AvJoe

Hello, at the request of Yankee Clipper I have granted "his" so called page to him and ask the the continued discussion of a******n, right to live, the initiation of life etc. be t***sferred to this page.

All comments are of course welcome

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Except you t***sferred no prior posts or comments on this topic. You title it; however, have not set forth clear statements for commentary. Are we talking proposed legislation forthcoming in the US House of Representatives? Are we discussing the TX Law? It is your forum, so start with a premise, please.

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

He was explaining to me how a legal definition of human life should be used, rather than a scientific one based on the characteristics of living organisms, to determine ethical and legal views on a******n.

AvJoe also asserted that the Bible defines human life as beginning with fertilization, of which assertion I sought citation of relevant passages.

He has not answered, either, to support his claims or to rebut mine.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Basically, "personhood"?

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

That would not be a scientific concept, but yes, in a legal, ethical, or religious discussion that would be the concept. At what point does a living human organism become a person?

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

The last time I made the comment to follow, I as blasted to perdition and back; however, will "stand my ground" (I just had to do that.) on the following.

It is nary a single person's business except the female who is pregnant!

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

Did you misspell "was?"

Unless, there is a person inside that female, or if that female pays another person to remove that life inside her.

Both of those would suppose another person concerned with the matter, and the latter in a specifically businesslike manner.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

I did misspell "was".

AvJoe

That was the subject I thought I presented. Your references refer to a seventh grade science book. Although I do believe we are a bit above the 7th grade science book level let's examine your references.

What I found interesting is that no reference is made in the "7 Characteristics of Life" Is the ability of the fetus (just used as a general term) to survive though at least the first half of the pregnancy. This of course may disqualify the fetus in the ability to achieve number 7 of these characteristics, the fetus may adapt to the envirement of the womb but not to "life outside the womb.

Also in the section marked "What's Going on" quote" ....Scientists don't all agree on a common list of the characteristics of life".....which debunks the absolute authority of the 7 characteristics of life. It even gives an exaple of fire which uses energy, etc (see exact quote) but as the parargraph points out "its traits are necessary, but not sufficient, for life.

AvJoe

AuntiE,

No I did not t***sfer over any of the previous discussions of this subect. Maybe you can teach me how to do that. It appears however that the subect is off to a flying start out of the gate.

By the way I happen to agree with you, If I am correct in what you wrote that the women's rights (with some limitation-my add on) should be protected.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

I am sure the following will bring forth a volley of who knows what.

Men discussing this issue and making decisions on this matter is somewhat like a group of women making decisions relative to man's medical treatment for "performance" issues or prostate issues, unless such female is a physician.

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

On the one hand are some hysterical anti a******n fanatics who think no a******n should be performed any time, any place, and that laws should be passed to force everyone to agree.

On the other hand are some hysterical pro a******n fanatics who think a******n should be available any time, any place, and that someone else should have to pay for it.


The tenth amendment says that the federal government has no authority to involve itself in the aborion issue.

AvJoe

Question: Where in the tenth amendment is a******n even mentioned? I don't believe it was even considered (in polite society) any where. Until Roe V. Wade a******ns for the most part were performed in back alleys under very unsanitary conditions. The rich were the only ones who could afford "safe" a******ns. If you are discussing the rights "not otherwise granted to Federal Government" portion of the tenth ammendment than by default only you are right.

As to the other side, I believe the government is correct in restricting a******n during the 3rd tri-mester. So question? Is the legal answer some where between these two views and if so where?

patriot47

AuntiE, it has been my firm belief for decades that legal decisions to disregard any rights of the father have contributed to the idea that there is no such thing as family. That there is a mother, child and sperm donor.

Would you be terribly upset if I said I oppose taxpayer funded a******n?

Realize that the State would prefer all women to see it as their baby's father.

Augustus Greatorex Loc: NE

I only cited sources to push for fair evidence citation. Unfortunately, you do not reciprocate. You could have looked up my terms on your own. It is much harder to look up vague appeals to religion on my own. When I wrote: "I doubt life begins at fertilization is in the Bible," I was asserting I could find no evidence to support your argument. And your response that I should validate your accusations is juvenile, more towards third grade, than seventh grade.

The cited sources and biology, the study of life, agree unilaterally that reproduction of animals is reproduction of a living organism. They disagree on whether seeds are living or dead, v***ses are living or non-living, and how to differentiate life from combustion, among a few other issues. But on the issue at hand there is no discussion a zygote reproduces the moment it becomes two cells. Reproduction is on a specious and individual level, which is why mules are considered living organisms, though by nature they are sterile.

You cannot adapt to anaerobic environments. To argue that you are not "alive" because you cannot adapt to certain alien environments is absurd. The same is true for the unborn life. That you adapt to changes of temperature and pressure, as does the unborn, should suffice as evidence of a limited ability to adapt.