Conical

quote:

---

But the "pro-choicers" are too hellbent on their own stance to give any argument of the "pro-lifers" any chance of being considered.

---

Right. That is why the pro-choicers give choices to the women while the pro-lifers take them away. I can see your logic. </sarcasm> I have not seen even ONE pro-life person on any of these boards give any decent reasons for or even think about their pro-choice stance. On the other hand, I have seen pro-choice people double-think their positions and because more-or-less neutral on the issue.

And before you try to bash me in an attempt that will be unsuccessful, I have no stance on abortion, so do not even try to go there with me.

quote:

---

Besides, these "pro-lifers" are too hellbent on their own stance to even consider the "pro-choice" side.

---

But the "pro-choicers" are too hellbent on their own stance to give any argument of the "pro-lifers" any chance of being considered.

no offense but can ya'll stop arguing about it? there's never going to be a real solution untill the idiots in goverment finally get off their butts and make it final. it's all how you look at things and some people don't see it as killing

quote:

---

Like my cousin she is pregnant and it could kill her because she has a half heart and it is upside down. She has a 85% chance of dieing. She is not having an abortion

---

Your cousin is a perfect example of a mother. How selfless! I wish her the best of luck and I'll keep her in my prayers.

Drugdancer

quote:

---

so, if abortion is murder and deathpenalty is murder is it murderous of you to eat eggs, poultry, VEAL...

---

Right. How about you go back to school for a couple of years, start thinking for a change, and maybe learn some English and reading comprehension skills, and then come back here. That way you might be able to make a nearly valid point instead of being blatantly out of it.

so, if abortion is murder and deathpenalty is murder is it murderous of you to eat eggs, poultry, VEAL...

WAS AT FULL TERM! That's why Scott is getting time for 2 murders. What does that mean? That means he could have killed her and cesereaned the baby, and the baby would have a 75%+ chance of surviving, due to the fact he was full term, organs fully developed. That is murder, so much more so than being 4 weeks-12 weeks along and saying, I can't do it.

I think that abortion is wrong. How they do it is barbaric. One way they do it is pulling the baby apart piece by piece.
But their is one thing when I think that it is ok. Like my cousin she is pregnant and it could kill her because she has a half heart and it is upside down. She has a 85% chance of dieing. She is not having an abortion, but if she did I would not blame her.

quote:

---

Not a solid definition?? I gave my sources. It's all from dictionary.com. Look it up yourself!!!!

---

I'm not talking about the actual dictionary definitions. I'm talking about your definition of being human. You can't say something is not human because there's only one cell. You can have one skin cell, it's still a HUMAN cell. A zygote is still human in the same way as that cell. But it also has the added properties of self replication, potential to become a fully developed human, and unique genetic code.

quote:

---

Yes, it is preparing to split. But IT HAS NOT BECOME MULTICELLULAR YET. The sperm in a male before sex is preparing to enter the female and join with the egg. But IT HAS NOT DONE THIS YET. There's a difference between preparing to do something and actually doing it.

---

See, you missed my point. Every organism undergoes mitosis on some level. With unicellular organisms, these split off cells are individual entities. With multicellular organisms, they are part of the same. So, even though the zygote is one cell, when it splits it will still be one organism. Identical twins aside.

quote:

---

If it has one cell, it is not a multicellular organism. It will develop into one, but is not one yet.

---

See above. The DNA specifies that it will have multiple cells. Therefore, it is a multicellular organism. Period.

Again, if you still don't get it, think of it this way: At that stage in development, humans ARE unicellular. Therefore, it is still a human.

quote:

---

The zygote phase, by definition of a zygote vs. definition of a fetus (look them up) lasts a full eight weeks. Eight weeks is not an irrelevant period of time when talking about abortion.

---

No, actually the zygote phase lasts only a few hours (or less). You're talking about the EMBYRONIC phase. Do you think that a single cell zygote suddenly blossoms into a 8 week old fetus?
Get your facts straight.

quote:

---

That's not a solid definition though.

---

Not a solid definition?? I gave my sources. It's all from dictionary.com. Look it up yourself!!!!

quote:

---

Undoubtably, that zygote is already preparing to split right after conception.

---

Yes, it is preparing to split. But IT HAS NOT BECOME MULTICELLULAR YET. The sperm in a male before sex is preparing to enter the female and join with the egg. But IT HAS NOT DONE THIS YET. There's a difference between preparing to do something and actually doing it.

quote:

---

Therefore, even though at this early stage it only has one cell, it is still technically a multicellular organism.

---

If it has one cell, it is not a multicellular organism. It will develop into one, but is not one yet.

quote:

---

In any case, the zygote phase only lasts for a extremely short period. So short that when talking about abortion, it's irrelevent.

---

The zygote phase, by definition of a zygote vs. definition of a fetus (look them up) lasts a full eight weeks. Eight weeks is not an irrelevant period of time when talking about abortion.

DrSL

quote:

---

Don't include me in this. I'm special
I promise not to invoke the Bible. Scout's honor.

---

Lol, ok then. You can be an exception because at least your arguments are presented respectfully and you have some good points. ^__^

quote:

---

Do not bother trying to debate with them. Half of them have never taken a Biology class, and those who have obviously did not listen when it came to the reproduction chapters.

Besides, these "pro-lifers" are too hellbent on their own stance to even consider the "pro-choice" side.

---

Don't include me in this. I'm special
I promise not to invoke the Bible. Scout's honor.

quote:

---

Therefore, we can infer that since a zygote is an ovum BEFORE it goes through mitosis, the zygote is a unicellular organism. Since humans are multicellular (no argument there), a zygote is not a human.

---

That's not a solid definition though. Undoubtably, that zygote is already preparing to split right after conception. It's genetic makeup defines it to be a multicellular organism. Therefore, even though at this early stage it only has one cell, it is still technically a multicellular organism.

If that's confusing, think of it this way: At that stage in development, humans ARE unicellular.

In any case, the zygote phase only lasts for a extremely short period. So short that when talking about abortion, it's irrelevent.

Audrey

Do not bother trying to debate with them. Half of them have never taken a Biology class, and those who have obviously did not listen when it came to the reproduction chapters.

Besides, these "pro-lifers" are too hellbent on their own stance to even consider the "pro-choice" side.

...must I keep repeating this?

From dictionary.com:

quote:

---

Zygote (n.) - The cell formed by the union of two gametes, especially a fertilized ovum before cleavage.
Cleavage (n.) - The series of mitotic cell divisions that produces a blastula from a fertilized ovum. It is the basis of the multicellularity of complex organisms.

---

Therefore, we can infer that since a zygote is an ovum BEFORE it goes through mitosis, the zygote is a unicellular organism. Since humans are multicellular (no argument there), a zygote is not a human.

quote:

---

A fertilized egg is a zygote. It does not form into a fetus until the eighth week after fertilization. Therefore, any abortion between the time of fertilization and the eighth week is not killing a human. Those of you who have studied biology will understand this.

---

You don't mention the fact that it's a human zygote. You're still killing a human, just not a fully developed and self sufficient one.

quote:

---

it is STILL a human!! and for those of you who are gonna say "its not a human yet" then what the hell is it?????

---

A fertilized egg is a zygote. It does not form into a fetus until the eighth week after fertilization. Therefore, any abortion between the time of fertilization and the eighth week is not killing a human. Those of you who have studied biology will understand this.

quote:

---

Just another thing: Isn't it ironic, that in some states it is illegal to drink or smoke while pregnant because it may cause birth defects and harm the child; yet you are allowed to kill the child with an abortion if you'd like? It's wrong to harm, but not to kill? Sounds a bit inconsistent.

---

My dad was pointing that out to me the other day...in a way, it's a good thing. It means that people are recognizing it's wrong to hurt an unborn baby. It's just one step closer to an abortion free country

quote:

---

But before the 1st trimester ends abotion seems okay to me

---

Are you saying that the greater the age of a human, the greater the value? Why should a baby in the first trimester have no value, yet a day into the second trimester have the right to life?

Just another thing: Isn't it ironic, that in some states it is illegal to drink or smoke while pregnant because it may cause birth defects and harm the child; yet you are allowed to kill the child with an abortion if you'd like? It's wrong to harm, but not to kill? Sounds a bit inconsistent.

Why can't we keep this abortion stuff into one thread?

Abortion only decreases the world population, and keeps kids out of lives of poverty. If someone is "showing" enough and has an abortion, then hopefully social ostracization will cause them to never do it again. But before the 1st trimester ends abotion seems okay to me.