BigMike Loc: yerington nv

Sez you! There are some who'll go to great lengths to convince you otherwise!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/05/01/spark-life-science-and-bible-meet-again.html?cmpid=NL_opinion

Mikeyavelli

I was sick to my stomach stomach in 2008 when I realized the inevitability of an obama presidency. Literally, I was sick.
I see that same inevitability now with Trump.
I'm feeling good all over.

robmull Loc: florida

Mr. Trump is going to get attacked, 24/7/365, cl, and it seems to have worked real well over the past few months. For every attack, Mr. Trump's numbers went straight up. And there is absolutely no recognition of reality in the secular/communist liberal progressive "bubble" of the current administration and its "drive-by, lap-dog, state-run, alphabet channel" media. It's ALL daily morning "talking-points," going after any group or person who seems, at the time, to be opposing the dictates of this administrations bold-faced and quite possibly treasonous tyranny. I love the new James Carville intimidation factor, and I'm looking forward to Mr. Trump's immunity to the smear campaign that's JUST about getting started. Mr. Trump's numbers are going to go through the roof, they will keep "obamanating" the poll numbers as with the "unemployment," and the economy; and the "Harvard Debate Team" at the WH will probably be still fixated on "global warming;" and certainly ANYTHING but the truth. Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmm. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TRUMP!!!

BBZ Loc: Long Island, NY

Wow, what a well written post. Did you attend Harvard?

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

And pray tell there northernlights what she was doing when she entered into the action (sexual intercourse) that led to the pregnancy? If it was involuntary, it was rape. If not, it was an action with a strong possiblity of pregnancy as a result. She knew what she was doing unless want to maintain that she was so swept up in the passion of the moment that she was out of control. See how the feminists like that one.

northernlights

I am sure, but it is a process, a ball of clay is a ball of clay until it is formed into a bowl. I am not for abortion but I do support the day after pill or the birth control pill and I am against day of conception BS.

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

.


You have to address this.

The fetus or the embryo is genetically distinct and differs from the mother and the father by 50% even though all of its genes come from the two of them. If the mother is Rh- (Rh is a factor that was identified in certain Rhesus monkeys) & the fetus is Rh+, during the birth process, the fetus' blood will mix with the mother's and the mother's sytem will develop antigens to the RH factor. In a subsequent pregnancy, if the fetus is RH+, her antigens cross the placenta barrier, destroy the fetus' blood cells and kills it.

There are only three irrefutable points in the emergence of a human being - fertilization, implantation and birth. All others are arbitrary.

It is not BS to oppose the Day After pill. It is a valid belief that life begins at conception. The American College of Pediatricians (ACP) defines the beginning of life at conception, the opinion of international biologic authority northernlights' notwithstanding.

ACP is designated as on organization to be watched on the home page of The Southern Poverty Law Center. I believe this is the reason for it. That is a distinction I seek.

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

How does Kevyn know any of this? He just spews out these things as accepted fact.

I have often said that the most intolerant, self-righteous, judgmental, smug people I have even known have been liberals. This is a perfect example. He knows he is better than you.

Angry? Kevyn, I suggest you look in the mirror.

northernlights

northernlights

You are correct when you say a belief, just as yours is that every seed that is fertilized must be born. There are many, many beliefs, attached to each and every individual. Some believe life exists before birth and continues after death, and while here on earth we inhabit the shell of a human being. If we are not born at that time there will be another, there really is no loss. It sounds to me and correct me if I'm wrong but your attachment to every seed that is fertilized must follow through to birth is a religious one. That is fine for your personal belief but many may not agree with you and they have that right.

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

.


I maintain that there should be nothing done to interfere with the progression to birth once an egg is fertilized. The majority of miscarriages during the first trimester of pregnancy are due to fetal malformations. This is not religious but scientific. This is consistent with natural law.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

I think some folks think that's what the "spark" is...the clay is no longer clay. However, the all-or-nothing attitude of the protagonists ensures that nothing will be solved anytime soon.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

I have agreed with everything you have thus far said with the exception of this comment...She did know what she was doing having sex without protection and the man to whom she was soooooo enamored with shares in that level of responsibly as well..A simple question would suffice...Yet, in that heat of the moment neither think of the consequences or if they do it is dismissed as surely not going to happen "this time"....

I support the right of choice, please let me make that clear..I do not support abortion itself..Never have...It is however, a matter between she and her physician..(You being one know this.)

Roe v Wade changed the foundation of abortion and in that long hurdle also determined that the period from the end of the first trimester to the point of fetal viability – the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb, either through natural or artificial means, typically takes place between about 24 and 28 weeks into a pregnancy.... Likewise at 20 weeks an interest in protecting potential life before viability, making the 20-week requirement valid even if fetal viability normally occurs after 20 weeks, was also addressed and ruled constitutional "in the protection of potential life".. I read what you said that life starts at conception and I happen to agree with you..However the SCOTUS had defined viable fetus to be outside the window of that 24 week gestation and arguably 20 weeks...Right?? Therein lies the debatable issue of when a fetus, is life sustaining, yes???

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Never is more like it~~~Emotions heightened whenever the loss of life of a baby is at issue..In any capacity...

Remember, that every baby born is a message from God he is not yet discouraged with mankind..Life is a gift and ever so precious......

crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island

.


I could respond completely but it would have to be quite long & I have neither the time nor patience now. Suffice it to say that it is not simply a matter between the woman & her physician. There is a third party with human tissue and existence involved. If you do not support abortion, how do you proceed to the statement that it is only between two? It seems to be an oxymoron.

The matter of viability is another arbitrary point. Since before Roe vs. Wade when Gov. Ronald Reagan of California and Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York signed legislation legalizing abortion i in their states, the point of viability has been moved back considerably leading to the question of how many viables have been aborted. The courts have no standing in this aspect. No human can outlaw progress though people like Sotomayor and Bader-Ginsburg, Obama & Hillary might think they can.