If I dont go visit my frozen embryo..

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

I know that it's hard to believe that people like BrianBaru, CaptainFritz28 and learnedSloth are serious (I can hardly believe that they are being serious),

This reminded me of Plato's cave, where people sat ignorant of life outside, beholding shadows.

For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. -- John 3:20

The good news is basically that God is willing to forgive us, but we must also be ready to forgive others. Jesus stresses it multiple times in the Gospels, even right after teaching the Lord's prayer:

For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. -- Matthew 6:14-15

This leads to the sharp divide that can be observed all over the Bible:

But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. -- John 3:21

https://www.elmundotoday.com/2014/04/la-caverna-de-platon-era-en-realidad-un-local-gay-segun-confirman-unos-historiadores/

Today is the day my teachers told me about- “someday you will appreciate learning Spanish”

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

Behold, a tree.

No, it hasn't germinated yet. Potential tree, like a sperm swimming toward an egg is a potential human life.

Exactly. And since it is not life, destroying it is not murder. But once it meets the egg, the process of life begins. If cared for as necessary, by natural means, a baby will be born. Before conception, no such process has begun.

Why is the meeting of egg and sperm the definitive start of life?

Half of fertilized eggs fail to implant on a woman's uterus.

About a fifth of pregnancies end in an early miscarriage within the first five weeks ("chemical pregnancies").

For pregnancies that are clinically validated the miscarriage rate is about 15-25%.

A fertilized egg has about a 1/3 chance of becoming a human baby. Is having procreative sex wrong if, on average, it's "killing" 2 potential humans for each viable human it produces?

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

I don't think a fertilized egg has much more moral status than a seperate egg or spermatozoa, and these are squandered all the time by design. I don't think a failure of birth control should imprison a woman to carry the child to term. I think women have an intrinsic right to choose when and with whom to procreate that cannot be superseded by a failure of birth control (let alone a sexual assault).

Wait wait wait... so you're telling me that you think we should be able to kill babies in the womb simply because women should be allowed to have sex without consequence?

Look, actions have consequences. Sex leads to pregnancy; it's simply a fact of life. To say that we have a "right" to be free from natural processes is like saying I have a right to smoke for all my life without getting lung cancer.

I don't think pregnancy is a necessary consequence of sex in 2024. An IUD almost perfectly prevents pregnancy. I don't think it's wrong for women to use IUDs. Some woman can't use an IUD and instead use other, less reliable methods of birth control and I don't consider it their fault when alternative methods fail.

The smoking analogy is actually a great one, because we do basically have consequence-free nicotine products now. Smoking an unfiltered cigarette is the same as raw dogging it in the middle of your fertile window. Vaping might be like condomed sex. Nicorette gum is like an IUD.

I think a woman's life is more valuable than a fetal life unless she chooses otherwise.

Very, very rarely does it come down to this, but when it does I agree. The woman should have the ability to choose whether she or her child dies, but only when those are the only possible outcomes.

So we agree that a fetal life is not exactly as valuable as any other human life.

Prioritizing the woman's right in this case is also a pragmatic way to support children — a woman who terminates a dangerous pregnancy may live to have more children in the future, the same is true for a woman who aborts in a bad situation (too young, abusive partner, etc.), and in general more children will be born to parents who are ready and willing to raise them if abortion is available.

Your logic here is just that if we kill all the children who will have bad lives, then we are supporting children! (Except for the ones who would've had bad lives, but it doesn't matter because they would have had bad lives anyways.)

The value of your life has nothing to do with its quality. A man being tortured and held in a concentration camp has just as much value as a man who just won a Nobel peace prize. All are equal,regardless of circumstances. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to improve those circumstances, which is why I believe a key part of being pro-life is supporting families and mothers who have chosen life, and helping to ensure that their circumstances are bettered. But the first step to that is having a life to better in the first place.

Nope, that's definitely not what I said. My logic here is that forcing unwilling parents to raise unwanted children is going to reliably produce bad results for parents, children, and society.

I think the best approach for both pro-life and pro-choice folks is to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies before they occur, but that requires more and better birth control, which apparently offends the sensibilities of some Alabamans.

Is that really the only way to go about it?
Perhaps if less people had sex who are not willing to support a child, perhaps if people realized that *GASP* there are consequences to their actions, then maybe we wouldn't have men running around impregnation dozens of women and then leaving them to fend for themselves.

This is just as much a fault of men, if not more so, and to ignore that is to be blind to the situation.

Sure, for some people abstinence might be a good solution. But experience suggests that abstinence-first isn't a very useful way to prevent unwanted pregnancies. I think human sexuality is a natural part of most peoples lives. I don't think it's outrageous for men and women take preventative measures that limit the risk of pregnancy and STIs from sex. And I don't think that the failure of these reasonable preventative measures necessarily puts a woman on the hook to carry a baby to term. A safe, early-term abortion doesn't strike me as much more morally meaningful than just having successfully used birth control in the first place. But, more and better birth control would mean fewer abortions, which is something I think everyone would like.

[CaptainFritz28]

Behold, a tree.

No, it hasn't germinated yet. Potential tree, like a sperm swimming toward an egg is a potential human life.

Exactly. And since it is not life, destroying it is not murder. But once it meets the egg, the process of life begins. If cared for as necessary, by natural means, a baby will be born. Before conception, no such process has begun.

Why is the meeting of egg and sperm the definitive start of life?

Half of fertilized eggs fail to implant on a woman's uterus.

About a fifth of pregnancies end in an early miscarriage within the first five weeks ("chemical pregnancies").

For pregnancies that are clinically validated the miscarriage rate is about 15-25%.

A fertilized egg has about a 1/3 chance of becoming a human baby. Is having procreative sex wrong if, on average, it's "killing" 2 potential humans for each viable human it produces?

There have been times throughout history when infant deaths were greater than 50%. All you have said is that a fertilized egg has a 66% mortality rate.

The fact that a child is not born for every instance of conception does not mean that a life is not created at conception, just as the fact that a child does not survive infancy for every birth does not mean that they are not alive.

[Krippe]

The ruling does not necessarily reflect the views of all Christians. It's wrong to loop everybody in one large group, that's a failure to appreciate the broadness and diversity in views among the church. Take a look at a video of different denominations and you'll see pretty quickly. The ruling of the Alabama Supreme Court has no bearing on the Christian faith. Christians can use their faith to best interpret their agreement with said ruling, but just because a Supreme Court in one state made a controversial decision doesn't mean all Christians are bad people. That's quite a jump.

Just as Christians proclaim that they "don't hate the sinner, just the sin", I do not hate the religious, just the religion.

So, then, you hate the teachings that all are created equal, that we should love even our enemies, that we should be charitable whenever possible, that we should aid the widowed and poor?

These are the teachings of Christianity, the religion. If you hate the religion, I will presume you mean it in its entirety.

Unless you mean to clarify that you hate the amalgamation of Christianity which people use to justify acts of violence, which are contrary to the religion itself?

Acts of violence are contrary to the religion itself?

https://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.html

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

Exactly. And since it is not life, destroying it is not murder. But once it meets the egg, the process of life begins. If cared for as necessary, by natural means, a baby will be born. Before conception, no such process has begun.

Why is the meeting of egg and sperm the definitive start of life?

Half of fertilized eggs fail to implant on a woman's uterus.

About a fifth of pregnancies end in an early miscarriage within the first five weeks ("chemical pregnancies").

For pregnancies that are clinically validated the miscarriage rate is about 15-25%.

A fertilized egg has about a 1/3 chance of becoming a human baby. Is having procreative sex wrong if, on average, it's "killing" 2 potential humans for each viable human it produces?

There have been times throughout history when infant deaths were greater than 50%. All you have said is that a fertilized egg has a 66% mortality rate.

The fact that a child is not born for every instance of conception does not mean that a life is not created at conception, just as the fact that a child does not survive infancy for every birth does not mean that they are not alive.

I was pushing back against your claim that "But once it (sperm) meets the egg, the process of life begins. If cared for as necessary, by natural means, a baby will be born", which is just factually untrue 2/3rds of the time.

It's not my contention that survivability determines moral worth. 100% of humans die but our lives have value anyhow.

[DarthPorg36]

Why is the meeting of egg and sperm the definitive start of life?

Half of fertilized eggs fail to implant on a woman's uterus.

About a fifth of pregnancies end in an early miscarriage within the first five weeks ("chemical pregnancies").

For pregnancies that are clinically validated the miscarriage rate is about 15-25%.

A fertilized egg has about a 1/3 chance of becoming a human baby. Is having procreative sex wrong if, on average, it's "killing" 2 potential humans for each viable human it produces?

There have been times throughout history when infant deaths were greater than 50%. All you have said is that a fertilized egg has a 66% mortality rate.

The fact that a child is not born for every instance of conception does not mean that a life is not created at conception, just as the fact that a child does not survive infancy for every birth does not mean that they are not alive.

I was pushing back against your claim that "But once it (sperm) meets the egg, the process of life begins. If cared for as necessary, by natural means, a baby will be born", which is just factually untrue 2/3rds of the time.

It's not my contention that survivability determines moral worth. 100% of humans die but our lives have value anyhow.

I mean if you use empirical data, I'm immortal!

[learnedSloth]

100% of humans die but our lives have value anyhow.

Giving that value to all human life is what the pro-life movement is about.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

100% of humans die but our lives have value anyhow.

Giving that value to all human life is what the pro-life movement is about.

This entire convo will hinge on where we define the start of human life / moral relevance. I don't think a zygote is much more morally relevant than the sperm and egg that created it, so I'm not particularly fussed about early-term abortions.

[kingofthepirates]

This entire convo will hinge on where we define the start of human life / moral relevance. I don't think a zygote is much more morally relevant than the sperm and egg that created it, so I'm not particularly fussed about early-term abortions.

I really do agree with this. I think the single most important part of the overall answer to all our wild situations, speculations, and beliefs lies in answering the simple question of when 'life' truly begins, and how everything works, like whether or not we have souls, the secrets of consciousness, and other related bits. I believe to answer this, we simply must wait for science to catch up and give us some kind of concrete evidence. until then, when we get a scientifically provable and verifiable answer, I argue that we must still retain abortion, for the reasons I listed previously (that is, a safety net, which, I'll add, never hurts to have, and as a tool to help those who need it).

[BrianBaru]

There are two closely related issues here:
1. The Science of Life
2. The Value of Life

1. The Science of Life
Science shows that human life begins at the fertilization of a human egg. From the moment of conception, the fertilized egg is a living, unique, and growing human. When fertilization is complete, a unique genetic human entity exists. To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.
a. Upon fertilization, a new organism exists after fertilization that did not exist before conception. That new life is not simply a continuation of the life of the sperm or egg cell. Rather, it is the life of a distinct, unique, new individual who has never existed before in history and will never exist again.
b. Nothing will be added to this new organism except nutrition. This new organism has its own human DNA that is distinct from the mother and father, meaning that it is a unique human person. From fertilization onward, it is a new organism that is unique, alive and growing.
c. Cells start dividing within an hour of fertilization This new life continues to grow and develop until death occurs due to injury or illness.
d. Every fertilized human egg dies, or grows into a human
e. This new human life will continue to grow and develop as long as nutrition is provided and its life is not ended through violence or illness.
f. Human Life changes continuously - A human is very different at age 85 than at 40. By age 16, the development of the brain allows for most adolescents have fully developed abstract reasoning, which is why it is difficult to teach calculus in grade school. Five year olds cannot survive on their own. One year olds have just learned to walk. Humans have a long period of development. That does not mean they are not humans from conception on.

2. The Value of Life
Preborn babies are the most vulnerable and helpless members of our society. The value of a human being does not depend on where they live, physical shape, what race they are, what they look like, or how old they are. Each person has inherent worth because of who and what he or she is - a member of the human species. Bad things happen when we don’t recognize the value of human life.
a. The National Socialists of Germany did not value certain lives, which led to the death of homosexuals, Slavs, Roma and 6 million Jews.
b. Margaret Sanger did not value Negro lives, and founded what became Planned Parenthood to discourage and eventually eliminate, “the defective and diseased elements of humanity” and eliminate the “dysgenic horror story” of blacks who reproduced “carelessly and disastrously.” We now have seen over 60 million abortions in the USA, 4 out of 10 Black pregnancies aborted, and Planned Parenthood puts 86% of its Abortion Facilities in minority neighborhoods
c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

The Declaration of Independence in the USA says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The founding Fathers saw the clear relationship between the Right to Life and Liberty. A really slippery slope when life is devalued.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

There are two closely related issues here:
1. The Science of Life
2. The Value of Life

1. The Science of Life
Science shows that human life begins at the fertilization of a human egg. From the moment of conception, the fertilized egg is a living, unique, and growing human. When fertilization is complete, a unique genetic human entity exists. To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.
a. Upon fertilization, a new organism exists after fertilization that did not exist before conception. That new life is not simply a continuation of the life of the sperm or egg cell. Rather, it is the life of a distinct, unique, new individual who has never existed before in history and will never exist again.
b. Nothing will be added to this new organism except nutrition. This new organism has its own human DNA that is distinct from the mother and father, meaning that it is a unique human person. From fertilization onward, it is a new organism that is unique, alive and growing.
c. Cells start dividing within an hour of fertilization This new life continues to grow and develop until death occurs due to injury or illness.
d. Every fertilized human egg dies, or grows into a human
e. This new human life will continue to grow and develop as long as nutrition is provided and its life is not ended through violence or illness.
f. Human Life changes continuously - A human is very different at age 85 than at 40. By age 16, the development of the brain allows for most adolescents have fully developed abstract reasoning, which is why it is difficult to teach calculus in grade school. Five year olds cannot survive on their own. One year olds have just learned to walk. Humans have a long period of development. That does not mean they are not humans from conception on.

2. The Value of Life
Preborn babies are the most vulnerable and helpless members of our society. The value of a human being does not depend on where they live, physical shape, what race they are, what they look like, or how old they are. Each person has inherent worth because of who and what he or she is - a member of the human species. Bad things happen when we don’t recognize the value of human life.
a. The National Socialists of Germany did not value certain lives, which led to the death of homosexuals, Slavs, Roma and 6 million Jews.
b. Margaret Sanger did not value Negro lives, and founded what became Planned Parenthood to discourage and eventually eliminate, “the defective and diseased elements of humanity” and eliminate the “dysgenic horror story” of blacks who reproduced “carelessly and disastrously.” We now have seen over 60 million abortions in the USA, 4 out of 10 Black pregnancies aborted, and Planned Parenthood puts 86% of its Abortion Facilities in minority neighborhoods
c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

The Declaration of Independence in the USA says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The founding Fathers saw the clear relationship between the Right to Life and Liberty. A really slippery slope when life is devalued.

You're conflating science with morality. It's true that a zygote creates a genetically unique form. It does not obviously follow that the zygote therefore has personhood and all the moral obligations that come with that.

Qualities such as sentience, the capacity to feel pain, consciousness, etc., are often cited as criteria for moral consideration. By these standards, the early stages of embryonic development — prior to the development of the central nervous system and the capacity for sentience — may not meet the criteria for personhood. It's not a scientific question, but an ethical/moral one. None of us will have a definitive, provable answer about when personhood starts.

The rest of your post is just a series of slippery slope fallacies. Widespread, early-term abortion is most available in democratic and liberal societies. The harshest prohibitions on abortion exist in human-rights-abusing theocracies. It's obviously not the case that our stance towards abortion is a critical factor in determining our views on the value of other human lives.

[Jamiet99uk]

There are two closely related issues here:
1. The Science of Life
2. The Value of Life

1. The Science of Life
Science shows that human life begins at the fertilization of a human egg. From the moment of conception, the fertilized egg is a living, unique, and growing human. When fertilization is complete, a unique genetic human entity exists. To say that the beginning of human life cannot be determined scientifically is utterly ridiculous.
a. Upon fertilization, a new organism exists after fertilization that did not exist before conception. That new life is not simply a continuation of the life of the sperm or egg cell. Rather, it is the life of a distinct, unique, new individual who has never existed before in history and will never exist again.
b. Nothing will be added to this new organism except nutrition. This new organism has its own human DNA that is distinct from the mother and father, meaning that it is a unique human person. From fertilization onward, it is a new organism that is unique, alive and growing.
c. Cells start dividing within an hour of fertilization This new life continues to grow and develop until death occurs due to injury or illness.
d. Every fertilized human egg dies, or grows into a human
e. This new human life will continue to grow and develop as long as nutrition is provided and its life is not ended through violence or illness.
f. Human Life changes continuously - A human is very different at age 85 than at 40. By age 16, the development of the brain allows for most adolescents have fully developed abstract reasoning, which is why it is difficult to teach calculus in grade school. Five year olds cannot survive on their own. One year olds have just learned to walk. Humans have a long period of development. That does not mean they are not humans from conception on.

2. The Value of Life
Preborn babies are the most vulnerable and helpless members of our society. The value of a human being does not depend on where they live, physical shape, what race they are, what they look like, or how old they are. Each person has inherent worth because of who and what he or she is - a member of the human species. Bad things happen when we don’t recognize the value of human life.
a. The National Socialists of Germany did not value certain lives, which led to the death of homosexuals, Slavs, Roma and 6 million Jews.
b. Margaret Sanger did not value Negro lives, and founded what became Planned Parenthood to discourage and eventually eliminate, “the defective and diseased elements of humanity” and eliminate the “dysgenic horror story” of blacks who reproduced “carelessly and disastrously.” We now have seen over 60 million abortions in the USA, 4 out of 10 Black pregnancies aborted, and Planned Parenthood puts 86% of its Abortion Facilities in minority neighborhoods
c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

The Declaration of Independence in the USA says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” The founding Fathers saw the clear relationship between the Right to Life and Liberty. A really slippery slope when life is devalued.

If all of the above is true, why does Alabama have the death penalty?

[Jamiet99uk]

c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

As a communist I must respond to this particular point.

First of all I'm not sure where you're getting the 200 million figure from but I expect it is an exaggeration.

Second of all, capitalists value money over life. Capitalism commoditises human life. The 20th century saw over 100 million killed by capitalism.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

As a communist I must respond to this particular point.

First of all I'm not sure where you're getting the 200 million figure from but I expect it is an exaggeration.

Second of all, capitalists value money over life. Capitalism commoditises human life. The 20th century saw over 100 million killed by capitalism.

Ugh, why are we back to the death accounting wars? This ends up being a dumb cul de sac we have to travel around in all of these conversations.

[Jamiet99uk]

c. The Communists value power over life. The 20th century saw over 200 million killed by the communists, not counting wars.

As a communist I must respond to this particular point.

First of all I'm not sure where you're getting the 200 million figure from but I expect it is an exaggeration.

Second of all, capitalists value money over life. Capitalism commoditises human life. The 20th century saw over 100 million killed by capitalism.

Ugh, why are we back to the death accounting wars? This ends up being a dumb cul de sac we have to travel around in all of these conversations.

I agree with you.

I just couldn't let that silly point stand.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

As a communist I must respond to this particular point.

First of all I'm not sure where you're getting the 200 million figure from but I expect it is an exaggeration.

Second of all, capitalists value money over life. Capitalism commoditises human life. The 20th century saw over 100 million killed by capitalism.

Ugh, why are we back to the death accounting wars? This ends up being a dumb cul de sac we have to travel around in all of these conversations.

I agree with you.

I just couldn't let that silly point stand.

Your implicit defense of Soviet and CCP communism is also silly lol. There should just be a separate thread where you all throw random numbers at one another and wait to see whether it changes anyone's mind.

[Jamiet99uk]

Ugh, why are we back to the death accounting wars? This ends up being a dumb cul de sac we have to travel around in all of these conversations.

I agree with you.

I just couldn't let that silly point stand.

Your implicit defense of Soviet and CCP communism is also silly lol. There should just be a separate thread where you all throw random numbers at one another and wait to see whether it changes anyone's mind.

What implicit defence? I did not mention any specific country or party.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

I agree with you.

I just couldn't let that silly point stand.

Your implicit defense of Soviet and CCP communism is also silly lol. There should just be a separate thread where you all throw random numbers at one another and wait to see whether it changes anyone's mind.

What implicit defence? I did not mention any specific country or party.

You defended communism in response to a post that includes numbers of dead that clearly relate to mismanagement/atrocities committed by the CCP and USSR.

But of course there's fine print you didn't write lol. You somehow didn't mean your comments should apply to either of the two major examples of real life communism that the original post was clearly referring to. You probably also don't mean to defend Cuba or Venezuela...or really any actual communist government. But capitalism is bad too and you've got the *numbers* to prove it lol.

It's just dumb on both sides.

[learnedSloth]

Didn't Marx invent capitalism to make communism look better?