Biden: Life begins at conception, abortion always wrong.

[Art&Science]

It appears uncle Joe will not be throwing his hat in the ring.http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/22/biden-life-begins-at-conception-video/

I tend to agree with Mr. Biden's statement. I am, obviously, an atheist.

I believe that our current culture will be judged harshly by history due to our acceptance and propagation of "convenience" abortions. In 500 years, the behavior (along with religion) will be viewed as primitive and barbaric, not something which is practiced by a type I civilization.

 

[StinkyPinky]

To me, being human begins at conception. They are human cells that if left unchecked will grow into a baby. Disrupting that process is disrupting life.

That is my view on it but sadly anyone with those views seems to be shouted down into oblivion.

 

[BoberFett]

Personally, I'm not only pro-choice, I'm pro-abortion. I think we need MORE abortions.

But I'm also intelligent enough to know that there's room to understand why some people are pro-life. It's too bad all these "intelligent" left wingers aren't as smart as they believe they are.

 

[sandorski]

To me, being human begins at conception. They are human cells that if left unchecked will grow into a baby. Disrupting that process is disrupting life.

That is my view on it but sadly anyone with those views seems to be shouted down into oblivion.

That "Life" begins at conception is not in itself unreasonable. What happens or what that means subsequently might be unreasonable.

 

[MongGrel]

This can't be true because liberals eat fetuses that they acquire at abortion complexes.

On a more serious note, conservatives should take note that just because you fear God doesn't mean you should use power of government to impose your fear of God on others.

They only eat the parts they cant sell.

 

[Victorian Gray]

I prefer Italian myself.

 

[sandorski]

I prefer Italian myself.

I dunno, those curried sauces are pretty tasty.

 

[Belegost]

If a you believe that a fetus is not a living human, then it's a reasonable position to see terminating a pregnancy on the same terms as removing a benign tumor, or wisdom teeth, it's an unwanted growth in the body.

If, however, your belief (which need not be tied to any religious leaning) is that a fetus is a living human, then the only reasonable conclusion is that it has all the rights assumed to exist for all other humans, most fundamentally the right to life. Western civilization has long agreed to such fundamental rights, separate from any religion.

Believing that a life starts at conception but also stating that you're not going to impose that belief on others and tacitly allow them to kill living humans (per the belief held) effectively forces there to be a class of humans for which it is acceptable for others to believe they have to right to kill members of that class at will.

Someone holding such a position is a truly vile person, a spineless, mealy-mouthed, failure of a human; one so craven that they lack the courage to stand up and speak out when they believe that thousands of helpless people are being murdered.

Even if I don't agree with the pro-life position I can at least respect that from their point of view they sincerely believe they are working to stop the deaths of people unable to speak for themselves. That is at least a rational and humane position.

 

[sandorski]

If a you believe that a fetus is not a living human, then it's a reasonable position to see terminating a pregnancy on the same terms as removing a benign tumor, or wisdom teeth, it's an unwanted growth in the body.

If, however, your belief (which need not be tied to any religious leaning) is that a fetus is a living human, then the only reasonable conclusion is that it has all the rights assumed to exist for all other humans, most fundamentally the right to life. Western civilization has long agreed to such fundamental rights, separate from any religion.

Believing that a life starts at conception but also stating that you're not going to impose that belief on others and tacitly allow them to kill living humans (per the belief held) effectively forces there to be a class of humans for which it is acceptable for others to believe they have to right to kill members of that class at will.

Someone holding such a position is a truly vile person, a spineless, mealy-mouthed, failure of a human; one so craven that they lack the courage to stand up and speak out when they believe that thousands of helpless people are being murdered.

Even if I don't agree with the pro-life position I can at least respect that from their point of view they sincerely believe they are working to stop the deaths of people unable to speak for themselves. That is at least a rational and humane position.

I disagree. When you say "Human", what do you mean? What exactly entails being Human and what makes being Human so special that at any given time we have to assume that a Human has Rights? Are all Humans equal at all stages of Life?

This goes back to the old dilemma: If a hospital is on fire and you have a choice between saving a Baby or a frozen tray of thousands of Embryos, which do you choose to save?

 

[dank69]

If a you believe that a fetus is not a living human, then it's a reasonable position to see terminating a pregnancy on the same terms as removing a benign tumor, or wisdom teeth, it's an unwanted growth in the body.

If, however, your belief (which need not be tied to any religious leaning) is that a fetus is a living human, then the only reasonable conclusion is that it has all the rights assumed to exist for all other humans, most fundamentally the right to life. Western civilization has long agreed to such fundamental rights, separate from any religion.

Believing that a life starts at conception but also stating that you're not going to impose that belief on others and tacitly allow them to kill living humans (per the belief held) effectively forces there to be a class of humans for which it is acceptable for others to believe they have to right to kill members of that class at will.

Someone holding such a position is a truly vile person, a spineless, mealy-mouthed, failure of a human; one so craven that they lack the courage to stand up and speak out when they believe that thousands of helpless people are being murdered.

Even if I don't agree with the pro-life position I can at least respect that from their point of view they sincerely believe they are working to stop the deaths of people unable to speak for themselves. That is at least a rational and humane position.

I don't know anyone that argues that life doesn't start at conception. The argument is always about whether that life should be protected the same as a born human. Biden's statements change nothing.

 

[Knowing]

Ron Paul was more liberal on gay marriage than Obama in 2008. Obama only changed his mind for the election in 2012.

The democrats are scarcely more liberal on social issues than the republicans, and only to convince their voters.

 

[dank69]

Ron Paul was more liberal on gay marriage than Obama in 2008. Obama only changed his mind for the election in 2012.

The democrats are scarcely more liberal on social issues than the republicans, and only to convince their voters.

Haha, scarcely he says, as Republicans all across the country have been passing legislation to stop gay marriage while Democrats have fought them every step of the way.

 

[Belegost]

I disagree. When you say "Human", what do you mean? What exactly entails being Human and what makes being Human so special that at any given time we have to assume that a Human has Rights? Are all Humans equal at all stages of Life?

This goes back to the old dilemma: If a hospital is on fire and you have a choice between saving a Baby or a frozen tray of thousands of Embryos, which do you choose to save?

Gosh, it's not like the first paragraph asks some of the most fundamental questions in philosophy and ethics since the beginning of history, or anything. /s

No humans are equal at any stages of life, each is unique. However, civilized societies have agreed that all humans equally have fundamental rights, even if there is argument on some details, it's quite widely agreed that no human should be arbitrarily deprived of life.
The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a good starting point.

As for your dilemna, which one is mine? Fundamentally my concern will be for the care of my genetic legacy.

 

[Greenman]

If a you believe that a fetus is not a living human, then it's a reasonable position to see terminating a pregnancy on the same terms as removing a benign tumor, or wisdom teeth, it's an unwanted growth in the body.

If, however, your belief (which need not be tied to any religious leaning) is that a fetus is a living human, then the only reasonable conclusion is that it has all the rights assumed to exist for all other humans, most fundamentally the right to life. Western civilization has long agreed to such fundamental rights, separate from any religion.

Believing that a life starts at conception but also stating that you're not going to impose that belief on others and tacitly allow them to kill living humans (per the belief held) effectively forces there to be a class of humans for which it is acceptable for others to believe they have to right to kill members of that class at will.

Someone holding such a position is a truly vile person, a spineless, mealy-mouthed, failure of a human; one so craven that they lack the courage to stand up and speak out when they believe that thousands of helpless people are being murdered.

Even if I don't agree with the pro-life position I can at least respect that from their point of view they sincerely believe they are working to stop the deaths of people unable to speak for themselves. That is at least a rational and humane position.

This is exactly right. If Biden really believes that a fetus is a human being, then abortion has to be premeditated murder.

 

[sandorski]

Gosh, it's not like the first paragraph asks some of the most fundamental questions in philosophy and ethics since the beginning of history, or anything. /s

No humans are equal at any stages of life, each is unique. However, civilized societies have agreed that all humans equally have fundamental rights, even if there is argument on some details, it's quite widely agreed that no human should be arbitrarily deprived of life.
The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a good starting point.

As for your dilemna, which one is mine? Fundamentally my concern will be for the care of my genetic legacy.

I know what Human Rights are, I even agree that they are a good thing. However, is a Human Zygote = to someone Post Birth?

 

[WHAMPOM]

We just got over a twenty year hysterical over reaction to gay rights in marriage. Calm down so we don't do it again on another subject.

 

[Vic]

Ron Paul was more liberal on gay marriage than Obama in 2008. Obama only changed his mind for the election in 2012.

The democrats are scarcely more liberal on social issues than the republicans, and only to convince their voters.

You see, that argument used to work years ago, when grandpa getting published meant a letter to the editor because he couldn't work that fancy AOL thing, but then this one liberal invented this thing called Facebook, and now we know, for the fact, that the right wing is crazier than we ever dared imagine on social issues.

 

[Vic]

Gosh, it's not like the first paragraph asks some of the most fundamental questions in philosophy and ethics since the beginning of history, or anything. /s

No humans are equal at any stages of life, each is unique. However, civilized societies have agreed that all humans equally have fundamental rights, even if there is argument on some details, it's quite widely agreed that no human should be arbitrarily deprived of life.
The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a good starting point.

As for your dilemna, which one is mine? Fundamentally my concern will be for the care of my genetic legacy.

And the mother's life? Is she just a slave to your genetic legacy?

 

[Belegost]

And the mother's life? Is she just a slave to your genetic legacy?

What part of

This goes back to the old dilemma: If a hospital is on fire and you have a choice between saving a Baby or a frozen tray of thousands of Embryos, which do you choose to save?

had anything to do with the (whom's?) mother's life?

This is the sort of mentally defective statement that makes me question whether birth alone is a sufficient achievement to merit admittance to humanity...

However, is a Human Zygote = to someone Post Birth?

Well that is the fundamental question, reading from Biden's quotes the interpretation I have is that he believes so. If he believes that, then there clear consequences that arise from that belief, consequences that carry a responsibility for a human living in a civilized society.

 

[woolfe9998]

And those people are assholes. That doesn't make Biden any less of a nut, and certainly not someone who should be president.

So tell us, do YOU think that someone who believes in a magical man in the sky should be our president?

If an atheist ever ran for POTUS, I'd likely vote for that person. However, belief in the magic man is essentially universal among candidates. We can only pick those who are relatively less kooky than others.

 

[Vic]

What part of

had anything to do with the (whom's?) mother's life?

This is the sort of mentally defective statement that makes me question whether birth alone is a sufficient achievement to merit admittance to humanity...


Well that is the fundamental question, reading from Biden's quotes the interpretation I have is that he believes so. If he believes that, then there clear consequences that arise from that belief, consequences that carry a responsibility for a human living in a civilized society.

No matter how eloquently you do it, beating up on a straw man is just beating up on a straw man.
Individual self-ownership is the basis of all rights. If the woman doesn't own her own body, then she is a slave. And for her to be a slave to *your* genetic legacy does not interest me. Better that she be free to control her own genetic legacy.

 

[Paratus]

How about a little quiz to maybe shed some light on the abortion and life starts at conception issue:

1) How many babies is this:

Spoiler

1

2) How many babies is this:

Spoiler

0-4 (no implantation to identical quadruplets

3) How effective is RU486 at causing an abortion?

Spoiler

92-95%

4) How effective is natural pregnancy at causing a miscarriage/failed implantation?

Spoiler

~66% of fertilized eggs will not make it to birth

5) What is the mortality rate for a born child between the ages of 1-4 in the US?

Spoiler

0.026% in 2013

6) T or F The sperm is alive before conception.

Spoiler

T

7) T or F The egg is alive before conception.

Spoiler

T

8) T or F The fertilized egg is alive after conception.

Spoiler

T

 

[Belegost]

No matter how eloquently you do it, beating up on a straw man is just beating up on a straw man.
Individual self-ownership is the basis of all rights. If the woman doesn't own her own body, then she is a slave. And for her to be a slave to *your* genetic legacy does not interest me. Better that she be free to control her own genetic legacy.

If you go back to my original post:

I don't agree with the pro-life position

My comment was specifically about the question posed - if I am in an emergency situation and have to choose between a baby or frozen fetus, I am quite sure an enormous legacy of evolutionary selection will bias me to select the option that is my own offspring.

At no point did this have anything to do with enslaving any women with anything, except in your own brain damaged thoughts.

-edit-

Perhaps I should expand on my personal beliefs since somehow they have become more important than that of the VP. I believe that cortical activity is the primary indicator of being a living human - if a man gets hit by a car and the hospital can keep the body alive, but no brain activity is there, then the part that was a sentient human has died, the body is just so much meat. Similarly, until a fetus develops sufficiently to have brain activity it is effectively brain dead and thus not a living human with the right to life associated. Hence I am against late-term abortion where babies with brain activity are killed, at that point I believe it is wrong, have voted as such, and will clearly say as much to anyone. At the same time it is only in a rare cases that a pregnancy is not clear well before this point, allowing a woman time to consider and choose the option best for her life, including an abortion.

Mr. Biden made statements that reasonable interpretation suggest that he believes conception is the point at which a human life begins and is subject to human rights protections. I can respect that position, even if I disagree with it, it is based on his beliefs on what constitutes life and humanity.

Where I take issue is when he then goes on to say that he won't impose those beliefs on anyone. That statement is fundamentally saying "I believe there is a class of human beings deserving of protection from arbitrary death, however, since other people believe they should die, I will let the rights of this class of humans be trampled so as not to inconvenience or offend those who wish to kill them." This is a truly despicable position, the same position that would allow the euthanasia of handicapped children, or smothering female infants because males are preferred. It is completely at odds with a progressive humane civilization.

 

[DrDoug]

I'm anti-abortion in one way; I believe that the Republican party is an abortion.

They need to drop the elephant for their symbol and adopt the coat hanger. :biggrin:

 

[TheSlamma]

Which fact does Biden have wrong?

“I’m prepared to accept that at the moment of conception there’s human life and being,”

Are the eggs not already alive? are the sperm not already alive? that is part of a continuous process. If we are talking about a "human being" then a new fertilized zygote is also not a human being (individual) in my opinion that takes place later on, of course this like you said is when the argument starts.

Edit: corrected my post to reflect human being as an individual instead of human life which starts at conception, sorry for my poor choice in terms. I will not be posting again past midnight like that when it's well past my bedtime.