Since you on the right won't answer this question. Abortion (page 14)

momzcrazy

Was the picture I posted too hard to stomach? That is what an aborted eight week old child looks like. How about this:

http://www.100abortionpictures.com/Aborted_Baby_Pictures_Abortion_Photos/images/CK-Garb.jpg

I'm not retracting anything I said earlier. Yes, I believe that babies have souls that are instilled in them at the moment of conception. But I didn't always believe that. However, it has always seemed logical to me that, from the moment of conception, it's a human. Just in the very early stages of development, but still a clump of cells that will become an adult human being someday. My logical belief came well before I added my belief in the immortal soul.

I really don't care what Wikipedia calls it. Logically, to me, it's a baby. Who came up with the term "baby"? Zygote, fetus, embryo, whatever, it's a baby to me. Reducing a newly forming human being into a "clump of cells" is insulting to me. It's not a tumor or a mole you have cut off. Those are clumps of cells. It's a human being in its earliest stages.

And I'm not attacking anyone. You asked for opinions. I gave you mine, straight out. I can't believe anyone can look at our society and not see that people are treated as merchandise.

StAnn

dawg

The first picture you posted didn't come through... plain and simple.. I avoid nothing and answer all questions...I doubt you posted a photo of a zygote or a embryo on that photo.

This photo has no zygotes in it... read what I've said without prejudging what you think my views are; I've stated clearly what I think and I get a photo of unborn fetuses as a reply? That makes no sense....

StAnn

you have yet to make those of us whom differ see your point

Dawg,

You asked for someone like me to give her opinion. I did. I'm not trying to "convince" anybody. I can't really see the point of people who support abortion, either! I've made my point as clearly as I know how.

StAnn

SixofNine

"Was the picture I posted too hard to stomach? That is what an aborted eight week old child looks like. How about this:"

meh, those ain't 8 week old zygotes, that is a picture of the trash cans after a Texas prom night!

.

At 8 weeks, a potential human looks like this li'l alien critter here:

http://www.pregnancy.org/images/pregnancy/pregnancycalendar/8week120.jpg

StAnn

A fetus is defined by this... "In humans, the fetal stage of prenatal development starts at the beginning of the 11th week in gestational age (the 9th week after fertilization)".[2] [3]

Dawg,

Whose definition? That of science. I'm not anti-science, I'm very pro-science. I don't believe in a flat earth and I certainly do believe in evolution. But I don't see science as a religion. Scientists, for very good reasons, I'm sure, have divided the stages of human development into specific periods and put labels onto those periods of time. Fine. Nothing wrong with that. But that does not mean that at any stage that the person who is developing is not a person. They are a human person from the moment of conception, just a wee little one no bigger than a pinhead. They don't spontaneously become human persons at a specific moment of development when science decrees it to be so. They are always human persons.

Does that clarify my understanding?

StAnn

dawg

St anne, you're cool by me, as I've said, I love your passion... its all cool...

You state this in your answer..."I really don't care what Wikipedia calls it. Logically, to me, it's a baby". My question is, can't you see that many others feel differently and that we have not only scientific explanations/definitions we've formed our opinions with, but many of us are like myself and have seen firsthand what a zygote and embryo is? To me, zygotes and embryos are not human beings... that's my logical opinion

You don't have to agree with it, and you yourself haven't done this, but I've read where people call people like me terminating the pregnancy murderers... that's horse crap in my opinion...

And, to make matters worse, some bring their religions into this debate, they have no qualms forcing their religious views on the rest of us.

I'm not accusing you just asking... don't you think your judgment may be tainted by your views that God installs souls into the fertilized egg?

dawg

St anne, you said this..."Whose definition? That of science?" Well yes, we as humans definde all sorts of things don't we? That's because we have no God defining what words we shall use, we make them up as we go along.

Scientist have been studying prenatal cases for many years now, I'm not sure but I think for about 400 years, they have looked into their microscopes and made definitions about what they were seeing.. who else is going to do this? God?

See, what I'm saying is this, you are trying to use your religion to define for the rest of us what we are seeing... you seem like a generous lady, and I think in your heart you're trying to be open, but religion taints your view... you don't "believe in evolution" for instance...

Its all good the way I see it, you defending all life, me trying to find a middle, I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash...

StAnn

Dawg,

Regarding children born with horrific diseases, yes, it is so very tragic. I spend a lot of time at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, one of the best in the nation, and people from all over the world bring their sick children there for treatment. Sitting in the waiting room with these families has a lot more impact than something on the internet, believe me.

Have you seen Lorenzo's Oil? It's based on a true story. A little boy was born with a horrible, fatal disease. In his case, his parents fought to find a treatment to save him and he lived to be over 30 years old. He just died a few months ago. In the movie, at one point, the father asks the mother, "Do you think that all of this struggle may have been for someone else's kid?" Although the family is not able to restore their own son's health, they are able to help prevent other boys born with the same disease from becoming symptomatic. The only good I know that comes from the birth of these children, such as the ones you mentioned, is that if they are born, doctors have to try to treat them, and that advances research into ways to manage or cure the disease. There are many people today who live with diseases that at one time would have been a death sentence because of the valiant sacrifice and courage less fortunate people who were born with these diseases made to advance medical science.

I know a family who had a son with Tay Sachs. They kept a blog of every day of his little life. I think he lived to be almost two weeks old and died at home. It is so, so sad and tragic but I also know they cherished those two weeks with their baby and the baby got to be held and cuddled and kissed and loved round the clock while he was here. At least he died knowing he was completely loved, which is something many of us ex-JWs will never know, with our families trapped in the Borg.

StAnn

Dawg,

Uh, I said that I DO believe in evolution. I'm no creationist.

First, I'm not trying to convince you. Never thought I could. Just like you're not trying to convince me. I thought you just wanted both sides out there.

You also keep saying that my religion "taints" my view. Even though I told you that I held this view before "finding religion." I have to say, I wonder if your negative experience with the JWs taints your view of all things religious?

Stann

Since you on the right won't answer this question. Abortion

Share this