Oh, snap, freedom.

quote:

except when it comes to abortion, and gay marriage,

Exactly. Hypocrite. You're saying "Zygotes and people: Created Equal. Gays and heterosexuals: Not created equal."

quote:

since a fetus has its own unique DNA sequence it is a human

DNA is not mentioned in the definition of what constitutes a person. Sperm has half of the human DNA, does that mean that sperm have half the right of humans to live?

quote:

its right to live overides the mother's right to happiness/quote] That's an opinion without any basis on fact.

quote:

but life is not, reproduction is transfering matter chemicals and energy to create a whole new life, not a part of a cycle...

You just described a cycle. It might be a whole new life, but it is given only through the previous lives.

[pquote]abortion bridges a human individual's right to live

I don't think you mean bridges. And a fetus lacks the rights opf a human because it is not on the same playing ground as a human that has been born. There are many differences betweena fetus and a person which means a fetus has different rights.

almost all of my veiws are liberal, except when it comes to abortion, and gay marriage, but my conservative views about gay marriage is only when the topic comes into the church itself, otherwise it is their way of life, I may not agree with it, but it isn't killing anyone.

If one thinks about it no one is completely liberal, or conservative, no one is entirely left wing or right.

Conservatives suck. I am only commenting because of Neodigit's avatar. How can they think of equality when in life they're the ones discriminating everyone? This eludes the hell outta me. Either that or they're just plain hypocrites. Oh wait, that's it!

Why isn't DNA a valid way, you never explained why it isn't...I just want to know you're reasoning..

For me it is a perfectly valid reason, abortion bridges a human individual's right to live, which is given by our law to all people not just citizens, abortion fits in with homicide which is defined as one person killing another, and that is illegal. So since a fetus has its own unique DNA sequence it is a human, a unique human, one who is seperate from its mother, and its right to live overides the mother's right to happiness. You can't kill someone just because they're annoying you or seem to just get in the way, so you shouldn't be able to kill a fetus either for the same reasons, because it is a person, a unique human.

Also it isn't a never ending cycle, humans being a diploid just means they only have two chromosomes in their cells. Science says that at conception a new life is began and created, it does not say it is one part of an on going cycle, energy and matter are as neither can be destroyed, though they can change form, but life is not, reproduction is transfering matter chemicals and energy to create a whole new life, not a part of a cycle...

The egg has the X chromosome. The sperm may contribute a Y or an X, which of course determines the sex.

The egg and sperm both contribute alleles for blood type, which exhibits the properties of multiple alleles and codominance. Thus, one may end up with OO, AO, BO, AB, AA, or BB, but this isn't determined until after the egg and sperm meet.

We aren't dealing with some predetermined DNA code, we're dealing with assortment from chromosomes crossing over during gamete formation and then mixing together during fertilization.

Scientifically speaking, the sperm and egg are part of the human diploid life cycle, which is ongoing. In other words, human life doesn't suddenly appear at some stage. It's an ongoing cycle, and the sex cells are merely part of it. Fertilization creates a new DNA code and thus a new indivudual, but THAT IS NOT a valid argument against abortion.

Technically, gametes and zygotes are both human life. However, one can't take a blastocyst and call it a full citizen with equal rights as adults. When one starts considering the individual to be human is a very difficult decision, but DNA isn't a valid way to argue it.

quote:

The sex is also imprinted upon the DNA, as is the blood type, so yes they do.

Then it's there before the egg and sperm meet.

quote:

May I ask why?

because it is entirely possible to be self dependant. Do people do it? No, but it's possible.

I'm not going to answer that for yog, but I agree with him. We aren't all dependent on each other. Not all the time, at any rate.

quote:

Originally posted by yogore:
I disagree with that.

May I ask why?

quote:

I didn't think zygotes had blood types or an official sex. I'm pretty sure that comes later on.

Technically the sex is there, remember the pairing of chromosomes, XY and XX. The sex is also imprinted upon the DNA, as is the blood type, so yes they do.

quote:

all humans depend on one another, all at different degrees, but still are all dependent...

I disagree with that.

quote:

it also must have the same blood type which most don't, and also can't be a different sex than her...

I didn't think zygotes had blood types or an official sex. I'm pretty sure that comes later on.

quote:

Originally posted by Euterpe:
Lol, yeah.

I'm done here. Neo, you make great points, you really do. Which is more than can be said for 98% of everyone who shares your views. I respect that. Nicely done.

But, I'm finished. I'm pro-choice, always will be. You're pro-life, always will be. Jus' how it is.

Awww, thanks you make great points and counters also, you're much like my pro-choice friend, and I can tell you won't waver either. You seem to stand up just as well as he even possibly better, we've been known to interrupt/disrupt class by our agruments...we start everyone in on the discussion and in my town many people are pro-choice so I need to be able to defend my views well if I want to truly stand for them...I'm amazed how well you were able to fight back at some of my points, a bunch of them haven't been questioned before and people just ignore them...

Lol, yeah.

I'm done here. Neo, you make great points, you really do. Which is more than can be said for 98% of everyone who shares your views. I respect that. Nicely done.

But, I'm finished. I'm pro-choice, always will be. You're pro-life, always will be. Jus' how it is.

Yargh!!!!!!!

That's all....you know what I mean.

quote:

Originally posted by Euterpe:
No, actually, it isn't like that at all. I can physically survive by myself. I have the ability and means to support myself. Is it a great existence? Not really. But am I able? Yes. I can touch, feel, think.

You can exist, though you're still dependent on others, you wouldn't be able to survive long, or at all without other people. So it is like that, and a newborn child needs a parent wether it be for physical and health reasons, or emotional/mental reasons...all humans depend on one another, all at different degrees, but still are all dependent...

quote:

Viruses are contracted from a carrier. They aren't developed within the body. They mutate within the body. Viruses do not make offspring. Viruses are contracted into the body via air or fluid. Inside you, the duplicate themselves and mutate to attack the immune system's defenses.

First of all, duplicating is considered reproduction, asexual reproduction to be exact, and thier duplicates are offspring. They may be contracted through another host but they can develop within a host such as infamous SARS which was able to transfer from being only able to attack birds and other animals to being able to attack humans being fatal to people, becuase it infected a linking animal between the two, a pig, which is fairly common among viruses, this link gave the the ablity to cross over and to combine with another virus to become SARS...Not all viruses attack the immune system, most don't, HIV does, but SARS does not, and neither does Herpes or the cold...

quote:

...And, by your logic, if a virus is so similar to a fertilized egg, shouldn't it be illegal to remove viruses, as well?

Actually, "my logic" never said they were very similar, "my logic" said that from the point of conception the child, or zygote, whatever you wish to call the human, is its own being and is seperate from the mother...it has its own DNA structure and for it to be part of her it has to have the same as her, not half of the same, but the whole thing, it also must have the same blood type which most don't, and also can't be a different sex than her...

quote:

I still don't see how you've proven to me that what I do within my body is your business.

I don't care what you do with your body, that is your right to privacy, it is a different matter when you do something to someone else's body, which is out of your rights' jurisdiction and into someone else's...

quote:

Originally posted by Neodigit7:
back to the dependency even a child once born outside the womb can't survive with out a mother or parent, just as we can't survive without other people or organisms...

No, actually, it isn't like that at all. I can physically survive by myself. I have the ability and means to support myself. Is it a great existence? Not really. But am I able? Yes. I can touch, feel, think.

quote:

about the viruses, parasites and saprotrophs, well yes the first organism is, though as with viruses and saprotrophs the consecutive organisms are formed within and/or attached to the body, but are still a different being...

Viruses are contracted from a carrier. They aren't developed within the body. They mutate within the body.

Viruses do not make offspring. Viruses are contracted into the body via air or fluid. Inside you, the duplicate themselves and mutate to attack the immune system's defenses.

...And, by your logic, if a virus is so similar to a fertilized egg, shouldn't it be illegal to remove viruses, as well?

I still don't see how you've proven to me that what I do within my body is your business.

but the mothers "own" genes only account for one half of the childs while the outside source, the father, accounts for the other half...23 chromosomes and 23 chromosomes each...also it is very often that the mother and child have different blood types and therefore definitly can't be part of the mother...their DNA in the sense that DNA goes is highly different and doesn't show them being one, quite the contrary it shows more of a unique person...

back to the dependency even a child once born outside the womb can't survive with out a mother or parent, just as we can't survive without other people or organisms...if we were all seperated and left alone we wouldn't survive no matter what our age, or if where we are...so you can't just say that a child is dependent on someone else so it can't be human, of course it is dependent we all are and we're all unique human beings...

about the viruses, parasites and saprotrophs, well yes the first organism is, though as with viruses and saprotrophs the consecutive organisms are formed within and/or attached to the body, but are still a different being...much like a child, the sperm cell isn't part of the mother but when it combines with the egg cell the consecutive formations are seperate and different from the mother, they aren't one with it anymore...just like a virus' offspring may take on characteristics of the cells it infects and uses to reproduce, being dependent, they're is still considered thier own being, but are different then the host cell and original virus...

But parasites, saprotrophs and viruses are intially alien BEFORE attaching themselves to a person.

A fetus is created inside the mother from the mother's own genes and one outside element.

quote:

I still don't understand how something that would die without the mother's uterus can be considered its own being.

well parasites, saprotrophs, and viruses need hosts; they can't survive without other organisms, and they're still their own being, seperate from the one they depend on...

Until that "strong evidence and reasoning" becomes legislation, one cannot legally tell a woman that she must birth a child she has no financial or emotional way to support.

I still don't understand how something that would die without the mother's uterus can be considered its own being. In the late third trimester, when the fetus can now survive outside of the body, then it's murder. Then you're just an idiot for not having removed the fetus before.

You cannot infringe right to privacy based on upon scientific evidence and so-called reasoning. It must be law, obviously. If, somehow, a law is passed stating fertilized egg up untuil birth are considered separate entities away from the mother's body, then abortion is murder.