I hope Russ' fixes it soon too.
Well Linda, RAZD can produce any "data" he wishes, it does not take away the diabolical reality. "out of sight, out of mind" as they say.
Journey of the unborn child:
http://www.guilfoy.org/journey.htmlPeople are often surprised when they view the reality. They have been lied to for so long that it's a clump of cells or fetal tissue mass, and when they see ears, eyes, fingers, toes, colon, legs, tongue, arms, ribs, etc. of this little few-week old person, they are taken aback. There is absolutely no denying the humanity - the personhood of the child.
Here are some pictures of the aftermarth of 7 week and older aborted babies. (excuse the graphic nature of these pictures):
http://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures.htmlhttp://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures_2.htmlhttp://www.abortionno.org/Resources/pictures_3.html88% of abortions are conducted at the end of 14 weeks. So when/if you look at those pictures, consider that carefully.
Either one believes that human life starts and becomes a person at conception (granting it civil rights), or that it starts after a baby is born.
I like this:
Human Life: This is any living entity that has DNA from the species homo sapiens. (1)
This includes: Zygote, embryo, fetus, newborn, toddler, child, teen, adult, and elder. People hold different values of life on these stages. You hold value on the stages after birth, while we hold value on the stages after conception.
Human Person: This is any human life that is considered to be a person. Our laws and constitution grant human person civil rights. One of these rights is the right to life. The disagreement is that an embryo/unborn child doesn’t become a person until after birth, and thus doesn’t contain those civil rights given to all of us. This is the core disagreement.
Murder: This is the pre-determined or simply the act of taking a human life. This act of murder is the act of trampling upon someone’s civil rights; which relates to the civil right of life. Our government finds us at value as human persons, and protects us from murder.
The arguments: Is an unborn baby/fetus alive? If it is alive is it a human life? If it’s a human life is it a human person? If it’s a human person then the act of removing it’s life is removing it’s civil rights and thus committing murder. If I can get through those phases and reach the end, than I can conclude that abortions (ending the life of the fetus entity which is human, alive, and a person) is immoral, illegal, and protected by our civil rights.
I. Life a. Any form of living animal or vegetable.
b. life (lif) Pronunciation Key (*1)
n. pl. lives (livz)
The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism.
c. Our fetus/unborn child is obviously alive. It is not inanimate matter because over time it grows and displays motion. By this textbook definition, we know that it’s alive, but can it be considered human life?
II. Human Life a. What makes it a human life? I believe it needs to follow certain characteristics to be a human life and thus a human person:
“…is biologically alive. It fulfills the four criteria needed to establish biological life:
metabolism,
growth,
reaction to stimuli, and
reproduction.” (4)
b. Metabolism: It contains the function of a metabolism (as it seeks nutrients from food supplied by a mother, and contains a self-governed method of processing these nutrients)
c. Growth: It has the ability of growth. Nothing new will be added from the moment of conception to the unborn child. Upon conception, the child contains all the chromosomes needed for it’s growth, personality, height, characteristics, etc. All that is needed to fulfill the plan of it’s DNA is time, and nutrient/food. Over time it grows it’s ligaments, nerves, bones, etc. A key here is that nothing will be added after conception: rather it just needs to grow.
d. Reproduction: It’s DNA already contains the functions it will need to design that needed to reproduce at puberty.
e. Response to stimuli: This is something overlooked. Many believe an unborn baby is not a alive because it has no pain stimuli, but that is untrue. It contains a pain circuit (connection of nerves from a sense, such as he olfactory nerve) to the brain at early stages in it’s first trimester. This, and the addition of other nerves in the head, feet, hands, gives it the pain-stimuli required to be alive.
f. Adaptation to the environment: A child is able to develop taste buds in the tongue during the first trimester, and studies have down (in the mid to upper portions of a pregnancy) that an unborn baby is able to learnt not to intake sour fluids injected in the mother, and well as desire sweeter fluids.
g. With this, I can show that the fetus is obviously alive. It is part of the Homo sapient species, and displays all those characteristics to grant it life. The only issue now is that the entity is not a human person, and even though it’s alive, it does not contain the civil rights that a human person does.
III. So when does human personhood begin? a. As a pro-abortionist, you must be able to make the claim that the fetus has no personhood. To do this, you must show how non-persons can turn into persons.
b. As a pro-lifer, I must prove that personhood is developed before birth. Human personhood begins at conception. Here all DNA is set to fully guide the development of the unborn child. All 42 chromosomes are in place, and all that is needed is nutrients and time. This is the genetic view that human life starts at conception (5)
c. Now we must look at the stages of growth. Remembering that 88% of abortions are conducted at the end of 14 weeks, we look at the time period. And what are we looking for? We are trying to identify those things that make an unborn child the same as the rest of us. We are looking for those things that make the unborn child alive, and a human person.
d. For times sake, we’ll look at a handful that support our claim that this indeed is human life, and thus warrant sit being a human person and having civil rights.
5 Weeks: the olfactory nerve, which is integral to the sense of smell, is present on the 35th day after conception.
-Pain receptors appear in the mouth
6 Weeks: The foundation of the sense of smell is established on the 39th day when nerve fibers in the brain connect with the olfactory lobe
-Development of Neocortex (largest portion of the brain)
-This is extremely important because all the parts in in place to complete pain circuitry.
-This means a child has developed the ability to feel pain in late gestation.
8 Weeks: -At eight weeks after conception, local stimuli can induce partial closing of the fingers, opening of the mouth, and squinting.
-Taste buds
-More taste buds unborn than a born child.
9 Weeks: -Pain receptors appear in Face, palms, and soles of the feet.
10 Weeks: Response to sounds. This shows it’s ability to react with it’s environment.
11 Weeks: the child will open its mouth and suck a finger.
-pain pathways are running from sensory receptors in the skin to those in the brain.
An unborn child can quickly develop the organs and systems a born child does. It contains the ability to exert motion like a newborn. It contains senses. It can learn. These support those definitions called upon to be considered human life. With this only in the early stages of development, how can we not consider it human life? Like the rest of us, it merely requires time to grow and nutrients to keep it’s group. It contains the ability to produce it’s cell’s, and shows all those things that we ourselves use to define ourselves as being alive.
IV. Is this murder? a. mur..der [mur-der] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
..noun
1.
Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
b. Do I consider this the murder of a human person who is alive? Yes. Do I consider this to be against our civil liberties? Yes.
Why is any of this important? It is of dire importance because we are discussing life here. About 4000 fetus’ (correct my math if you can) are eliminated every day through abortion (IN THE UNITED STATES ALONE). If this is true, and the fetus is considered alive, than we would be ending 4000 potential lives. If this fetus is human life, than not only are we eliminating the life of an entity, but we are eliminating our own species. If you grant these personhoods, as I explained, than we are committing a mass murder and merely ignoring it. It’s a rather grave issue. We grant human life as the most valuable gift in the world (granted through Gods, religions, and governments). To ignore the removal of this gift to individuals who cannot defend themselves is immoral. It places mankind in the position to defend the death, the mute, and those who cannot defend themselves. In a court of law, our government provides a lawyer at a human’s defense, if this human cannot defend itself. As humans, we must take on this position, and step forward to defend those whose voices cannot be heard.
This stretches beyond the issue of “I am a woman and it is my body”. In respects to that comment, we are very well discussing the right of a body; yet this body is that unborn child. Just as the woman holds rights to her form, so does a child hold those same civil rights; whether it is in the womb or not.
Since we can consider the unborn child alive, part of our homo sapient species, and a human person, than our government has granted it the same civil rights that those carrying the child have.
It is our duty to make sure the value of life, and of human being, is withheld. An unborn baby has the right to live, and do the rest of us.
AMEN!
All of us here had parents that said "yes" to life. Ok for us to sit and debate isn't it? We've already been born. To allow a baby to live, is not elevating its rights above the Mother. It is respecting a human being's right to live as we have been given.
The Nazi doctors experimented with BORN human beings (adults/children) in concentration camps in ways that make vivisection seem like playtime. Abortionists are just as bad and inhumane. The harvesting of selected "parts" from aborted human beings and sale of the same is monstrous beyond words.
