problem with this assessment is it’s been a moving bar. Survivability has changed as Medicine has changed. Newborns are completely dependent for survival. Nurturing this is part of our humanity. We have an obligation to care for and meet the needs of the helpless infant that could not survive on its own. Somehow you think it’s ok to destroy an earlier phase of this developing human.

The other issue is human being describes ALL the phases of human development, which includes prenatal. All a human being has is its potential. The past has already gone. You are currently actualizing your future reality. It would be preposterous for me to justify your murder because your future hasn’t happened yet.
Click to expand...

human being is a legal term and in many cases does not include prenatal.
 
#548
#548
Roustabout said:
So, you think we don’t have a moral obligation to provide for and care for children?
I’d hardly call the legalized destruction of this unique, developing human child minding our business.
Get real with your arguments.
Click to expand...

Of course, I don't see an unviable fetus as a "child", however.
 
#549
#549
Roustabout said:
So, you think we don’t have a moral obligation to provide for and care for children?
I’d hardly call the legalized destruction of this unique, developing human child minding our business.
Get real with your arguments.
Click to expand...

There is no legal obligation for a mother to provide for her children. She can drop them off at the firehouse ending any such obligation. You have decided that she should be forced to carry the unborn to term.
 
#550
#550
ClearwaterVol said:
It is also to remove a glob of cells. It is illegal to kill a human being, but you still have to qualify as a human being. My personal line is still in order to be classified as a human being it must be capable of surviving outside the womb. Until such a time, it merely has the potential of being a human being.
Click to expand...

Sooooo, what age is the child "capable of surviving outside the womb"?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top