Originally posted by coiChance equates biological life with human life, which is (at best) an ignorant perspective of what the Bible teaches of the same.
the same day surely.....can only be born once
if you are asking when the placenta was first created then around 9 month earlier in most cases
whats your point though?
This is being addressed, as already posted here, in the thread entitled Who give(s) human life?
Do we celebrate the birth of the placenta?
Do we mourn the loss of its or the other fetal membranes' biological life?
Originally posted by chancremechanicGods written word. So where did you get THAT revelation?
The dictionary was written by secular man, who thinks we come from the asshole of a tadpole. The Bible states different what a fetus is. God knows us before we are even conceived....the Bible, as God's written word, trumps Webster anyday......
Straight from God? And you believe we went fishing with the dinosaurs
right?
In order that No1 can get to know and love his grandson he must first be alive.
In order for him to throw himself in front of the train in his grandsons stead he must first be alive.
In order for Shaz to play nudey prod games with as many women as possible he must first be alive.
In order for coi to value and look after his families well being he must first be alive.
This is not to say 'mere' existence is the highest value, there are two ways to approach life one is to live it, the other is to avoid death. One is to get a shot of adrenalin every once in a while, the other to stay in the comfort zone.
Originally posted by jammerI'll help, jammer. I believe knowledge is more valuable to me than anything else. Of course one must be free also, but first comes knowledge.
Damn!
When I first looked I thought it was a thread about values. Turns out it got highjacked as another abortion thread.
Oh well .. i'll attempt to get it back on track.
My "highest" value ... Liberty.
Discuss.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOK, when a "human" sperm and a "human" egg are joined, isn't this considered "human" life"?, i.e., the beginning of "human-biological" life? Human life is biological life....what planet did you go to highschool? 🙄
Chance equates biological life with human life, which is (at best) an ignorant perspective of what the Bible teaches of the same.
This is being addressed, as already posted here, in the thread entitled Who give(s) human life?
Do we celebrate the birth of the placenta?
Do we mourn the loss of its or the other fetal membranes' biological life?
Originally posted by chancremechanicBoth my mother and I are pro-abortion (no big shock there).
Sure, a "baby" is considered born...OK. When conception occurs between the sperm and egg, a unique blueprint of a human being, unknown anywhere else in the universe, has been laid out. That "blueprint", or DNA, has one purpose and one purpose only: to create a human being in the form of a newborn baby. It is still considered a life form from the t ...[text shortened]... sue.....and that issue is not birth control, or at least shouldn't be......
However, I think you'll find the answer to your question, in the debate between my parent and I.
I seriously think it's up to a woman. End of story. If she wants to rip a leg off, fine by me. If she wants an abortion at 8 months and 2 weeks...fine by me. Once the baby is out and is breathing by itself, that's when I make the distinction, and feel that the mother should no longer harm it.
Although, I do totally agree with the infantaside law in Britain (if a mother kills her baby within an x-amount of weeks after birth, she doesn't get prosecuted...a hormone thing).
My mother on the hand believes that abortions should stop being carried out after 3 months. This is before the central nervous system has a chance to develop. Meaning that the foetus doesn't feel pain.
So you see that pro-choice can go together with not harming any seals or anything.
Personally, I have no problems with the killing of baby seals, as long as they do it without causing suffering.
If foetus' are found to feel pain (at say 8 months), then I feel they should be sedated before being aborted.
Life and death is inherent to "being". Dying is not bad. Some reasons for dying I will judge as not being "good", but that's a whole different discussion, for a whole other day.
Nice one Freaky and jammer, freedom and truth are essential to 'life' i.e. not the - just existing 'life', but the living 'life'.
Perhaps I should have asked for values rather than value, but I still maintain the number one highest value that makes loving, learning and liberty possible is life itself, without it.....well....?
Originally posted by Wajomathe act of sacrifice by its very nature, does not stop to consider if there is an imposition to one's self, or call into question the rights of others. the very nature of sacrifice is to boldly act without any thought of self, of personal gain or advantage, or whether the recipient of that sacrifice deserved or warranted our favour.
What right do others have to require that you sacrifice your life.
maybe too altruistic to swallow, but if its not that, then it needs to be called something else.
There is only one "highest value" one can attribute. Self recognition through "consciousness". None of the higher functions of rational existence can become real without it.
Without being conscious, one has no conscience. This actually links to the nerdlinger aholes who think that killing potential humans is like blowing snot out of their noses. I must agree that in THEIR case, it probably is the same. But then, I know not god.
To go a step further, I will say that one must recognize the potential in an egg and a sperm if one is to be considered as a conscious being. Then if that person chooses her own liberty over the right to exist -- of her own progeny -- it is that persons right to do so. But to set and argue about whether a zygote is a human seems a bit ridiculous. It always seems to turn out to be true.