If "life begins at conception," then of course *your* IVF kills *your* babies, fake pro-lifers. Your embryos aren't magic. What did you think you were saying? And what do you want for Canady day?
There is no doubt that life begins at conception. BUT you raise some very important and valid questions. Each step of scientific advancement, such as IVF, brings a set of new ethical challenges. And you raise some really good ones. That's why I like to keep an open mind and LISTEN to the opposition. However, a return to the old days of full-on nine month + abortion is something we don't need to return to. That's literally throwing the baby out with the bath water (or the embryos as the case may be). Great article.
This is what happens when you have laws being made and interpreted by people who know next to nothing about female and gestational physiology. They don't know that the first few weeks included in the "Nine Months gestation" the woman isn't pregnant at all. The count begins several weeks before she ovulates. They couldn't explain preeclampsia or ectopic pregnancy, but they have the hubris to enact and interpretate laws on pregnancy and childbirth. They care little about the already born people whose lives they are destroying in this worship of the fetus. The forced birthers are cruel, cruel people!
I just re looked at Northam's position. You do understand that every single case that was talked about on both sides started with, "If...." or "Supposing that...." Show me an actual place or incident where this happened instead of people coming up with hypothetical scenarios. Beliefs or supposes are not facts.
New comments from the Alabama legislature yesterday on possibly “clarifying” the law.
“Melson, who chairs the Senate's Health Care Committee, said Thursday that he is planning to introduce legislation that would clarify that embryos are not viable unless they are implanted in a uterus.”
Note that important word “viable”. If viability gets introduced as a standard, that potentially resolves many of the worst cases - ectopics, fetal malformations, etc.
That doesn’t completely solve abortion, but brings us back more closely to the Roe standard. At its heart Roe was using fetal viability as the point at which the government acquired an interest/role in the outcome.
There is no doubt that life begins at conception. BUT you raise some very important and valid questions. Each step of scientific advancement, such as IVF, brings a set of new ethical challenges. And you raise some really good ones. That's why I like to keep an open mind and LISTEN to the opposition. However, a return to the old days of full-on nine month + abortion is something we don't need to return to. That's literally throwing the baby out with the bath water (or the embryos as the case may be). Great article.
This is what happens when you have laws being made and interpreted by people who know next to nothing about female and gestational physiology. They don't know that the first few weeks included in the "Nine Months gestation" the woman isn't pregnant at all. The count begins several weeks before she ovulates. They couldn't explain preeclampsia or ectopic pregnancy, but they have the hubris to enact and interpretate laws on pregnancy and childbirth. They care little about the already born people whose lives they are destroying in this worship of the fetus. The forced birthers are cruel, cruel people!
I just re looked at Northam's position. You do understand that every single case that was talked about on both sides started with, "If...." or "Supposing that...." Show me an actual place or incident where this happened instead of people coming up with hypothetical scenarios. Beliefs or supposes are not facts.
So they’re hinging it all on whether the egg and sperm are in the oven or not. Because that’s how they see us as women: we are Easy Bake ovens.
New comments from the Alabama legislature yesterday on possibly “clarifying” the law.
“Melson, who chairs the Senate's Health Care Committee, said Thursday that he is planning to introduce legislation that would clarify that embryos are not viable unless they are implanted in a uterus.”
Note that important word “viable”. If viability gets introduced as a standard, that potentially resolves many of the worst cases - ectopics, fetal malformations, etc.
That doesn’t completely solve abortion, but brings us back more closely to the Roe standard. At its heart Roe was using fetal viability as the point at which the government acquired an interest/role in the outcome.