Saddleback point: At what point is a life a life?

[Conky]

All quotes are taking from the rather liberal LA Times, with the link furnished here: http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...8aug17,0,3145888.story

Obama said: "I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions.

McCain, however, immediately responded that a baby's rights begin at conception. Perhaps seeking to tamp down alarm among conservatives over his recent comment that he's open to a running mate who favors abortion rights, he continued: "I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."

-------------------------

Here's the part I find simply hilarious... Obama, being the highly educated Harvard graduate, doesn't know what the average highschool student knows about human reproduction.

Human life begins at conception, and this is strictly speaking from a scientific point of view.

Barack, despite making far more money than the average highschool science teacher, claims this is "above my pay grade".

The beautiful part is that McCain doesn't flinch on this question and answers it like a highschool freshman would.

Hi! I'm back!

 

[KIRBYEE]

Why is abortion such a big deal to some people?

An unborn baby has no rights, it's not a citizen. Abortion must be legal.

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
Why is abortion such a big deal to some people?

An unborn baby has no rights, it's not a citizen. Abortion must be legal.

Too bad your mom didn't think like that.

Take a highschool level biology course in human reproduction and you will never look at abortion the same way.

 

[Colt45]

If you don't want an abortion, don't have one... simple enough, yeah?

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Conky
All quotes are taking from the rather liberal LA Times, with the link furnished here: http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...8aug17,0,3145888.story

Obama said: "I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions.

McCain, however, immediately responded that a baby's rights begin at conception. Perhaps seeking to tamp down alarm among conservatives over his recent comment that he's open to a running mate who favors abortion rights, he continued: "I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."

-------------------------

Here's the part I find simply hilarious... Obama, being the highly educated Harvard graduate, doesn't know what the average highschool student knows about human reproduction.

Human life begins at conception, and this is strictly speaking from a scientific point of view.

Barack, despite making far more money than the average highschool science teacher, claims this is "above my pay grade".

The beautiful part is that McCain doesn't flinch on this question and answers it like a highschool freshman would.

Hi! I'm back!

How does Human life begin at conception both the sperm and egg where alive before conception?

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Conky
All quotes are taking from the rather liberal LA Times, with the link furnished here: http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...8aug17,0,3145888.story

Obama said: "I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions.

McCain, however, immediately responded that a baby's rights begin at conception. Perhaps seeking to tamp down alarm among conservatives over his recent comment that he's open to a running mate who favors abortion rights, he continued: "I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."

-------------------------

Here's the part I find simply hilarious... Obama, being the highly educated Harvard graduate, doesn't know what the average highschool student knows about human reproduction.

Human life begins at conception, and this is strictly speaking from a scientific point of view.

Barack, despite making far more money than the average highschool science teacher, claims this is "above my pay grade".

The beautiful part is that McCain doesn't flinch on this question and answers it like a highschool freshman would.

Hi! I'm back!

How does Human life begin at conception both the sperm and egg where alive before conception?

They will teach you this in freshman science class.

Jeez, I really hope you were joking and are not just completely stupid.

 

[dennilfloss]

When he/she transitions from foetus to baby.

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: Colt45
If you don't want an abortion, don't have one... simple enough, yeah?

Abortions or not is not the issue here.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Conky

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
Why is abortion such a big deal to some people?

An unborn baby has no rights, it's not a citizen. Abortion must be legal.

Too bad your mom didn't think like that.

Take a highschool level biology course in human reproduction and you will never look at abortion the same way.

In reality it would not matter to me if my mother had had an abortion.

I have taken graduate level biology courses and I have a good idea how the system works. If I were a woman I woud want to have the final say on if I had children or not.

I read some where that pregnancy increases a woman's morbidity and mortality. I am looking for a link(s).

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Conky

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Conky
All quotes are taking from the rather liberal LA Times, with the link furnished here: http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...8aug17,0,3145888.story

Obama said: "I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions.

McCain, however, immediately responded that a baby's rights begin at conception. Perhaps seeking to tamp down alarm among conservatives over his recent comment that he's open to a running mate who favors abortion rights, he continued: "I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."

-------------------------

Here's the part I find simply hilarious... Obama, being the highly educated Harvard graduate, doesn't know what the average highschool student knows about human reproduction.

Human life begins at conception, and this is strictly speaking from a scientific point of view.

Barack, despite making far more money than the average highschool science teacher, claims this is "above my pay grade".

The beautiful part is that McCain doesn't flinch on this question and answers it like a highschool freshman would.

Hi! I'm back!

How does Human life begin at conception both the sperm and egg where alive before conception?

They will teach you this in freshman science class.

Jeez, I really hope you were joking and are not just completely stupid.

And yet with you're graduate level biology courses you can't answer the question.

 

[Conky]

Again, the issue in question is not whether abortion is right or wrong.

The question is at what point does human life start?

Again, it's very effin basic biology to determine this kind of stuff. We figured it out for all of the animal kingdom many many years ago. :laugh:

Only Obama claims it's above "his pay grade" to figure stuff like that out. McCain blurts out the answer without hesitation.

I'm not crazy about McCain but Obama horrifies my ass with his stupidity. Or lack of truthfulness, you be the judge.

 

[smack Down]

I'm still waiting for how life can start at conception when all conception is combining two living cells.

 

[KIRBYEE]

The question was: At what point does a baby get human rights?

My answer: When it is born.

They're both giving silly answers. Why are presidential candidates arguing about abortion or their faith anyway?

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEEThe question was: At what point does a baby get human rights?

My answer: When it is born.

They're both giving silly answers. Why are presidential candidates arguing about abortion or their faith anyway?

Strangely enough, Obama didn't agree with you, at least before he started running for President.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080228_The_Elephant_in_the_Room__Obama__A_harsh_ideologue_hidden_by_a_feel-good_image.html">That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.

The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.

Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.

Let's be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby.</a>

 

[GroundedSailor]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
The question was: At what point does a baby get human rights?

My answer: When it is born.

They're both giving silly answers. Why are presidential candidates arguing about abortion or their faith anyway?

Because a section of voters believe that to be their main issue, or certainly an important issue on their political agenda.

Originally posted by: Conky

Originally posted by: Colt45
If you don't want an abortion, don't have one... simple enough, yeah?

Abortions or not is not the issue here.

Yes it is. The whole point of raising the conception issue in any political sphere is tacitly tying the discussion to the abortion issue.

Colt45 has it right. If you don't believe in abortion don;t have one. There are others whose culture / faith does not address the issue as Christianity does.. Why should they be forced to give up their choices just because a majority if Christian voters feel so.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Conky
All quotes are taking from the rather liberal LA Times, with the link furnished here: http://www.latimes.com/news/pr...8aug17,0,3145888.story

Obama said: "I think that whether you are looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade." He added that he supports the landmark decision Roe vs. Wade but said the issue has "moral and ethical content" and stressed his commitment to reducing the number of abortions.

McCain, however, immediately responded that a baby's rights begin at conception. Perhaps seeking to tamp down alarm among conservatives over his recent comment that he's open to a running mate who favors abortion rights, he continued: "I will be a pro-life president, and this presidency will have pro-life policies."

-------------------------

Here's the part I find simply hilarious... Obama, being the highly educated Harvard graduate, doesn't know what the average highschool student knows about human reproduction.

Human life begins at conception, and this is strictly speaking from a scientific point of view.

Barack, despite making far more money than the average highschool science teacher, claims this is "above my pay grade".

The beautiful part is that McCain doesn't flinch on this question and answers it like a highschool freshman would.

Hi! I'm back!

Save the cells Save the cells Save the cells Save the cells :roll:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: smack Down
I'm still waiting for how life can start at conception when all conception is combining two living cells.

2 cells=a vote

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Conky
The question is at what point does human life start?

Actually, that's not the question.

The question is, when does a human life become a person?

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
Let's be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby.

It's always convenient to put words into the mouths of those we oppose. So this, "He effectively voted for infanticide" is almost certainly subject to debate. I'm guessing that Obama had a pretty good reason for opposing the bill - it might have been linked together with another, unpalatable measure or included an unacceptable provision.

For example, suppose a bill that banned the killing of already-delivered babies also included a provision that legalized child prostitution. Would you vote for such a bill? I thought not.

If you could provide us with text of the bills, we might be able to figure out what the problem was.

 

[Lemon law]

Since most Americans favor a basic woman's right to choose, McCain is effectively choosing the minority position. But still, the whole whole abortion issue is an extremely complex issue and is basically made possible by advances in Medical science.

But is extremely hard to be a rational total pro lifer and say the fetus has full legal rights at the moment of conception. Most pro lifers will make exceptions, for rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is at stake. Others will add in certain genetic abnormalities such as the certainty of the fetus being born with no brain at all. A whole host of traits can now be tested, and where is that line?

At the same time, its hard to be totally pro choice, at a certain point in the pregnancy, usually beyond the second trimester, many no longer believe abortion should be a casual issue. Then there is that other issue, sometimes the mother may want an abortion, but what about the legal rights of the father?

If their is anything the case of Terry Shiavo taught this nation, that lesson has to be that these decisions should be made by families and not by governments.

Which is why I am so disturbed by asking these questions in a purely religious venue, ask simple questions, and you will simple minded answers that satisfy no one.

 

[mizzou]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Since most Americans favor a basic woman's right to choose, McCain is effectively choosing the minority position. But still, the whole whole abortion issue is an extremely complex issue and is basically made possible by advances in Medical science.

But is extremely hard to be a rational total pro lifer and say the fetus has full legal rights at the moment of conception. Most pro lifers will make exceptions, for rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is at stake. Others will add in certain genetic abnormalities such as the certainty of the fetus being born with no brain at all. A whole host of traits can now be tested, and where is that line?

At the same time, its hard to be totally pro choice, at a certain point in the pregnancy, usually beyond the second trimester, many no longer believe abortion should be a casual issue. Then there is that other issue, sometimes the mother may want an abortion, but what about the legal rights of the father?

If their is anything the case of Terry Shiavo taught this nation, that lesson has to be that these decisions should be made by families and not by governments.

Which is why I am so disturbed by asking these questions in a purely religious venue, ask simple questions, and you will simple minded answers that satisfy no one.

such is the dillema when we legislate morality

 

[Taejin]

You have a baby in your womb that you don't want? You fucking bitch you carry that little saint to term or we'll put you away for life for murder.

 

[winnar111]

Originally posted by: GroundedSailor

Originally posted by: KIRBYEE
The question was: At what point does a baby get human rights?

My answer: When it is born.

They're both giving silly answers. Why are presidential candidates arguing about abortion or their faith anyway?

Because a section of voters believe that to be their main issue, or certainly an important issue on their political agenda.

Originally posted by: Conky

Originally posted by: Colt45
If you don't want an abortion, don't have one... simple enough, yeah?

Abortions or not is not the issue here.

Yes it is. The whole point of raising the conception issue in any political sphere is tacitly tying the discussion to the abortion issue.

Colt45 has it right. If you don't believe in abortion don;t have one. There are others whose culture / faith does not address the issue as Christianity does.. Why should they be forced to give up their choices just because a majority if Christian voters feel so.

Kind of like people forced into tiny cars to satisfy the environuts.

Either way, abortions get rid of probable Democratic voters in mostly Democratic areas of the country.

 

[nageov3t]

I think it is life once it's viable outside the womb... I'm strongly, strongly against 3rd term abortions.

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: XMan

Originally posted by: KIRBYEEThe question was: At what point does a baby get human rights?

My answer: When it is born.

They're both giving silly answers. Why are presidential candidates arguing about abortion or their faith anyway?

Strangely enough, Obama didn't agree with you, at least before he started running for President.

<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080228_The_Elephant_in_the_Room__Obama__A_harsh_ideologue_hidden_by_a_feel-good_image.html">That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.

The act simply prohibited the killing of a baby born alive. To address the concerns of pro-choice lawmakers, the bill included language that said nothing "shall be construed to affirm, deny, expand or contract any legal status or legal right" of the baby. In other words, the bill wasn't intruding on Roe v. Wade.

Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition.

Let's be clear about what Obama did, once in 2003 and twice before that. He effectively voted for infanticide. He voted to allow doctors to deny medically appropriate treatment or, worse yet, actively kill a completely delivered living baby.</a>

Whether one agrees with abortion or not... that act Obama sponsored is fvcked up. The baby was born due to a failed abortion. It should be treated as a person.