Those Who Say "Life Begins At Conception" Need To Research "Implantation Failure"

Gizmo j

Senior member
Nov 9, 2013
899
247
116
When a woman has semen shot into her there is a 99% chance her egg will get fertilized, but there I only a 20% chance her fertilized egg wont get flushed out of her body.

This is called "Implantation Failure", look it up.

No, YOU must "look it up" and then post the link here. You must document your claims in P&N, whenever possible.

Perknose
Forum Director
 
Last edited by a moderator:

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
58,128
12,314
136
1) Source for 99% fertilization chance?
2) They could also just shut the fuck up and stay out of other people's uteruses
3) You're laboring under the impression they give a damn about facts, or really, people, when they don't
5) I missed number four
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
When a woman has semen shot into her there is a 99% chance her egg will get fertilized, but there I only a 20% chance her fertilized egg wont get flushed out of her body.

This is called "Implantation Failure", look it up.

Maybe THAT'S why they changed the definition...

Now, "life" begins when you tell your buddy that you're going to nail the blonde on the dance floor. :cool:

In any case, I think I'll just park this here for consideration.

1616462298800.png
 

NWRMidnight

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,930
2,558
136
When a woman has semen shot into her there is a 99% chance her egg will get fertilized, but there I only a 20% chance her fertilized egg wont get flushed out of her body.

This is called "Implantation Failure", look it up.
I have no intentions of derailing this topic into a religious or any other argument, just want to point a couple things out:

The bible says life begins at birth, when god breaths air into their lungs. There is actually NOTHING in the bible about abortion. Which derails the argument that life starts at conception on religious grounds.

Christians use Science to advance their argument about abortion, which is why their arguments over the years have been getting more in depth such as trimester, pregnancy time lines, etc. But Christians ignore science when it comes to homosexuality. Christians (majority, but not all) only use Science and manipulate the bible (cherry pick sentences/verses) to fit their narrative, and refuse to consider the Science and full passages of the bible that puts things in the proper context, if it goes against their narrative/belief/interpretation.
 
Last edited:

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,667
13,406
146
When a woman has semen shot into her there is a 99% chance her egg will get fertilized, but there I only a 20% chance her fertilized egg wont get flushed out of her body.

This is called "Implantation Failure", look it up.

I made a similar argument in a recent thread and in the past.

They always make excuses why it’s fine if the embryo dies naturally or that they are not responsible for the outcome of the sex they have.
Let me explain my issue with disregarding spontaneous abortion vs choosing abortion. (I’m not going to jump on you for your beliefs. Your intentions seem to be good)

I assume you being pro-life would not approve of someone taking RU486. RU486 has a 95% efficacy rate of causing an abortion.

I also assume you being pro-life have no issue with married couples having children whenever they care to try.

Well as parents age their risk of spontaneous abortion or miscarriage After conception increases until it’s above 80% in their mid forties.
screen-shot-2015-07-22-at-8-39-09-am.png


The moral hazard that pro-lifers state they care about is causing the death of a child.

A woman taking RU486 has a 95% chance to abort a fetus after conception.

A pro-life couple in their mid- forties trying to conceive have an 80% chance of abortion or miscarriage after EACH conception until she successfully makes it through 9 months.

The moral hazard that pro-lifers state they care about is causing the death of a child.

In case 1 a single fetus is likely aborted. In the second multiple fetuses are likely aborted. Yet only the first case is “wrong” per the pro-life position.

Both cases rest upon the “parents” making decisions with a similar level of risk for causing a dead fetus.

How do you reconcile these cases from the pro-life standpoint of fetus=child?

If the argument is one person wanted the abortion and the other wanted a child are we saying it’s acceptable to kill as many fetuses (children) as we have to until we get a live birth?

How is that pro-life?
It only makes logical sense if the reason isn’t to prevent the deaths of “children” but to control women’s reproduction.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,667
13,406
146
Poorly thought out thread title proposes a meaningless proposition.

The science says life did not start at conception as both the sperm and egg were alive before and after conception. Simple logic says a fertilized egg may become no one, (as the op states many fail to implant ), or may become 1-6 babies in 9 months as individuals and identical twins through sextuplets are an actual thing.

So while anyone living can trace their life back to a fertilized egg it’s inherently unknowable that a fertilized egg at conception will become anyone or multiple anyone’s at all.
 

NWRMidnight

Platinum Member
Jun 18, 2001
2,930
2,558
136
The science says life did not start at conception as both the sperm and egg were alive before and after conception. Simple logic says a fertilized egg may become no one, (as the op states many fail to implant ), or may become 1-6 babies in 9 months as individuals and identical twins through sextuplets are an actual thing.

So while anyone living can trace their life back to a fertilized egg it’s inherently unknowable that a fertilized egg at conception will become anyone or multiple anyone’s at all.
It's pointless to try and explain it to him. See my previous response, as it pretty much fits most conservatives, not just Christians.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,719
2,064
136
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: rommelrommel

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,527
5,045
136
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.


Timmy!!!!
 

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
5,542
2,849
136
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.
Sending a link of your blog to a bunch of your mouth breathing friends who read it while chortling like Beavis and butthead does not a peer review process make.

This paper is trash.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,099
5,639
126
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.

Moot.
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
You hear that imported_tajmahal? You committed mass murder growing up with all that masterbation you did.. you didn't even think about the children.

Going to cost him a few bucks too.


Texas bill would fine men $100 each time they masturbate

1616492581024.png


A Texas lawmaker has proposed a bill that would fine a man $100 each time he masturbates.

The bill also imposes a 24-hour waiting period if a guy wants a colonoscopy or a vasectomy, or if he’s in the market for some Viagra.

Rep. Jessica Farrar, a Democrat, knows her bill isn’t going to get very far. But she proposed it last week to make a point and give male lawmakers a taste of their own medicine.

Farrar has long been an advocate of women’s health in a state that has made it extremely difficult for women to get abortions. And the bill, by pointing out a sexist double standard, is meant to shine a light on the obstacles women deal with when it comes to their health care.

“Let’s look at what Texas has done to women,” Farrar told CNN. “What if men had to undergo the same intrusive procedures?”

Even the name is a jab

Farrar’s bill would penalize men for masturbation because such behavior is a failure to preserve the sanctity of life and “an act against an unborn child.”

Even the bill’s name – “A Man’s Right to Know Act” – is a jab at a pamphlet Texas doctors are required to give women seeking abortions.

Backlash from political opponents

Republicans have lashed out at Farrar’s bill.

“I’m embarrassed for Representative Farrar. Her attempt to compare to the abortion issue shows a lack of a basic understanding of human biology,” said Rep. Tony Tinderholt in a statement.

“I would recommend that she consider taking a high school biology class from a local public or charter school before filing another bill on the matter.”

Tinderholt recently proposed a bill that would charge abortion providers and women receiving abortions with murder.

Access to abortions in Texas

Texas has quite a one-two punch to keep women from getting abortions. One: strict laws. Two: Lack of clinics.

Texas doesn’t allow abortions for women past the 20-week mark unless their life is endangered. Under this law, women who are pregnant with an unviable fetus are forced to carry to term. Additionally, women must receive state-directed counseling, must have an ultrasound and a provider must describe the image of the unborn child to the woman.

As of 2014, some 96% of Texas counties had no clinics that provided abortions, and roughly 43% of women lived in those counties, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

And since 2014 the number of facilities providing abortions in Texas has plummeted from 44 to18 after the state passed restrictions on abortion doctors and clinics. The restrictions were eventually struck down by the Supreme Court, but the damage was done.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
23,174
12,833
136
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.
Evolutionary dead end talking.
Evolutionary dead end talking.
Evolutionary dead end talking.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,667
13,406
146
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.
Direct from your “scientific paper”

“One of the basic insights of modern biology is that life is continuous, with living cells giving rise to new types of cells. “

As I said earlier. All human life came from a conception but not all conceptions end in human life.

It’s not a hard concept.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,562
29,171
146
Hate to tell you guys, but science says that human life begins at conception. Case closed. The only ones that disagree are political hacks, religious nut birds and fucking liars. and i can see we've heard from them all.

Including a link to the scientific peer reviewed paper.

nope.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,357
5,111
136
The science says life did not start at conception as both the sperm and egg were alive before and after conception. Simple logic says a fertilized egg may become no one, (as the op states many fail to implant ), or may become 1-6 babies in 9 months as individuals and identical twins through sextuplets are an actual thing.

So while anyone living can trace their life back to a fertilized egg it’s inherently unknowable that a fertilized egg at conception will become anyone or multiple anyone’s at all.
In other words, life is a continuum, not an event.