I'm not too mad about abortion, since this really isn't a good time to be having kids. Unless you can guarantee your kid will be able to survive the mountain of problems that have been accumulating for centuries.
The Abortion debate
- Thread starter Houseman
- Start date
Here's the scenario. A couple has sex, and an egg is fertilized. That egg is now a person, and a citizen, specifically an underage citizen. That couple are now parents, and the egg is their child.
10mins later they have sex again - that egg is now a 10min old child. But the egg hasn't had time to implant and certainly hasn't traveled to the womb. So when the man orgasms his sperm will be going to the same location - where his 10min old child is. So the mother is letting the father orgasm onto their 10min old child.
That is a sex crime because it involves A. Incest, and B. a sexual act involving an underage person.
If a fertilized egg doesn't implant on the wall and is flushed out of the body, is it murder, manslaughter or suicide?
I always found it weird and off about people saying my body my choice when it came to not wearing masks, but they want gubmint intervention against abortion.
Honestly there really is no right or wrong answer to this. It's a yes and no answer, just like the majority of social issues. I wouldn't have much of a problem with pro life and all life is sacred, but the people who say that don't value your life; only when you are a fetus.
If legal personhood started at conception, would an embryo be a US citizen or would they have to wait until birth to get that status? Would someone conceived but not born on US territory qualify as a natural born citizen and be eligible to run for president?
A newporn is a human person. If a single fertilized egg can grow two a single person as well as into twins who are several persons it makes no sense to extend personhood to conception, Otherwise a single cell might be several persons. Or not, depending on what happens later.
Now the next question would be when the fetus starts counting as a person. But this question is nonsense. Pregnacy is a process, there is no single point in time where an egg becomes a person, it is the whole pregnancy duration.
Now the next question would be when the fetus starts counting as a person. But this question is nonsense. Pregnacy is a process, there is no single point in time where an egg becomes a person, it is the whole pregnancy duration.
Always. And if it's simply not remotely possible after a certain point, then adoption needs to be available easily and readily
More strictly, they say if he has sex, he rolls the dice and has to accept the result. If he wants to make it even more risky by not using appropriate protection and/or not ensuring his partner does, then too he accepts the result.
Yes. Let me say to women now, if you want to guarantee not becoming a parent, don't have sex or otherwise let a man's jizz anywhere near your vagina, and don't have IVF.
Life begins before conception. Sperm cells are alive, ova are alive, as are other trillions of cells in your body in order for you to function.
I did, there is no right answer when it has to do with everyone's different beliefs/takes/opinions/etc.
Sure, but are sperm part of their progenitor's organism once they've been ejaculated?
Like, that's a particularly pedantic point given that I'm pretty sure my message carried across fine. If we really wanted to go down your diversion, "life began" as some kind of chemical reaction in primordial oceans billions of years ago and has carried on since. I could revise my original statement to preclude such a nitpick over my choice of language, but, and I can't emphasize this enough, I don't care to.
I won't be satisfied until women are charged with two hundred million counts of murder every time they have sex, for all the poor sperm that are doomed to die in her body without fulfilling the purpose God gave them. Why can't women let every sperm fertilize its own egg? After all, every sperm is sacred; every sperm is great!
