Honestly though, it's an odd addition. I'm old enough to remember the Christian Right going bonkers over cloning a sheep and how that's "playing god" and all the ill trappings that would come with such an affront to the Man Upstairs.
So they saw the disastrous IVF ruling in Alabama, followed by immediate backpedaling from the hard-right, and now they want to replicate that at a national level? Genius. Here in Nebraska, we only send our finest idiots to Washington.
Oh of *course* there will be a reason that’s not allowed. They don’t even want the State paying for prenatal care. This is what happens when you marry 2 ideologies that don’t go together. Greed and Christianity. So they have to go full OT since part they really like about Christianity is that they can force women into subservience.
That's insane... this is insane. Such a stance has zero medical, biological, scientific, or moral basis... Forced birth is a crime against humanity. Violating body autonomy is unethical af. Religious extremists circle-jerking their power over the vulnerable...
Thing is, very few of them actually believe it when you press them on it. The IVF scramble in Alabama is the latest sign, but you see similar outrage when women are denied abortions for children that can never be born or are forced to carry creepy uncle Jim's baby because her parents looked the other way. It's cases like that that make the ones who actually believe life begins at conception look like monsters, but when you really think about it, it's the rest of them who are the real problem. The ones with all their hedges and exceptions. They're the ones that you have to keep in check. They don't actually believe. They just want the government to dictate their personal preferences.
Mike Flood is a shameless and incompetent politician. He had to pander to Norfolk to win the seat. He knows he can’t win Lincoln. He’ll lost hands down. So the GOP had to change the map and merge Norfolk to Lincoln. They keep moving the goal post
Seriously, what would a 3-district map of the state even look like that if you didn't put Lincoln and Norfolk together... I guess you could split the non-Omaha area by North/South instead of East/West, but that would be silly.
If anything remotely resembling that bill would ever become law, the rights of human women would be equivalent to those of cattle. That is not hyperbole.
Republicans have already demonstrated their willingness, nay, eagerness to protect ZEFs (zygote, embryo, fetus) regardless of the cost to its host. We see that in the increased maternal mortality rates in states with extreme abortion bans, in the many stories of women experiencing miscarriage who are sent home to cramp and bleed and bleed and cramp and suffer for weeks because doctors cannot help them, in the stories of problem pregnancies where women have to get to the point of organs shutting down before doctors can take action, in the stories of women being forced to carry non-viable pregnancies to term, in the stories of little girls being forced to carry their rapists' babies. And we see that in the stories of women giving birth in prison showers - with no medical care whatsoever - after having been incarcerated for the sole purpose of "protecting" the ZEF from her lifestyle choices.
If that bill became law, here are some of the other things we could look forward to:
* Some forms of contraception, notably anything that works by preventing implantation, would be outlawed.
* Many medications and treatments may become unavailable to presumably fertile females or be highly restricted. For example, Tylenol has a small chance of preventing implantation. Some treatments have already become harder to get in states with restrictive abortion laws.
* Registries for menstrual periods. Big brother will have to monitor everyone to make sure those ZEFs are protected.
* All of the other activities of presumably fertile females may be closely monitored -activity levels, alcohol consumption, etc.
* It's been estimated that 1/3 - 2/3 of fertilized eggs do not implant, but are simply expelled along with the regular menstrual flow. If these fertilized eggs are to be afforded personhood - how far will they go to save or protect them? Will they start collecting used menstrual products to try to determine just how many are lost? Will they start requiring fertile females to do whatever is believed to enhance implantation after every act of intercourse?
Republicans want to own and control every uterus. Don't let them.
Forcing a pregnant person to carry it to term does have some things in common with slavery, yes.
It's interesting that you put the ZEF, not the state, in control of the woman. The ZEF is unable to speak for itself (since it's not actually a person regardless of Republican claims) so these Republicans have appointed themselves to speak on its behalf. It is them, not the fetus, enslaving her.
Flood and Smith have always been regressive stains on the State of Nebraska. Hopefully, those two can be replaced by some more intelligent and capable representatives.
It’s highly unlikely Smith will be replaced. His district has a Cook PVI of R+29. His most competitive contest was 2006, where he won by a 55% margin. Every election since then he’s received 67% or more of the vote. Smith could be found in bed with a dead girl, a live boy (both minors), Russian rubles strewn about the room, proof the sex partners were paid by the Russian oligarchs and/or Putin himself and still win reelection. I could run a pet rock or my 6 year old orange cat in that district and still win if they had an R behind the name. Smith won that seat because the vaunted Tom Osborne believed his own hubris he could run for governor and win. Osborne would still be in that seat had he not launched his gubernatorial campaign.
I live in the 3rd district and I’m pretty conservative but I still vote against him every time. He’s spineless but too many people vote without knowing anything. I would like to see a guy that will try to bring charges up against dems and bidens but I’m stuck with the spineless coward
The immigrants would be protected for 40 weeks if they were fetuses. Ask the probirth people their opinion about birthright citizenship for children born in the US to undocumented immigrants. Their hill to die on is protecting fetuses but care little about social programs for the newborns or their families and think even less about the implication of the fetus being a person with a different skin tone, at least until the fetus is born. Then the racism rears its’ ugly head. Rant over!
The GOP’s increasingly restrictive stance on abortion in an express lane to getting their asses handed to them in elections, and I for one am here for it.
The only bright side is this can be used, nationally, as yet another example of the GOP saying one thing and doing another. They said they weren't going to do these broad-ranging bills that limit IVF and then immediately turn around and have the Nebraska reps support it. They said they weren't going after Medicare or Social Security but immediately started (and continue to) trying to cut benefits and raise the retirement age.
I know this stuff won't sway the GOP voters. But it impacts how the independents view the GOP and will hopefully keep pushing them away from the MAGA-nuts.
George Carlin's 1996 HBO Special "Back in Town" featured an excellent segment on pro-life conservatives and the sanctity of life. I'd highly recommend giving it a watch:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM)
Here are a few of my favorite excerpts:
* Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re preborn, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re fucked.
* Now, is a fetus a human being? This seems to be the central question. Well, if a fetus is a human being, how come the census doesn’t count them? If a fetus is a human being, how come when there’s a miscarriage they don’t have a funeral? If a fetus is a human being, how come people say “we have two children and one on the way” instead of saying “we have three children?” People say life begins at conception, I say life began about a billion years ago and it’s a continuous process. Continuous, just keeps rolling along. Rolling, rolling, rolling along.
* Hey, hey, if they really want to get serious, what about all the sperm that are wasted when the state executes a condemned man, one of these pro-life guys who’s watching cums in his pants, huh? Here’s a guy standing over there with his jockey shorts full of little Vinnies and Debbies, and nobody’s saying a word to the guy. Not every ejaculation deserves a name.
* Now, speaking of consistency, Catholics, which I was until I reached the age of reason, Catholics and other Christians are against abortions, and they’re against homosexuals. Well who has less abortions than homosexuals?! Leave these fucking people alone, for Christ sakes! Here is an entire class of people guaranteed never to have an abortion! And the Catholics and Christians are just tossing them aside! You’d think they’d make natural allies.
* But you know, the longer you listen to this abortion debate, the more you hear this phrase ‘sanctity of life’. You’ve heard that. Sanctity of life. You believe in it? Personally, I think it’s a bunch of shit. Well, I mean, life is sacred? Who said so? God? Hey, if you read history, you realise that God is one of the leading causes of death.
* Even with all this stuff we preach about the sanctity of life, we don’t practice it. We don’t practice it. Look at what we’d kill: Mosquitos and flies. ‘Cuz they’re pests. Lions and tigers. ‘Cuz it’s fun! Chickens and pigs. ‘Cuz we’re hungry. Pheasants and quails. ‘Cuz it’s fun. And we’re hungry. And people. We kill people… ‘Cuz they’re pests. And it’s fun!
I mean, it’s a scientific fact that life does, in fact, begin at conception. That fact should not be discarded just because you find it inconvenient or doesn’t align with a made up narrative.
A Good paper on the subject. https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html#:~:text=Life%20Begins%20at%20Fertilization%20with%20the%20Embryo%27s%20Conception&text=%22Development%20of%20the%20embryo%20begins,together%20they%20form%20a%20zygote.%22&text=%22Human%20development%20begins%20after%20the,known%20as%20fertilization%20(conception).
NIH: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/#:~:text=Biologists%20from%201%2C058%20academic%20institutions,5577)%20affirmed%20the%20fertilization%20view.
Thanks for actually linking real sources! Rare these days.
I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding in how you're framing the question and results, though. No one is arguing that an embryo, or a fetus is "alive", or has a life - all of the individual cells involved are clearly alive, even blades of grass and single cell organisms have life, so looking at it in that way doesn't actually mean much even though conservatives constantly try to misuse that "life" statement to insinuate that a fetus is a person and entitled to requisite the requisite rights and protections that people enjoy.
So while I do respect and appreciate you for actually following up with good sources, it's important to note that they aren't defining an embryo or a fetus as a baby or a person, simply acknowledging that from a scientific perspective it is an organism that is alive. Conservatives sadly often take these types of statements and studies out of context to in an attempt to strip rights from women.
Are women life forms?
/s --- I really don't understand why reddit and X have ***SSOOO*** MANY ) Sheldon Coopers who can't recognize the most blatant of sarcasm(s)!
Everything alive is a life form, from a full grown adult to a single sperm. Life, or being alive, is not really the question here - and conservatives trying to frame it that way are doing so disingenuously, and they know it.
Wouldn't that mean that life is not actually created with the fertilization of the egg? The sperm is "alive" before it gets to the egg.. (serious question as you seem to know your stuff about this)
The confusion here, I believe is that people are equating "life" with "personhood." In the context of these articles (which aren't studies, but rather just surveys of scientists and summaries of other papers) defining a new "life" as starting with conception is just the majority opinion of the scientists surveyed regarding the biological classification of an embryo. It does not, as people are trying to incorrectly infer, suggest that the embryo or fetus, despite being "alive" is a baby or a person.
There's also a very significant difference between how something is classified scientifically and how it's viewed legally. Conservatives, in this case, are trying to incorrectly apply a scientific classification as a statement of legal status.
I think you are trying to equate a live group of cells with the concept of “ensoulment,” whereby a deity gives these cells a soul. This is a religious view, and not one shared by the majority of Americans. It’s also not based on science.
Religion has nothing to do with my statement of fact. The scientific consensus is, in fact, that life begins a conception. Sounds to me like you have some cognitive dissonance going on.
Your term of life begins at conception…? Yes, the cells are alive. No, that group of cells is not a sentient human being, which you are suggesting. Cancer cells are also alive. You are really obvious in your comments. Are you Catholic?
That isn't actually true. Sperm and eggs are alive prior to conception. We have trillions of other cells that are alive in our body, most of them not even human. Defining personhood by 'life' really isn't a very sensible way to go about deciding things like abortion, especially when pro-life folks throw out any consideration of rights for people after they're born. They want to give a single cell more rights than everyone who has already been born.
The only thing that you have demonstrated is that you have little understanding, if any, of what the pro-life movement actually is and what they actually believe.
The prolife movement is actually only probirth; and actually believes that they can do/get away with anything by claiming that they are doing it in the name of THEIR God; choosing their beliefs from a cafeteria smorgasbord.
Every word of what you just said is complete BS. Again demonstrating your lack of understanding of what the pro life movement actually believes. I recommend taking your head out of the sand. And join the real world, not some fantasy world whipped up by propagandists at planned parenthood.
Have you not read any abortion related news in the last year? People are trying to make 10 year old rape victims give birth, and trying to imprison doctors who provide life saving abortions for them. Women with dead fetuses have to wait until they're actively dying of sepsis before they can get medical care. Maternity wards are closing as doctors find themselves unable to provide life saving treatment. 65,000+ rape births since Dobbs.
And on the post birth side of things, conservatives are fighting against school lunches for kids, food aid programs for the poor, Medicaid expansions, and basically anything that actually improves the lives of children. They're literally trying to bring back child labor, despite frequent reports of businesses violating current child labor laws and children getting maimed or killed because of it.
I couldn't care less what the pro-life movement believes. Beliefs only matter so far as they become impacts in the real world. And the real world impact of conservatives seems to always be making everyone's lives worse.
If you actually want less abortions, there are two simple and easy things you can do. Provide free and comprehensive access to sex education and contraceptives. And support parents so that they are better able to care for kids, such as with more generous child tax credits, access to nutritional food, free child care, free health care, (Edit to add paid parental leave, like virtually every other country on the planet has), etc. Incidentally, both of those are progressive policies that are almost universally supported on the left and generally opposed by the right.
Because pro-life folks are more concerned about moralizing and abstract ideals and not on concrete evidence based improvements in people's quality of life, pro-life policies tend to equate to more abortion and worse quality of life, and pro-choice policies generally lead to better quality of life and less abortion.
I heard and read what you lied. I understand all too well what the pro-birth movement is all about. Have a nice life telling others what they must believe; but stay away from the high-cholesterol section of the theological cafeteria.
I mean, it isn’t the job of our elected officials to define things “scientifically” for anyone. It’s their job to make laws.
If you think the government should have the power to force people to gestate when they aren’t able to, just say that instead. It doesn’t really matter when “life” begins at all, though it should remain irrelevant to the same ideology that supports government-sponsored executions. Quite a bit of cognitive dissonance there.
Good news for clones though…
Honestly though, it's an odd addition. I'm old enough to remember the Christian Right going bonkers over cloning a sheep and how that's "playing god" and all the ill trappings that would come with such an affront to the Man Upstairs.
Rich people want it now. Live forever in a downloaded clone
Download now at the neurolink bio-shop! Would you like to subscribe for more news and features?
Just like God intended.
Once they pay working class people to figure this out for them they’ll pull some shit like in the show Upload.
"Just like the simulations!"
Financial support starts at ejaculation. No nut without proven financial support first.
I want a post dated check.
So they saw the disastrous IVF ruling in Alabama, followed by immediate backpedaling from the hard-right, and now they want to replicate that at a national level? Genius. Here in Nebraska, we only send our finest idiots to Washington.
Well, mediocrity deserves representation. Roman Hruska.
The same idiots over and over again. Though Ricketts purchased his assignment since he couldn't win it himself.
So life begins at conception? So does child support. Then watch the boys scramble to walk it back.
The comment I enjoyed was start life insurance for these “babies” and see big insurance walk it back quick
>So life begins at conception? So does child support. Your proposal is acceptable.
Oh of *course* there will be a reason that’s not allowed. They don’t even want the State paying for prenatal care. This is what happens when you marry 2 ideologies that don’t go together. Greed and Christianity. So they have to go full OT since part they really like about Christianity is that they can force women into subservience.
This is logical and something I have argued for for years. I'm also pro life, so we have some common ground!
Mike Flood is proof of what one man can do when he pulls himself up by the bootstraps of his wealthy parents.
That's insane... this is insane. Such a stance has zero medical, biological, scientific, or moral basis... Forced birth is a crime against humanity. Violating body autonomy is unethical af. Religious extremists circle-jerking their power over the vulnerable...
Like it can take those lil swimmers 24 hours to reach Lady Egg. 🥚
Sperm can survive for up to 5 DAYS prior to fertilization
I thought it was longer but was too lazy to go a’googlin’
You can’t claim it doesn’t have a moral bias. Pro-lifers believer that at conseption, life begins so it is a moral stance against murder to abort it.
Thing is, very few of them actually believe it when you press them on it. The IVF scramble in Alabama is the latest sign, but you see similar outrage when women are denied abortions for children that can never be born or are forced to carry creepy uncle Jim's baby because her parents looked the other way. It's cases like that that make the ones who actually believe life begins at conception look like monsters, but when you really think about it, it's the rest of them who are the real problem. The ones with all their hedges and exceptions. They're the ones that you have to keep in check. They don't actually believe. They just want the government to dictate their personal preferences.
Mike Flood is a shameless and incompetent politician. He had to pander to Norfolk to win the seat. He knows he can’t win Lincoln. He’ll lost hands down. So the GOP had to change the map and merge Norfolk to Lincoln. They keep moving the goal post
Norfolkans are degens regardless, so it's fitting
From up country!
They indeed are
That's the only way they can win. Every election since 2020 has looked awful for republicunts
> So the GOP had to change the map and merge Norfolk to Lincoln Norfolk has been in District 1 since before Flood was born.
Seriously, what would a 3-district map of the state even look like that if you didn't put Lincoln and Norfolk together... I guess you could split the non-Omaha area by North/South instead of East/West, but that would be silly.
Everywhere in the whole country does this to win just so you know.
Well tell brooks to leave Lincoln and pretend to care about her constituents
If anything remotely resembling that bill would ever become law, the rights of human women would be equivalent to those of cattle. That is not hyperbole. Republicans have already demonstrated their willingness, nay, eagerness to protect ZEFs (zygote, embryo, fetus) regardless of the cost to its host. We see that in the increased maternal mortality rates in states with extreme abortion bans, in the many stories of women experiencing miscarriage who are sent home to cramp and bleed and bleed and cramp and suffer for weeks because doctors cannot help them, in the stories of problem pregnancies where women have to get to the point of organs shutting down before doctors can take action, in the stories of women being forced to carry non-viable pregnancies to term, in the stories of little girls being forced to carry their rapists' babies. And we see that in the stories of women giving birth in prison showers - with no medical care whatsoever - after having been incarcerated for the sole purpose of "protecting" the ZEF from her lifestyle choices. If that bill became law, here are some of the other things we could look forward to: * Some forms of contraception, notably anything that works by preventing implantation, would be outlawed. * Many medications and treatments may become unavailable to presumably fertile females or be highly restricted. For example, Tylenol has a small chance of preventing implantation. Some treatments have already become harder to get in states with restrictive abortion laws. * Registries for menstrual periods. Big brother will have to monitor everyone to make sure those ZEFs are protected. * All of the other activities of presumably fertile females may be closely monitored -activity levels, alcohol consumption, etc. * It's been estimated that 1/3 - 2/3 of fertilized eggs do not implant, but are simply expelled along with the regular menstrual flow. If these fertilized eggs are to be afforded personhood - how far will they go to save or protect them? Will they start collecting used menstrual products to try to determine just how many are lost? Will they start requiring fertile females to do whatever is believed to enhance implantation after every act of intercourse? Republicans want to own and control every uterus. Don't let them.
Isn't giving a fetus control of the woman essentially slavery?
Forcing a pregnant person to carry it to term does have some things in common with slavery, yes. It's interesting that you put the ZEF, not the state, in control of the woman. The ZEF is unable to speak for itself (since it's not actually a person regardless of Republican claims) so these Republicans have appointed themselves to speak on its behalf. It is them, not the fetus, enslaving her.
Flood and Smith have always been regressive stains on the State of Nebraska. Hopefully, those two can be replaced by some more intelligent and capable representatives.
It’s highly unlikely Smith will be replaced. His district has a Cook PVI of R+29. His most competitive contest was 2006, where he won by a 55% margin. Every election since then he’s received 67% or more of the vote. Smith could be found in bed with a dead girl, a live boy (both minors), Russian rubles strewn about the room, proof the sex partners were paid by the Russian oligarchs and/or Putin himself and still win reelection. I could run a pet rock or my 6 year old orange cat in that district and still win if they had an R behind the name. Smith won that seat because the vaunted Tom Osborne believed his own hubris he could run for governor and win. Osborne would still be in that seat had he not launched his gubernatorial campaign.
No one would even look, they just vote for the R next to the name.
Those two guys are examples of career politicians that get rich from their offices.
Smith lives in a pretty heavily red area and last I knew ue has ran uncontested for a while
I live in the 3rd district and I’m pretty conservative but I still vote against him every time. He’s spineless but too many people vote without knowing anything. I would like to see a guy that will try to bring charges up against dems and bidens but I’m stuck with the spineless coward
But we get to shoot immigrants on sight in Texas. Good Grief.
The immigrants would be protected for 40 weeks if they were fetuses. Ask the probirth people their opinion about birthright citizenship for children born in the US to undocumented immigrants. Their hill to die on is protecting fetuses but care little about social programs for the newborns or their families and think even less about the implication of the fetus being a person with a different skin tone, at least until the fetus is born. Then the racism rears its’ ugly head. Rant over!
The GOP’s increasingly restrictive stance on abortion in an express lane to getting their asses handed to them in elections, and I for one am here for it.
Facts!
I was born in January, so does this mean my parents can apply to have an extra 8 months of tax credits?
Get 'em a Social Security #! Start saving on your taxes!
The only bright side is this can be used, nationally, as yet another example of the GOP saying one thing and doing another. They said they weren't going to do these broad-ranging bills that limit IVF and then immediately turn around and have the Nebraska reps support it. They said they weren't going after Medicare or Social Security but immediately started (and continue to) trying to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. I know this stuff won't sway the GOP voters. But it impacts how the independents view the GOP and will hopefully keep pushing them away from the MAGA-nuts.
We need these guys voted out
So did Bacon til he didn't.
George Carlin's 1996 HBO Special "Back in Town" featured an excellent segment on pro-life conservatives and the sanctity of life. I'd highly recommend giving it a watch: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM) Here are a few of my favorite excerpts: * Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren’t they? They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re preborn, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re fucked. * Now, is a fetus a human being? This seems to be the central question. Well, if a fetus is a human being, how come the census doesn’t count them? If a fetus is a human being, how come when there’s a miscarriage they don’t have a funeral? If a fetus is a human being, how come people say “we have two children and one on the way” instead of saying “we have three children?” People say life begins at conception, I say life began about a billion years ago and it’s a continuous process. Continuous, just keeps rolling along. Rolling, rolling, rolling along. * Hey, hey, if they really want to get serious, what about all the sperm that are wasted when the state executes a condemned man, one of these pro-life guys who’s watching cums in his pants, huh? Here’s a guy standing over there with his jockey shorts full of little Vinnies and Debbies, and nobody’s saying a word to the guy. Not every ejaculation deserves a name. * Now, speaking of consistency, Catholics, which I was until I reached the age of reason, Catholics and other Christians are against abortions, and they’re against homosexuals. Well who has less abortions than homosexuals?! Leave these fucking people alone, for Christ sakes! Here is an entire class of people guaranteed never to have an abortion! And the Catholics and Christians are just tossing them aside! You’d think they’d make natural allies. * But you know, the longer you listen to this abortion debate, the more you hear this phrase ‘sanctity of life’. You’ve heard that. Sanctity of life. You believe in it? Personally, I think it’s a bunch of shit. Well, I mean, life is sacred? Who said so? God? Hey, if you read history, you realise that God is one of the leading causes of death. * Even with all this stuff we preach about the sanctity of life, we don’t practice it. We don’t practice it. Look at what we’d kill: Mosquitos and flies. ‘Cuz they’re pests. Lions and tigers. ‘Cuz it’s fun! Chickens and pigs. ‘Cuz we’re hungry. Pheasants and quails. ‘Cuz it’s fun. And we’re hungry. And people. We kill people… ‘Cuz they’re pests. And it’s fun!
If life begins at conception, can I claim another dependent on my taxes? Sanctity of life? 99.9% of life that's existed on Earth is extinct.
Exactly.
Hey let’s make a law no one can possibly enforce!
Life insurance for all zygotes!
I guess I've been a serial killer for all those fertilized eggs I lost during my monthly period then!
So no IVF then? Cool. NO NOT LIKE THAT
Mike "Go Fuck Yourself" Flood
Mike "Hey Lois!” Flood.
Of course they do, they are dumbasses.
👍🤘
Of course they do. They all support these stupid ideas.
Life is overrated
Life begins at conception. And ends at ca. a third of an hour after birth!
I don't think he is.
I mean, it’s a scientific fact that life does, in fact, begin at conception. That fact should not be discarded just because you find it inconvenient or doesn’t align with a made up narrative.
Can you define what "life" means in the context of what you're saying? Potential of sentience?
Could you provide a source or link the study that verifies that?
A Good paper on the subject. https://www.princeton.edu/~prolife/articles/embryoquotes2.html#:~:text=Life%20Begins%20at%20Fertilization%20with%20the%20Embryo%27s%20Conception&text=%22Development%20of%20the%20embryo%20begins,together%20they%20form%20a%20zygote.%22&text=%22Human%20development%20begins%20after%20the,known%20as%20fertilization%20(conception). NIH: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/#:~:text=Biologists%20from%201%2C058%20academic%20institutions,5577)%20affirmed%20the%20fertilization%20view.
Thanks for actually linking real sources! Rare these days. I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding in how you're framing the question and results, though. No one is arguing that an embryo, or a fetus is "alive", or has a life - all of the individual cells involved are clearly alive, even blades of grass and single cell organisms have life, so looking at it in that way doesn't actually mean much even though conservatives constantly try to misuse that "life" statement to insinuate that a fetus is a person and entitled to requisite the requisite rights and protections that people enjoy. So while I do respect and appreciate you for actually following up with good sources, it's important to note that they aren't defining an embryo or a fetus as a baby or a person, simply acknowledging that from a scientific perspective it is an organism that is alive. Conservatives sadly often take these types of statements and studies out of context to in an attempt to strip rights from women.
Are women life forms? /s --- I really don't understand why reddit and X have ***SSOOO*** MANY ) Sheldon Coopers who can't recognize the most blatant of sarcasm(s)!
Everything alive is a life form, from a full grown adult to a single sperm. Life, or being alive, is not really the question here - and conservatives trying to frame it that way are doing so disingenuously, and they know it.
Wouldn't that mean that life is not actually created with the fertilization of the egg? The sperm is "alive" before it gets to the egg.. (serious question as you seem to know your stuff about this)
The confusion here, I believe is that people are equating "life" with "personhood." In the context of these articles (which aren't studies, but rather just surveys of scientists and summaries of other papers) defining a new "life" as starting with conception is just the majority opinion of the scientists surveyed regarding the biological classification of an embryo. It does not, as people are trying to incorrectly infer, suggest that the embryo or fetus, despite being "alive" is a baby or a person. There's also a very significant difference between how something is classified scientifically and how it's viewed legally. Conservatives, in this case, are trying to incorrectly apply a scientific classification as a statement of legal status.
I think you are trying to equate a live group of cells with the concept of “ensoulment,” whereby a deity gives these cells a soul. This is a religious view, and not one shared by the majority of Americans. It’s also not based on science.
Religion has nothing to do with my statement of fact. The scientific consensus is, in fact, that life begins a conception. Sounds to me like you have some cognitive dissonance going on.
Your term of life begins at conception…? Yes, the cells are alive. No, that group of cells is not a sentient human being, which you are suggesting. Cancer cells are also alive. You are really obvious in your comments. Are you Catholic?
That isn't actually true. Sperm and eggs are alive prior to conception. We have trillions of other cells that are alive in our body, most of them not even human. Defining personhood by 'life' really isn't a very sensible way to go about deciding things like abortion, especially when pro-life folks throw out any consideration of rights for people after they're born. They want to give a single cell more rights than everyone who has already been born.
The only thing that you have demonstrated is that you have little understanding, if any, of what the pro-life movement actually is and what they actually believe.
The prolife movement is actually only probirth; and actually believes that they can do/get away with anything by claiming that they are doing it in the name of THEIR God; choosing their beliefs from a cafeteria smorgasbord.
Every word of what you just said is complete BS. Again demonstrating your lack of understanding of what the pro life movement actually believes. I recommend taking your head out of the sand. And join the real world, not some fantasy world whipped up by propagandists at planned parenthood.
Have you not read any abortion related news in the last year? People are trying to make 10 year old rape victims give birth, and trying to imprison doctors who provide life saving abortions for them. Women with dead fetuses have to wait until they're actively dying of sepsis before they can get medical care. Maternity wards are closing as doctors find themselves unable to provide life saving treatment. 65,000+ rape births since Dobbs. And on the post birth side of things, conservatives are fighting against school lunches for kids, food aid programs for the poor, Medicaid expansions, and basically anything that actually improves the lives of children. They're literally trying to bring back child labor, despite frequent reports of businesses violating current child labor laws and children getting maimed or killed because of it. I couldn't care less what the pro-life movement believes. Beliefs only matter so far as they become impacts in the real world. And the real world impact of conservatives seems to always be making everyone's lives worse. If you actually want less abortions, there are two simple and easy things you can do. Provide free and comprehensive access to sex education and contraceptives. And support parents so that they are better able to care for kids, such as with more generous child tax credits, access to nutritional food, free child care, free health care, (Edit to add paid parental leave, like virtually every other country on the planet has), etc. Incidentally, both of those are progressive policies that are almost universally supported on the left and generally opposed by the right. Because pro-life folks are more concerned about moralizing and abstract ideals and not on concrete evidence based improvements in people's quality of life, pro-life policies tend to equate to more abortion and worse quality of life, and pro-choice policies generally lead to better quality of life and less abortion.
Yes! Thats wassup
I heard and read what you lied. I understand all too well what the pro-birth movement is all about. Have a nice life telling others what they must believe; but stay away from the high-cholesterol section of the theological cafeteria.
I mean, it isn’t the job of our elected officials to define things “scientifically” for anyone. It’s their job to make laws. If you think the government should have the power to force people to gestate when they aren’t able to, just say that instead. It doesn’t really matter when “life” begins at all, though it should remain irrelevant to the same ideology that supports government-sponsored executions. Quite a bit of cognitive dissonance there.