Posted on 10/10/2004 9:03:39 AM PDT by cpurick
I honestly don't know when life begins.
Let me help you.
The embryo, from the time of the fertilization of the egg by the sperm, has a different DNA than either parent. Different fingerprints as soon as the fingers develop, possibly a different blood type than either parent, possibly a different eye color, different hair structure and color.
The embryo is a diferent being. A separate being. A living being, although dependant on its host for 9 more months in the womb and 18 years outside of the womb.
It's clear to see that life begins at conception.
No, you've got it all wrong about what sKerry would have said in the 1800s.
"Slavery is against my religion, but I am too open minded to push my religion on others. Therefore it is none of my business if my wealthy wife keeps slaves -- after all, she inherited them from her dead husband. And if she wants to use her slaves to lavish attention on me, that is her privilege, because it is a woman's right to choose." sarcasm/off
At a little more than an inch long, the developing life is now called a fetus — Latin for "young one" or "offspring."
Everything is now present that will be found in a fully-developed adult.
The heart has been beating for more than a month, the stomach produces digestive juices and the kidneys have begun to function
.
.
Would you say that this fetus is "alive". If your answer is yes, then by your definition of the argument, you must call 90%-95% of the Abortions in this country "murder." Almost no abortions take place before the 8th week.
Kerry's remark just pegged the bullsh-t meter.
Kerry's position on abortion --- every tax payer who believes abortion is the killing of a human being would be required to pay for these killings. He is an extremist on the pro-abortion side.
That is pretty much Kerry's position on abortion in a nutshell.
Kerry is more or less saying "I respect your views, but the hell with you. I will take your money to pay for abortions.".
I thought Kerry is all for science. He is letting religious beliefs or conscience decide the law of our land with his position. It is a scientific fact that at the time of fertilization a new organism has been formed. I really believe that future generations will look back on abortion with repulsion like we now do with slavery. They will wonder how could they??????? This idea of when "life" begins is a religious or philosophical question but it is not scientific.
My biggest comlaint w/ the abortion issue is the whole "when life begins" argument.
There is no "life beginning" moment. What we have are two living cells which combine. But there is no sudden lighting strike which bring the combined cells to life, because THEY ARE ALREADY LIVING prior to their being combined. What you have is the creation of a new member of the species.
And everything that makes this new species member unique is there at the moment that the two individual cells' nuclei combine. So, the whole idea of when life begins is a moot point.!!
What our species does, is place a higher value on the life of the mother because, heck, she's a lot bigger and we can see and touch her. But, the flaw in this thinking is making her more important to the species than the child which is living inside of her.
Yes, she's more important to herself, maybe even to her friends or family, but she isn't more important than the other members of the species now, is she. In fact, the child within may very well provide more for the species than the mother. So, when looking at this delimma, any rational thought must weigh the two lives, that of the mother and that of the child, equally.
Therefore, the whole procedure of abortion does nothing but hurt the species by denying possibly meaningful members the chance to develop. And, if one assumes that continuation of the species is the ultimate goal, then any species which allows abortion does not wish to continue, but is, in fact, committing suicide.
Note: I am purposely not bringing religion in to my argument because too many people are too darn quick to classify and if I were to say that I believe in God, then the simpleminded will immediately shut down and say "right-wing religious zealot". So, I use simple scientific/socological concepts without bringing religion in.
I've heard many people say the Republicans and the Democrats have switched positions since the time of Lincoln. However, your point shows that, at least on the topic of serious moral issues, they have not. It is my belief the two Parties are the same as they ever were. One party supports the strength found in a States which are united, they other diligently tries to tear that unity usunder. The only thing that has changed between the two Parties is their geography.
Muleteam1
"Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise."
This statement clearly shows how Kerry's mind works!
Kerry obviously believes that the constitution obligates the government to tax others in order to buy certain things for poor people, including but not limited to abortions.
There's nothing in the constitution that says the government has to create a dole for poor people, much less that the government ought to tax people to pay for other people's abortions!
Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list
comlaint - complaint
Geez, no matter how many times I proof read, one always slips passed me!!
=;-)
Kerry's position is like saying, "I believe abortion is murder, but I have no right to save the lives of those who are being murdered by others who don't view it as murder." Simply absurd.
Excellent!
Murder isn't Constitutional, therefor skerrymouche isn't fit to be POTUS. He should be behind bars.
Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you; and before you were born, I sanctified you. -Jeremiah 1:5
Are you saying the doctor, the mother or the Justices are guilty of murder under our Constitution? [if Bush can propose a Constitutional amendment for marriage, he should have first proposed one for abortion - why didn't he?]
But he's never changed his position on an issue.
(/sarcasm)
What, should we do away with laws against murder and stealing because my religion happens to agree that those things are wrong?
"I am personally opposed to bank robbery, but I don't want to impose my values on others."
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.