Skip to comments.March for Life Unveils 'Unique From Day One' Theme Arguing That the Pro-Life Movement Is Pro-Science
Posted on 10/18/2018 3:35:15 PM PDT by Kaslin
The March for Life unveiled their theme on Capitol Hill Thursday, Unique From Day One: Pro-Life is Pro-Science. The organizations president Jeanne Mancini emphasized the growing body of scientific evidence that human life begins at conception.
Our DNA is present in the moment of fertilization and no fingerprint ever, past, present, future is like yours and thats what it means to be unique from day one, she told reporters at the Capitol Hill event.
Mancini referenced former President Barack Obama dodging the question of when life begins, arguing that his response was not backed up by science.
Consider in 2008 when President Obama was famously asked when does life begin, she said, and we can all remember he dodged the question by answering that was above his paygrade, he didnt know and yet while that conveniently gives cover for someone who advocates for the destruction of human life in its earliest stages, scientifically its not factual.
Mancini pointed out that just three weeks after conception, the fetal heart begins to beat and at eight weeks of pregnancy, the babys moving around even though mom cant quite feel that yet, by the tenth week of pregnancy, the little fingers and toes are forming.
Dr. David Prentice, the Vice President and Research Director for the Charlotte Lozier Institute and the Adjunct Professor of Molecular Genetics at the John Paul II Institute, followed Mancinis announcement by pointing to the consensus in the scientific community that life begins at conception.
The mammalian body plans start being laid down from the moment of conception, your world is shaped in the first 24 hours after conception, he said. These are the scientific facts and this is a consensus really in the scientific world. The arguments arent about biology. This is accepted science and has been for decades.
Prentice went on to quote world-renowned Irish embryologist Ronan ORahilly, who helped develop the Carnegie stages of human development.
"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed, ORahilly wrote.
He also noted that both the National Institute of Health and the National Academy of Science refer to the developing organism, not a random collection of cells.
Prentice also cited the story of Micah Pickering, a now six-year-old boy who was born prematurely at 22 weeks gestational age (20 weeks), defying conventional wisdom about viability.
He referenced the 1999 corrective surgery on Samuel Armas for spina bifida at 21 weeks in utero. A photographer captured the amazing moment that Samuel reacted to the doctors touch and grabbed the doctors finger.
Dr. Grazie Pozo Christie, a radiologist and policy adviser for the Catholic Association, also spoke about the science of fetal development and the strides made in seeing the stages of growth.
For us to believe what the pro-abortion movement tells us about early human life and the flourishing of women and the decency of our culture requires blindness, deafness, and silencing of the truth, she argued. Modern science has changed everything, It has opened our eyes, its opened our ears, and its allowed us to speak the truth with perfect confidence.
A babys growing in the uterus and we know it because we see it, she said, fetal ultrasound was, I believe, a game-changer.
Christies belief that fetal ultrasounds have revolutionized the way people look at a pregnancy is not a unique one.
Earlier this year, Joe Scarborough of MSNBCs Morning Joe argued that 3-D ultrasounds have changed peoples beliefs on late-term abortion.
"You are seeing poll numbers move on abortion for banning abortions after 20 weeks, he said. Why? Because for the past decade, younger Americans have been going in and they have been seeing 3-D imagery where they can look into the womb."
Towards the end of her presentation, Christie played a fetal heartbeat at three weeks post-conception.
It turns out that science opens our ears to life, she concluded.
The 46th annual march is scheduled for Jan. 18, the anniversary of the 1973 Supreme Court ruling in Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion.
Excellent. We go to the March but I believe all the Catholic imagery dilutes the message and turns off non Catholics
Years ago I thought the movement should have stolen an old anti-drug slogan and used it as Abortion kills people like you.
1. From conception a baby is a human life as shown by it's dna.
2. It is a unique life, also shown by dna.
It is living, shown by the fact that it needs only nutrition and a friendly environment in order to grow and change.
Therefore it is a unique human person and should be given all the legal protections of any other person.
This is logic and science.
Anything else is anti-science bigotry.
The Pro-choice peoples greatest fear if for the average citizen to actually view abortion procedures and see the results.
Public policy related to human life at its earliest stages is a Federal matter. I dare say it merits clarification specifically in the Bill of Rights. No one who advocates for abortion ought to be qualified for public office. As for women who undertake to destroy their progeny, this is a difficult matter, inasmuch as jail time is not suited to the crime.
OK. Yes. Terrific for our side. Science Wins! Glad they’re FINALLY shouting it from the rooftops FORTY-SIX (Friggin’) YEARS LATER!
WHO doesn’t already KNOW this? Roe v. Wade passed when I was 12 years old, and even THEN, I knew that I was a HUMAN BABY when Mom carried me and then later, my little Sister.
Life BEGINS at Conception. It’s a HUMAN BABY from that second onward.
Curious as to how many abortions were stopped though, once ‘Little Mama’ saw that ultrasound. But why hasn’t THAT been ‘settled science?’
What a ridiculous, UPHILL BATTLE this has been, going on 50 years.
(But, I remain hopeful.)
Wonder what the Pro-Aborts will do to ‘celebrate’ their 50th Holocaust in 2022? *SPIT*
And yet I don't think that anybody really doubts that the frisky being living and growing in a mother's womb is anything but human. Everybody knows that, and everybody has known it for thousands of years, since the dawn of the Neolithic Revolution. No herding/animal breeding society ever doubted that what's inside a pregnant ewe is a lamb, what's inside a cow is a calf, what's inside a woman is a human child.
We can see it with 4-D sonography, but people knew it in every cognate language that calls a pregnant woman simply a woman "with child."
The problem isn't that people don't know that humans beget humans. The problem is that they don't care.
Information does not provide motivation.
Religious devotion does. I'm not saying you have to be a religious Christian or Jew or Buddhist or Hindu to be pro-life. But it helps.
Personhood has not been defined by science, nor do I think it can be.
Quite true. Also note that a 5 year old needs these same things in order to grow and change.
And the point of "viability" is just a measurement of the local technology since the point of "viability" is much different in a modern hospital than it is in a grass hut in Kenya.
So do all adults.
It is really a mistake to refer to adults as "grown ups" because people continue to grow new cells until death.
Even life support can not cause new cells to grow, it will only retard the decay of cells for a while.
If you put a dead body on life support it will, over time, break down and rot.
March for Life = The true March for Science.
Created in the image of God on Day One — YES!!!!!!!!!
Watch the new movie “Gosnell” if you can.
Pocahontas was 1/1024 Native on Day 1
I will release the video soon where I read the stored memories of people of their experiences in life, all the way back to conception. These stored memories are physical and relatively easy to read in a consistent scientific methodology.
Also, the fetus's DNA is not the same as the mother's DNA. Whoops, there goes the "A woman's body, a woman's choice!" nonsense. A fetus is not his or her mother's body. A fetus is someone else's body.
"But, but, the fetus is inside the mother's body, so the mother has the right to kill it!" In other words, the fetus lives precisely where the mother invited him or her to live by having unprotected sex. He or she is not trespassing, and has not committed a capital crime.
Moving along, there is the "personhood" idiocy.
Pro-choicers would not lay a hand on a fetus with a personhood rating of 82, but they believe that a living human being with a personhood rating of only 51 belongs in a medical waste container if mom says so.
How much personhood does someone in a coma have?
"That's different, because if we just provide a warm environment and food and dispose of his or her waste, then he or she might eventually... Oh."
Yet one thing these 4 women have in common? None has repented their abortions. None are religious, despite each of them supposedly believing in God and identifying as Christian. They think it was just something they did - a long time ago, that had no bearing on their soul, their life, or their trajectory other than to save them from some kind of unmarried mother hell.
You could probably sit down with all 4 of these women, and get nowhere with an argument that they should see themselves as murderers because life begins at conception. They were willing to make that bargain with the devil then, and would probably do so again. I seriously believe that. They leave religion at the door of the Church when (and if) they attend, which isn't often.
It's what I call funcitonal atheism. You can call youself a Christian all you want, but if you only live by Christian principals when it suits you, your belief in God is more something you wear like a hat. And that's not really belief.
So it seems to me, while there are certainly securalists who are pro-life (a great article is here, A Secular Case Against Abortion) - selfishness is such that there are still women who would throw a live baby out of a train before they'd allow it to "ruin" their life - and sadly, in the case of at least 2 of the 4 women I've mentioned, I think they'd probably resort to that if they thought they had to.
I do feel sorry for such women, though. Whether they ended up having "successful" I-Me-My careers or just being washed-up lonely women, I don't think they can escape the underlying realization that they've been selfish and shallow.
Many post-abortion women do repent, and they are as precious as gold. God gives them new hearts. But the ones who say it's "nothing" to them and keep denying the inner truth of it all, are well and truly dead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.