Replies

Hard science backs you 100% on the following... there is a short time, after the penetration of the egg by the sperm, but before the last meiotic division of the egg, where the egg is merely "fertilized" and not yet a zygote, therefore, a "fertilized egg", the only caveat I would add, the period you refer to is less than hours and certainly not days. The use of some contraceptive products cause the uterine environ to reject the zygote/blastocyst (no longer the fertilized egg), and this well after the genetic expression of a new entity has occurred, thus they do have abortifacient action but the pharmaceutical companies (two of whom I have worked for) would characterize this rejection as 'spontaneous miscarriage' rather than abortion.

Lastly, the act of purposeful cancellation of life support for the newly implanted entity is abortion (and thus it is killing of another human, being a normal human at that stage in the lifetime begun at conception) any time during the 40 weeks of gestation. I will pass on discussing the rejection of life support as caused by withholding life support prior to implantation as the thread is focused on the redefining of conception, and the notion of application particularly to implantation which begins pregnancy.
Abortion 'clinics' practice serial killing, focusing on the most vulnerable and silent class of our fellow human beings. I consider that wrong and will not back away from characterizing it as such. Now, if someone wants to raise the issue of religious perspective regarding the wrongness of abortion, I'll leave that task to others.

********

The right of privacy misapplied by the leftist/liberal SCOTUS of 1973 does exist as far as the right to reject becoming pregnant . . .There is absolutely no truth to this statement whatsoever. Uh, if I restate the obvious, would you address that also? seriously, I wish to posit that the Constitution does protect the right of a woman to choose not to become pregnant (not in wording of 'right to privacy', that was judicial fiat on the part of the SCOTUS) and can be supported, I believe, with fifth and fourteenth amendments. Perhaps I misstated what I intended to address, namely, that a woman has a right, for her life, to NOT get pregnant if she so desires, but that right should in no way be misconstrued to mean she has a right to hire a serial killer to off a second individual human being based on the presence within her body as long as the act that brought that innocent individual to be there is not forced. As one can readily discern, I'm a goat where legaleaze(sp?) is concerned; I refuse to be a sheep for the fiat-laden social engineering of the leftist court, however.

the only caveat I would add, the period you refer to is less than hours and certainly not days

I never said this period was anymore than it was. I was merely pointing out that there is, in fact, a period of time where there is a "fertilized egg" before there is a zygote. This was neither an argument for nor against abortion, only a statemnt of fact, to correct a statement made in error.

All that name calling for nothing . . . in the end I was right.

Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Fourteenth Amendment (Section 1 only)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean when you say that someone has a right "not to become pregnant" under one of these two amendments, but I'm willing to listen to your rationale.