As I showed you slaves were different back then…than what happened in our country.

I will go read the scriptures you have shown here in the context and get back with you.

Was Gods name attacked to any of these…or were these man made rules regarding slaves?

Will get back to you.

I have listened. Do you feel a tad guilt supporting abortion like you do? Is there something wrong with abortion? If there is why do you support it…if there isn't then why not try to defend your position…be proud of it…and embrace what you put out there?

How can you deal with likelihood when you are talking about killing a living human being? I think the likelihood of most fetus's in the womb being born are pretty good. Abortion changes all that. You either believe that personhood starts at conception when the the new human life has started or you don't. REally all the statistics in the world…don't address the personhood that even science gives the life in the womb.

I do not believe it is sound reasoning to kill a living human person in a womb for any reason unless that life will result in ENDING the life of the one carrying it.

You don't find killing an innocent life vile…I do. You hide behind the statistics…and viability…and whatever you can think of to diminish personhood…in order to make your position more acceptable. You don't see the life as valuable or protectable.

Most women get abortions on healthy babies. So when you say.."If a fetus is insufficiently developed to continue to survive and continue to grow on its own without the mothers blood supply et al, what is the womb, really, other than a biological version of life support?" you are not talking about the 99% of babies who are killed for no reason. It is not like life support…it is murder.

The thing of it is…this is about not only killing unborn people…its an economic issue for you or you would not bring it up. You said this…"Would pro-lifers be happier if, instead of abortion, the fetuses were removed from the womb and all efforts were made to keep them alive? Would they be willing to cover the difference between the cost of an abortion and the cost of this care via taxes? Burial for those that don't make it? The extra funds needed for the organizations in charge of the adoption and foster care systems?

Sure I would love it if the unborn could be taken and allowed to live…rather than face your firing squad. What a stupid question. LMAO But your last sentence you imply that saving a life would come with a cost…and your not willing to play a part. It should only be the responsibility of those who value and want to save the life. How cruel…a position is that? Because people are against killing unborn babies…they should foot the bill for everything…which lets you humanists who don't give a rip about the life (don't pretend you do…) off the hook. I would much rather help support the life of an innocent child than those in our prison systems…or the illegals mooching off our system…or our government programs that are a complete waste.

You are making any excuse you can think of to justify killing the life in the womb….anything. You said…"I think it more likely that women would be villified every bit as much for having a fetus removed prematurely as they would for having an abortion, and I think it more likely that the pro-lifers would not be willing to cough up the extra taxes to cover the costs either- but who am I to say?" It is all about the woman for you…you don't see a value to the unborn.

Why would you not help a life be saved? What is it with people like you…you want to pass the buck…? You probably no doubt think that the world would be better off without the children who are without homes. KIll…that is your solution. We know who in Germany had those thoughts too didn't we?

You support unnecessary killing..you do.

Your last statement is the most hypocritical of any you have made.

"It's one thing to be opposed to unnecessary killing, but it's entirely another to claim you have jurisdiction over somebody else's body. There is certainly a good case for banning abortion, but there is zero case for requiring a woman to keep an unwanted child in her body. If a fetus is sufficiently developed to be considered a person, then it should be able to survive independently of the mothers blood supply, even if some medical assistance is needed."

You say I have no right to claim jurisdiction over any woman's body. But you do it when you say…that abortion should only be allowed up until a certain time in the pregnancy. LMAO If your position was sound…you would allow the right of any woman to kill on demand, BECAUSE IT IS HER BODY. But ya get a little squeamish about abortion when the little one starts looking more like a baby. So with you…the baby has to look like a baby to be valuable…worth saving.

Sorry I missed your post....

About pain....you are pro-abortion. So I would think since you are pro-killing them you would know the exact time in each one of their lives that they would feel pain. So when is it?

Lets pretend you are the abortionist and you are getting ready to stick that vacuum into the woman to kill it...do you think you could be sure it would feel no pain?

You said a child in the womb has no goal. So because he/she can't speak it the goal does not exist? Does a newborn have a goal? Does a toddler have a goal? Sure they do....just because they can't express themselves does not mean the goal is not there.

You said this...You're saying that because I believe abortion should be a choice that I shouldn't be able to define any restriction on that choice. That's ridiculous. That's no different than saying if someone believes that people should be allowed to choose whether to own an gun or not, then they can't put any restrictions on who they can shoot."

Not really. You want abortion legal. You probably fault me for wanting it banned and think I have no right to dictate to others what they can do. But you do the same thing by placing restrictions on abortion. Does the woman or should she have the final say when it comes to her body....yes or no? I say....no not when it comes to killing another human life. What say you?

If you say she should...then you can't put restrictions on her. How can you do that, and subject your morality on her. What if she says she does not care if the unborn can feel pain? What if she says....she doesn't think its a life until it takes its first breath? What would you say to her...if she asked you if you thought she should make the decisions about her body?

You have this list of when killing is wrong...and it is not consistent. Pain should not matter...we should respect all life and treat it with respect. Abortion does not do that.

You said, Instead of being smug and dancing around the question how about you actually answer it? How about you actually explain the logic behind your position instead of just asserting it? Do you really think you're going to win people over to your side by being condescending?"

I shouldn't be. But the idea of what you suggest is morally repugnant. I find it repulsive, sad and vile. I have explained the logic behind my position. Science confirms that at conception a new human life is started. I believe it is a person...and should be allowed to be born. This is the right thing to do. This is the moral thing to do.

The only thing you have done is get yourself in more hot water....because your position is immoral...and not logical...and does not confirm what science states about life.

You are pro-abortion...don't care about the life in the womb and you help to put a bulls eye on every life in the womb. You want and are trying to desperately make your position to be moral...so it does not sound so bad...and you have failed. You don't want to discuss it because you have nothing more that could make your position any worse than it is. Usually people run when their backs are against the wall....and clearly yours is.

Ya know we don't need to bring God into this...even atheists can know abortion is wrong. But you have to fling the....gee your a Christian and a terrible one at that at me. I would imagine Christ...telling you how immoral and vile your abortion position actually is....but to the pro-abort...would it matter? Not really.

So go ahead and run.....I probably would to...you won't win here...not with a "killing unborn children in the womb is moral" stance....not at all.

I think you are wrong....dispute is to argue or debate. We are debating. I am addressing what you said. I question what you said, what you claim is the truth. We are engaging in discussions and arguments.

Being a Christian is not about religion...it is about the relationship one has with Christ.

Religion can fade away but a relationship with God will not if you follow what He has told you. Also people can take religion away...they can't take a relationship away. They can take your Bible away, prohibit you from going to church or to pray in public. They can prohibit any public display of your faith...jewelry, bumper stickers, reading materials, magazines...etc.

BUT THEY CAN NOT TAKE AWAY YOUR PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP.

If you let that go then you didn't want it bad enough...the blame is on you.

If you are in a relationship with God it requires work on both sides. I know a lot of people who say...God won't do this, won't do that, He didn't answer my prayer. They said this while they were intentionally sinning and doing wrong. If you claim Christ then responsibility comes with it. Funny how hard people work on their relationships with people and they don't with God.

The fact is we want to spend time with the ones we love and cherish. And if you claim Christ...you should want do the same with Him.

if you want to be blessed by God then you need to be aggressively blessing other people.

Romans 5:8-11

(v.8)But God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners. (v.9)And since we have been made right in God’s sight by the blood of Christ, he will certainly save us from God’s condemnation. (v.10)For since our friendship with God was restored by the death of his Son while we were still his enemies, we will certainly be saved through the life of his Son. (v.11)So now we can rejoice in our wonderful new relationship with God because our Lord Jesus Christ has made us friends of God.

You didn't answer my question you avoided it.

First of all where does it say in the Bible that God approves of slavery?

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:16) What does this scripture say?

Slavery was completely different in Old Testament times...and there were specific rules as the Word states on slaves. No sex with slaves, they can't work on the sabbath, hurting or injuring a slave was punishable by death.

"If a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod and he dies at his hand, he shall be punished." (Exodus 21:20)

"If a man strikes the eye of his male or female slave, and destroys it, he shall let him go free on account of his eye. "And if he knocks out a tooth of his male or female slave, he shall let him go free on account of his tooth." (Exodus 21:26-27)

"He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death." (Exodus 21:12)

"Six days you are to do your work, but on the seventh day you shall cease from labor so that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female slave, as well as your stranger, may refresh themselves. (Exodus 23:12)

Do not slander a slave to his master, Or he will curse you and you will be found guilty. (Proverbs 30:10)

'Now if a man lies carnally with a woman who is a slave acquired for another man, but who has in no way been redeemed nor given her freedom, there shall be punishment; they shall not, however, be put to death, because she was not free. (Leviticus 19:20)

"You shall not hand over to his master a slave who has escaped from his master to you. (Deuteronomy 23:15)

'If a countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to you that he sells himself to you, you shall not subject him to a slave's service. 'He shall be with you as a hired man, as if he were a sojourner; he shall serve with you until the year of jubilee. 'He shall then go out from you, he and his sons with him, and shall go back to his family, that he may return to the property of his forefathers. 'For they are My servants whom I brought out from the land of Egypt; they are not to be sold in a slave sale. 'You shall not rule over him with severity, but are to revere your God. (Leviticus 25:39-43)

"If you buy a Hebrew slave, he shall serve for six years; but on the seventh he shall go out as a free man without payment." (Exodus 21:2)

He who pampers his slave from childhood Will in the end find him to be a son. (Proverbs 29:21)

All who are under the yoke as slaves are to regard their own masters as worthy of all honor so that the name of God and our doctrine will not be spoken against. Those who have believers as their masters must not be disrespectful to them because they are brethren, but must serve them all the more, because those who partake of the benefit are believers and beloved. Teach and preach these principles. (1 Timothy 6:1-2)

And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him. (Ephesians 6:9)

Masters, grant to your slaves justice and fairness, knowing that you too have a Master in heaven. (Colossians 4:1)

It is false to say a Christian would condone slavery. The fact is in biblical times people volunteered to be slaves.

Why is it rational to be afraid of death? I am not afraid of death...why are you? You maintain that there is no life after death...so you just end up as ash....so what are you afraid of?

Who programmed you to believe that way?

No reason we are here....all this just came about by random chance? Why didn't what we know happen on other planets? We are using iPads, pods on our planet and life is not sustainable on other planets? Odd isn't it?

So your world...says, no right or wrong. Rape can be good as can pedophelia as can murder. No afterlife on penalties for actions. Everything should be allowed then in your world...because there is no real meaning...no goodness.

You keep mentioning genetically predisposed.....who set us up to work that way?

90% is fatal? And your facts?

And if that is true...could not God have designed it this way?

You have a lot of faith to believe that all this...came about randomly....just by change. Wow. Even I don't have that much faith.

But you don't know for a fact that there is no life after death. I would think that would make you afraid. Because if there is....say if Christ said was true...then who loses out? What convinces you that there is no life after death?

Gee...that means no consequences so what reason would it be to be kind and do nice to people? Who cares. And if there is no eternal punishment, no consequences...then it should not matter what we do...murder, rape....no incentive to be good.

What realities are bad to confront? If you don't think there is an after life...you shouldnt be afraid to confront anything in life, even the bad stuff...who cares. You end up in dust anyway, right?

it is rational to fight for the death in something you believe in..especially if you believe in an after life. If there is one our existence matters, it means something. If there isn't one...as I said who cares. If one believes in an afterlife where consequences in life matters...you better believe it matters how one lives.

What is good and right? Well rape is bad. ARe you saying its good? What is good about rape? How many people think rape is good? Do you think someone should be punished for rape?

You don't understand complexed science...no one does totally. There is more unexplainable than explainable. That does not mean there was not a first cause....why are we here and who put us here? I don't have enough faith to believe it was by random chance.

I don't understand the first thing about scientific theories..but I know they can't answer the big questions in life...the big ones we all wonder about. And I don't think any mathamatician would say....that it all statistically could have happened the way it did.

So we just always were here? All we know just unbelievably got created?

The maturity level with which you post is unbelievable. You have this style because you don't have content.

What is irrational about believing there was an intelligent designer?

What was the first cause? What set everything into motion? Surely you wonder that.

It takes just as much faith to say no intelligent designer as there is to say there is.

Aliens....takes faith to believe that. And yet I am bashed for believing in God.

So if the majority says something is ok, it is? What if the majority said slavery or rape was ok?

Fair warning?

You can't address this..that much is obvious.

If scientists worked the way you say it works...we would never find out anything.

Don't atheists search for truth? Aren't you curious as to why we are here and how we got here?

ARe you telling me that there are no atheists trying to figure out the first cause? Or that the knowledge of that does not matter?

You can't answer the question....so you play ignore answering. Why don't you just admit...you have no clue as to what the first cause was?

I think God is eternal...He always was.

I would like to see evidence that there is no God. How did you form your worldview that formed the faith you have?

What was the first cause? Why are we here and how did we get here? Would like to hear your views on this.

Your mouth is vile.

The option you want available to women...kills another living human. You can't look at it as a person...because then what would that reveal about you? How would that make you look?

You place brain development between 24th-28th week of gestation. Wow. Roe law states abortion can happen up until 24 weeks...on demand for any reason. So for 4 weeks....the unborn has brain development. And still that does not matter to people like you. My niece born at 23 1/2 weeks....even before this time line you give. And that brain of hers did ok....she is graduating this year from college.

But you are for choice as you said....you condone unborns being slaughtered at full term for no reason. Wow. that is inhumane.

I believe I have posted pages of evidence where science bunks what you are saying.

ARe you saying this topic is not an emotional one? To say that shows you have no understanding of abortion.

Isn't it funny that since Roe was passed into law...in January 1973......this issue has not gone away? It is just as controversial today probably more...than it was back then. Why? Science tells us more about fetal development...and viability has lowered.

If you care about life...and human beings...then your care about abortion. Most pro-aborts simply do not care. Outta sight outta mind. They are willing to look away even if they really think abortion is wrong. That is what people did in Germany when Hitler filed the Jews into the ovens. THEY LOOKED AWAY.

For you to also say...or compare abortion to micro-organisms...is laughable. We are talking about when science says a new human life starts...not an organism on a table or object.

You don't recognize the human life in the womb. You are pro-abortion. So sad that you would look away as women kill unborns even in the ninth month.

Oh I understand your position. You want to kill unborn children so that we won't have to worry about them being born and needing homes. No homes....kill.

You don't like abortion? LMAO You want it legal don't you? You want it legal so unborn children are not born and have to depend on society for help and support. You are pro-abortion if you want abortion legalized.

Abortion has nothing to do with adoption or foster care. You either are pro-life and want all life protected...or you don't. You want to use abortion as a way of controlling the population.

You want to minimize suffering....then ban abortion. Easy....nothing complicated. The humane thing would be to stop killing unborn children...stop abortion.

You bring up rape. Ok what about it? It is a violent act done on an unwilling person...an innocent person. But so is abortion equally violent....with an innocent living human being who has not given consent.

So the woman was violated and has to suffer the consequences of the act..which would be horrible. So if she aborts...add the guilt and anguish of killing another living human to what she has already suffered...and her guilt is doubled. Two wrongs never make a right.

You have no idea how many women suffer from past abortions. It is not fun...it never goes away, the aftermath can be devastating. Abortion is like no other surgery...it is done to kill another human being.

She could always put the child up for adoption...but the child should have a chance to live. Your solution would be to condemn another living being. Your focus is only on the woman that is why you are pro-abortion.

There are far to many people on earth who don't value life. I don't agree with a lot of people but I would not wish anyone dead. Would the world be better off if we did not have to worry about handicapped and mentally challenged people? Would we be better without poor people? We could kill a lot of people to make earth function better couldn't we?

I work in this field...I know what I am talking about especially on a personal level. What connections do you have that make you an expert?

I am not trolling. I am going to start a thread about the pro-abort views in relation to Hitlers and I will outline the similarities in the world views.

Your posiiton does not value life...and you don't go to bat for the life in the womb. How you can say you are reasonable...and rational..I don't know. If what you say is true about killing so kids won't go into foster care...then lets take that one step further and kill the handicap...the mentally challenged. Lets kill people who smoke...who drink and who don't eat healthy. Can you imagine how much money we would save?

You are the one who is narrow minded and you have not supported your position whatsoever. You want abortion legal so that population would be controlled.

You tell me I can't judge....you said, "picked apart by a judgemental, narrow-minded, holier-than-thou, pseudo-intellectual self-professed child murderer."

And then this sentence defines YOUR CHARACTER. Or should I say lack of one. You judged me...I am narrow-minded...I am holier than thou....I am a pseudo-intellectual self-professed child murderer."

What you show is this....that the ones who scream and whine the loudest are the liberal humanists...who don't apply their own statements to themselves. You have judged the unborn in the womb...and you have judged me.

I did kill my unborn child...and I have had to live with that for over forty some years. You don't deserve to hear the whole story because you just are here to make pot shots and judge people.

You are a pro-abort...embrace the title.

What was the first cause? All you mention did not just always happen.

Explain it...

No no no....

Say you are in a room of scientists who don't believe in God and you are discussing this issue.

No God...then what? What was the first cause?

I don't have to explain anything...but nothing I would present would be taken seriously.

WHAT WAS THE FIRST CAUSE.....?

NOW ANSWER IT.

My position is not hypocritical at all. I want abortion banned not legal. You on the other hand want it legal...but then you don't.

Pain has nothing to do with whether or not a living human being should be slaughtered in the womb. You either respect life or you don't. YOU DON'T. So you try to come up with ways to make your position look humane. Gee if it can't feel...ok to kill. Absurd. Hitler also probably thought that gassing the Jews was also the humane way to do it.

Abortion is never a necessity unless the mother is dying in the hospital....this rarely but never happens. But to those with a "killing solves every problem" ( both personally and socially) abortion is the saving grace. Hitler had the same ideas.

I do not have to do research on this...you do. Adoption has nothing to do with killing living children. It only does to people like you who thinks killing them is better than life in an adoptive family. You presume to know what their lives would be like...you have NO RIGHT to do this.

I am close to this issue...very close. A soldier is close to the battlefield that he serves on....is that a bad thing?

I happen to work in this field. I have for over 13 years....with pro-life groups...Silent No More, Right to Life in my state, Operation Rescue, and my local CPC. I have seen it all, heard it all. I travel around to conventions,universities, colleges...fairs, Womens Expos, churches, schools....etc. I march in peaceful demonstrations. I picket and hand out information at PP clinics. I am very involved in abortion.

No condolences to me....but to the child I killed...fine. You have no clue, no idea what the majority of women believe about abortion. Basically as I said it is taboo to talk about.

Ever hear someone say....."hey thousandin1...can't have lunch tomorrow gonna get an abortion." Or...."Hey, can't go tonight not feeling well, had an abortion." Or "Hey I know how you feel I had two abortions."

You go to any debate site where abortion is discussed and you not find many women who have had abortions talking about them. Women don't want to talk about it...especially with other people who might judge them. It is one thing you get that you just want to go away. It was not traumatic for me at the time but hit me some 20 years later and about destroyed my life. I had no clue really what I was killing. I wanted and tried to convince myself it was just a blob of tissue. That is not the case as I found out from a doctor in a hospital who was taking care of my niece who was born at 23 1/2 weeks.

It makes me sick to my stomach to hear you say that killing children because they MIGHT NOT FIND A HOME...is better than giving them life. As I said...your worldview and Hitlers are very close.

I call it as I see it. You are pro-abortion and you do not value the life in the womb. You told me point blank I was to close to this issue to be objective....so if you can do it..so shall I.

The fact is....you are a man...and society says you don't matter in this. It is not your body, not your choice. The only reason your an issue is for monetary reasons. You should not even have a say or an opinion really...right?

If you want abortion legal for any reason....I question your morality..and your love of children...you bet I do.

No I am not. We are here to do what......you tell me? Is this a serious debate site or one for kids to just play around in?

I try to provide evidence for what I am stating. I certainly would not resort to swearing or making pot shots at people.

Sentence enhancers? LMAO

The fact is you have a potty mouth which takes away from anything constructive you could ever say.

Is happiness childish? Depends on what the action is...that expresses it.

I believe at conception that the life is a person and so does society or we would not be debating that fact here... or have debated it in the past. Abortion still after being legal for over 40 yrs still a hot topic that still divides the nation and families. It is taboo today as most women will not admit to having one. Why? Have you ever had one to know? You never see television programs where the characters nonchalantly mention they have had or are getting an abortion do you? No. People don't discuss it...because it is about killing and that is personal when you are the one who has killed. Pro-aborts like to detach themselves from the personhood argument...why? Because then..if they convince themselves that which is being slaughtered isn't a person, abortion isn't so bad. No woman would need an abortionist if there wasn't killing involved. Someone has to kill to make the procedure successful. The abortionist kills the life. It is not the life of a rock, or a hamburger or a cow. It is the life of a living human...that if left alone would become.......like we are. You were a person after you were conceived did you know that? And your mother obviously allowed you to live...she recognized YOUR PERSONHOOD.

Louise Brown was the worlds first test tube baby. Was she conceived in her mothers womb? No. She was conceived in a test tube. She became all she would ever be in THAT TEST TUBE. She only grew and used her mothers womb to grow. She was a person.

Being human....?

Why don't you show me why the life does not deserve to be called part of the human race?

God was not drunk...but you might be.

We have free will...if you fail...you did it yourself. There is a difference between wrong and right. You do not have to choose to do bad....its the blame game for you humanists. Everyone is at fault but you guys.

He created that turtle that little guy for you to enjoy. And you said the turtle is loving its surroundings. But your turtle could die I hate to tell you. Because you can't control what he thinks or does. He might get a disease? In fact they can make you sick as they carry salmonella in their urine. And chances are if this little guy gets bigger he will outgrow his tank and need to get into a bigger tank or you will have to release him to a place where he has room.

Can't answer it can you? LMAO

I am not claiming to know and prove. You are.

What was that first cause...if God was not the intelligent designer?

I do have a position and it is not hypocritical like yours.

Pain is the only issue for you. If something can feel pain then ya can't kill it. If it doesn't ya can. How absurd that reasoning is.

My niece was born at 23 1/2 weeks...she felt pain. She had multiple surgeries as she was in the hospital for over 5 months. You would have said she couldn't feel pain that aborting her would be ok.

Killing a living human being is wrong whether they can feel it or not. And there are methods to use to make sure the unborn can't feel pain.

Abortion is brutal. Have you ever seen one? What is your connection to this issue?

Is there something wrong with abortion? yes or no

Ya can't sit the fence on this one. You either are pro-life or you are not. Your position is immoral on every level.

You are pro-abortion in every sense of the word. You don't care if the unborn are killed. You are trying to talk yourself into making your position moral...and it's not.

I do NOT HAVE TO RESEARCH THIS...I KNOW FIRST HAND ABOUT ABORTION. What really ticks me off are people who pretend to know and don't. Ever had one?

Ever felt a child move inside your body? Ever see your child's ultrasound? Ever hear the machine that tears the living child apart?

You know nothing apart from what you read.

I have had an abortion and I know...all about it. I has affected my life since getting one in 1978.

Adoption has NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS issue.

You hate children.

This is the thing......and the question for you people who reject God to answer.

If God did not create the universe who did? What is the first cause? How did everything come to be.

Try with every fiber in your beings to answer this without acting like children. Because if you can't that means you can't address the issue.

Could you please answer a few questions for me.

You obviously are a pagan and denounce God. With that said....could you address the first cause. What was that first cause that set everything in motion. And then tell me how much faith it takes to believe what you believe.

Thanks.

You want me to mention God so you then can discredit that argument?

I am a Christian and I believe we were....before we were even in the womb. But one need not be a person of faith to acknowledge what science says..that a new human beings life starts at conception.

DEfend the position that from conception it isn't what science says it is.

What is the blob you are talking about?

From the second the egg and sperm unite and fertilization takes place...it is a human being. It has everything it needs to become a living functioning member of society. It is not a part of its mother other than using her body as a safe place to grow.

A blob? Nothing could be further than the truth.

It is a developing organism from the start....not a blob.

"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

Highly specialized cells.....does not sound like a blob to me.

"The zygote contains DNA from the mother and the father, combined to form the full set of genetic material that will control the cellular production of the new baby. In some cases, two eggs are released in the same menstrual cycle, and they are both fertilized, forming two zygotes. If both zygotes develop, they become fraternal twins. The process of producing identical twins involves only a single zygote, which forms into an embryo before dividing into two separate bodies. As the zygote travels down the fallopian tube and into the uterus, it divides and replicates itself. Once it has formed a ball of cells, it is referred to as a blastocyst."

The blastocyst implants itself in the wall of the mother's uterus within a few days of fertilization. There, it continues to grow rapidly, into a ball of several hundred cells. Most of the ball is only one layer of cells thick. This part of the ball becomes the placenta, an organ that serves as a connector to the bloodstream of the mother and helps to mediate development. One region of the blastocyst is three to four cells thick. This region eventually becomes the embryo itself."

"The embryo floats in a thin, fluid-filled membrane called the amniotic sac. It is connected to the placenta via the umbilical cord. During this stage of baby development in the womb, the human shape becomes recognizable. The spinal cord and brain are clearly differentiated from the rest of the body. The heart forms and begins to beat. The arms and legs sprout at the beginning of this stage; by the end, fingers and toes form. As the brain develops, it starts to produce electrical activity doctors can record. The nerve impulses produced by the brain begin to cause the muscles to contract and move.

Teratogens are agents that can cause birth defects by disrupting normal development in the womb. Drugs, alcohol, infection and radiation are the most common teratogens. According to the National Institutes of Health, the embryo is especially sensitive to teratogens because of the great amount of developmental change that occurs during this stage. For this reason, expectant mothers are strongly encouraged to avoid exposure to teratogens during this stage of development."

http://www.livestrong.com/article/95008-baby-development-stages-womb/#ixzz2iN76BXfZ

Blob is not the right term to use...human being is. But if blob makes you feel better about the issue of abortion and what your actually killing then by all means use it.

Some peoples hearts are just hardened. If you can't see the humanity in all this then you never will. What is obvious is that you don't respect human life. Killing is your solution to all things...especially getting rid of a child. What gives you that right?

Your entire position is hypocritical. You believe women should have choice...you have an opinion on when life should be saved and when killing it is ok....and then you say that late term abortion is wrong...just because an unborn can feel.

Do you know for a fact that someone who is so called brain dead can't feel.

You say consciousness doesn't matter that it does not take place in the womb...but later...(which is absurd) but that pain matters. LMAO

What if the abortionist makes sure pain isn't an issue...and then kills the unborn would that make you feel better?

Your position is all over the board on this.

Excellent response.....I believe God steps back and allows us to exersize free will. I do not believe God creates people to do evil.

I will not talk to a pagan about my Lord....you are here to demean the faith. Some hearts are hardened...yours is one of them.

Do you have to swear really?

Did you read the evidence I gave as to when science says...A NEW HUMAN LIFE STARTS?

Abortion is killing a living human being. FACT

You call it medical procedure....can you name another medical procedure like it? No...this one kills a living human being. But you pro-aborts try to use more user friendly terms...its killing....it is a procedure that ends, terminates...a life already started, that if left alone would surely be born healthy. In fact you were born that way. You were not terminated, but allowed to live. You help paint a bulls eye on every unborn in the womb.

Your position is hypocritical however. You are wrong....it is a human being, science and our laws say it is.

You talk about choice. Ok...a woman has the right to choose...she alone makes the decision. You say there should be no control on her decision because obviously it is her body.

Then you mention that you think it becomes more of a human when it develops a brain and starts to feel. Could you tell me when that is? Give me the exact time....as we are dealing with killing a life ok?

You talk about legal boundaries...which throws your position into hypocrisy. At that time...YOU WANT TO TAKE THE WOMANS RIGHTS AWAY AND ENSLAVE HER TO YOUR WARPED SENSE OF MORALITY. What makes you think that you can do this? You tell those that want abortion banned they don't have a right...and then you turn around and do the same thing.

You are a hypocrite about abortion.

How did you come up with 20 weeks? LMAo Its a crap shoot for you.

Your position is a joke.

So what about late term babies....are they just a hunk of mass?

You are pro-abortion throughout the nine months right? Or do you want to enslave the woman to your morality?

Did you know when the heart starts beating? Do you know anything about fetal development?

What is your position on abortion?

A pagan trying to understand the Law. Christ came because the Law could not be followed perfectly. We are not held to the Law today. Christ fulfilled it.

You say no offense intended...not sure I am buying it.

It takes the Holy Spirits help to interpret the Word. Do you have the Holy Spirit?

His Wrath will be poured out on unbelievers.

If you do not have the Holy Spirit you have head knowledge of the Bible...you do not know it perfectly. To even say that is absurd.

If you were an expert...you would know about the Law and you clearly do NOT.

Jesus isn't a religion He is Christianity. And being a Christian is about having a personal relationship with HIm.

And people can be brainwashed to beleive anything even the lies about Christ that the humanist tells.

But you certainly feel the need to swear dont' you?

The statement in the way it was said...was childish.

"If you look at the World's main religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hindu, etc.) and many ancient polytheistic religions (Greek, Roman, Egyptian, etc.), they all have a similar story, which fits along this outline. Names obviously aren't the same and stories are a bit different, but if you look at those stories in a metaphorical sense... they're pretty similar.

Christianity is just a term. Modern Christians are obviously monotheistic, but I think it is very possible that the Bible originally spread a polytheistic message."

They don't all say the same thing, they are all different. They don't even pray to the same God.

Different religions make different truth claims on a number of basis issues and they all claim exclusivity.

If we lived with the belief that there is no truth....everything would go...be allowed and everything would be acceptable.

How could we live like that as societies around the world?

There is cause and effect however...

What was the first cause...the first truth?

Well...lets see. I think it's a really complexed question but I will try.

It all boils down to CHANCE...with me. The chance that an egg..or the eye..or our entire planet just came into existence by random chance....not buying it. Is it impossible that a molecule just happened by chance?

Then how about cause and effect? Did something come from nothing? Just some random chance event in perfect harmonious unity so that everything works?

Am I to believe that the cosmos in all of its complexity was created by chance?

R.C Sproul said this..."chance is magic wand to make not only rabbits but entire universes appear out of nothing."

So chance implies no design or designer. The eye as I said is a complexed property.

This is what Darwin had to say about this. "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”

Ok the egg....it is one of the most highly organized and complexed structure in all the world. Sperm meets egg...and a human is created...an animal created so small it can't be seen by the human eye....microscopic with all it needs genetically. It is as small as a grain of salt and yet it has all the instructions it needs to develop.

Now look at our earth...precision and design. Ocean tides, gravitational pull of the moon....coming together perfectly. Even the temperatures on earth...our closeness to other planets. If we were closer to the sun we would burn up...further away we would freeze.

Random Chance? No way. That would take a lot of faith to believe.

Swearing and acting like he did is childish....it shows lack of substance.

No he wanted people to love him not because he forced them or commanded them to love him..

but of our free will.

Would you be happy knowing someone forced you to marry someone you didn't love?

We have the choice to sin or not to sin. Not Gods fault.

God is only good. We are evil. Our standards for good are not Gods standards.

You've heard people say...well I have been a good person my whole life. I gave to the poor, helped people, didn't murder anyone. But good is not good enough in Gods eyes. We are all filthy rags...and sin is sin. You break one you have broken all of them.

You might not have an affair on your spouse...but if you have lusted...looked at pornography and had sexual thoughts...then in the eyes of God you have sinned.

So Gods standards are way above ours.

Man tries to live LIKE A GOD, tries to live without god. The Word says only believers go to heaven...those who accept Christ. Jesus said it Himself, "I am THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE, NO ONE COMES TO THE FATHER BUT THROUGH ME." This is easy to understand...no way to misinterpret what Christ meant.

Now you can reject this...but then you would be denying what Christ said. There is no other way...only ONE WAY.

Christians put God first...so if you walk the walk...then you have to live a Christian worldview...the bible then is your guidebook on morality and how God wants us to live. Humans I don't think are like angels....basically we are sinful beings. We do not deserve to be in heaven...it is only by Gods Grace that we have a chance to go there.

Well I am not a theologian. What is important to me is the gospel and that is pretty easy to understand. I know why I am here....how I came to be...I know what the truth is...and it can be answered in one word....CHRIST.

I wonder about a lot of things, so many things don't make sense to me....but I am not alone, as no one can answer all the mysteries of life.

I do believe there is only one way...and that one way is Christ. It is exclusive to think that way...but all religions are exclusive. Many say Islam and Christianity have a lot alike...I don't believe so, not at all. We worship a different God. That is why it amazes me that people when they make pot shots at the religious...the religion that takes the most heat is Christianity.

Jesus was about love and forgiveness but He also was about wrath and He came to earth and addressed sin. In fact he talked more about sin and the wrath of God than he did about peace and love.

The gospel is easy enough for a child to understand...and that is what I concentrate on.

So I don't know how much we all could agree on.....this as you know is a subject that really excites people....

I try not to get trapped in the head. By this I mean...sometimes I over think an issue, try to analyze it too much. The head is connected to the heart...and my heart is with Christ...I can't answer everything but I don't think that matters.

What you propose is unliveable ......

If we can't dictate what is right and wrong.....can we live in a civilized society that has rules to protect the innocent?

Or don't you think there is innocence?

Can I just kill you...with no consequences to me?

Should I be able to just walk into your home and rob you blind. What you are saying is that you would stand by and allow me to do it? Why? Because I would have the right to do it if I think I have the right to do it.

How do you know there are other universes...where truth would matter?

All we know is what is right in front of us. We live on earth...it is all we know. Are there other planets with people on it like earth? Not that we know....Isn't it odd that we are like we are and no other life exists on other planets that we know of?

But don't you know rape is bad? Or can rape be acceptable?

Well I can't answer everything. And I can see where one would come off that God is mean.

As I parent I often did things to my kids that they thought were mean at the time. My motives were always honorable and I did it out of love. I tried to protect them and they did not have to know everything. I look at Gods reasoning the same way.

I do believe that one day all my questions will be answered.

When people use profanity it discredits themselves. It lowers what they say to be nothing but blabber....no substance at all.

And one of the rules is.......NO SWEARING.

Or can't you read? Either that or you are just here to disrupt and derail the topic that you can't debate?

This might help you....of course we don't know everything..there are mysteries.

"The image of God surrounded by a heavenly council is not uncommon in the Old Testament. The book of Job mentions the “sons of God” (Elohim) presenting themselves before Yahweh (Job 1:6). Isaiah saw a vision of God surrounded by his seraphim. “And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, ‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’” (Isaiah 6:1-8). The prophet Micaiah saw “the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left” (1 Kings 22:19). Modern ideas about these beings – angels, seraphim, and the host of heaven – are clouded by the elaboration of later ideas. However, the Bible itself does not go into detail about them.

It may be that Genesis 1 refers to “our image” and “our likeness” in order to suggest a link between humanity and the whole realm of the divine. In a similar way Psalm 8 says that Yahweh made the human “little less than” Elohim, a word which interpreters have taken to mean either God himself or the angels."

http://mysteriesofthebible.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/did-god-have-a-heavenly-court/

Hope this helps.

I do not use profanity...but when someone is acting like a child...then call them out. Why do people need to use profanity? This is a debate site...and usually the ones who do this are kids...who just crash the site to disrupt it.

Is it an insult to call someone out on language unbecoming to a debate?

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.” Genesis 1:26

Dr. Charles Ryrie explains the plurals as plurals of majesty: "Gen. 1:26 us . . . our. Plurals of majesty" (Ryrie Study Bible, NIV, p.6).

"The explanation of the first person plural forms is probably that the Creator speaks as heaven's King accompanied by His heavenly hosts" (The New Bible Commentary, p. 82).

"It is possible that this plural form implies a discussion between God and his heavenly court... Alternatively, the plural expresses the majesty and fullness of God's being" (New Jerusalem Bible, p. 19).

"It is now universally admitted that the use of the plural in Gen. 1:26 did not mean to the author that [God was more than one Person.]" (The Word Bible Commentary)

"It's not rational to believe in a supposedly omnipotent God who was defeated by iron chariots, so there goes Christianity, Judaism and Islam."

You said that....implying you know the truth. You made a factual statement.

So again...what is the first cause? You seem to know about about Christianity...the world....so why and how did it all start?

I thought what I said was very nice. You have the potty mouth not me. Look in the mirror.

Lets debate it....there is a debate going on now about this very thing.

You think a woman who is nine months...who walks into an abortion mill and wants to kill her unborn baby...for no reason....should be able to do it.

I don't judge your heart...but your words and actions...the fact that you think this would be moral....is disturbing.

I am for stem cell...but not embryonic stem cell.

Why do you bring up religion? Do you think everyone against abortion has to believe in God? You have no way of knowing.

To say that I don't care is a judgement you can't make...it only makes you feel better to criticize and bash people you disagree with. I value the life in the womb. Science does not talk about size...only that a new humans life begins at conception. It should not matter how big it is or if it can feel or think. The heart starts beating around 22 days it is alive and it is human. What right do you have to take anothers life away to be used in experimentation for other human beings. Why don't we take part of your body to do research? If you think that baby sacrifice is so noble...then why don't you take it one step further and donate your liver, or better yet heart?

So if your standing next to someone who shoots someone dead.....and you eye witness this....the truth about the situation is subjective? Come on.

The people back in the time where they thought the world was flat did not have the capability to prove their assumption. Today we do have that ability and the world is round. Your saying it could be square or triangular or any other shape.

You know you are right.

By implying someone is wrong, you also imply there is right.

Sorta like saying you can't judge someone...and your judging them by saying it.

If truth is truth, it must exclude something-falsehood. If you correct me, you assume error exists. And if you assume error exists, you assume that truth exists.

I don't believe that. Example

If I come to your home and kill your children.....are you telling me that it is not bad...just bad to those who think its bad? The act would not be evil?

Abbsurd and unliveable. Why even attempt to do anything good? We should then abolish prisons...disband our military...and let each one fend for himself. If there is no truth then what does anything matter? If moral relativism is right then there is no basis for opposing genocide, racism or terrorism...etc.

ABSOLUTE....

Absolutely yes.

An accident happens at the corner down the street...ten people see it...but give ten different accounts of what happened. There is still one truth...only one way it happened. Truth is more than our subjective reporting of a car crash. It has objective existence. It has universal application.

And the car crash...the truth is still the truth even if no one knows it or admits it. It's still the truth even if no one agrees what it is. Still the truth if no one follows it.

How would a relativist view this? For him, no fact is in all times and places true. Because everyone has a different point of view we can't ever know what the truth is...and in the case of the car accident...what happened. Some people would even question whether the crash actually happened or not. Relativism does not hang together logically.

The thing is you can't in one breath say that nothing is universally true...and then say my view is universally true. You would be applying your view to everyone but yourself.

Can two people believe contradictory ethical views and both still be correct?

Can rape ever be ok?

Can murder ever be ok?

Can child abuse ever be ok?

Can slavery ever be ok?

Lets take slavery....To speak out against such an atrocity implies the existence of a moral standard to which all people should conform. Insert anything in place of slavery...rape, murder...etc?

Was it wrong that the Allied forces imposed their morality on Hitler who murdered over 6 million Jews? Is it wrong our government imposes morality on those sitting in prison? Was it wrong that the North stopped the South from imposing slavery on blacks? And if you saw someone being raped...would you stand by because you would not want to enforce your morality on someone else?

If moral relativism is true...and there is no one truth....there is no basis then for opposing genocide, racism, terrorism, torture.

I think rape and pedopelia, and child abuse are ok.

Am I right?

Why would you say kill all abortionists? You like violence?

When did Kindergarten get out? Why don't you go get your color book and crayons and draw us a nice picture.

We live in a world of evilness, a world that can't address why we are even here and why and how we got here?

Why don't you explain the first cause. Would love to see the evidence and proof you have to explain what scientists can't begin to address.

What does the ability to talk to people around the globe have anything to do with anything, especially faith in God? Logic and math?

Why don't you address the logic behind all we know started with a big bang? What happens when something explodes? Is their order or chaos?

How do you know there is no God? And how do you know if there is a God that He would not help people? The fact is there is no possible way you can prove there is no God. You would be in the minority of all that have lived to have believed so. The first peoples of the world believed in a high power. To say all this happened...out of nothing? Now that is irrational. Something does not come from nothing.

What is childish is to make pot shots at people who do have faith especially because you can't answer questions that have been asked since the beginning of time.

If you know about the world religions you would see that they DON'T all say the same things. They can't be all right. They are opposed to one another in many ways..especially about the end.

What was the first cause anti-christ?

Tell us the truth of what happened.

Why are we here and how did we get here?

I am not afraid of death...I would like to live a long life however. I know my eternal life will start after I die. I would think someone who is unsure about what happens after death...would be afraid.

You talk about answers to questions. Why since you say the believer knows nothing....don't you explain why we are here and how we got here. What was the first cause?

It is rational to fight to the death for something you believe in. I would fight for Christ and my family. It is rational to encourage others to do good, the right thing.

The facts?

Why don't you share the facts with us all.

What was the first cause?

And address cause and effect...coming from the science angle of it.

Did a big explosion happen? If it did...what caused the explosion and why?

How do you account that evolution formed the universe in perfect harmony...the eye, the egg, life on our planet and on no other?

Why is being in an intelligent creator so irrational..if you can not explain anything either?

I do not believe in violence....the pro-abort believes violence is the answer.

I understand...but I believe he gave free will...other wise...we could do anything and blame it on God. And God is good.

Curious...are you a Christian? Did God create Hitler to kill that many people? Did God create and will the terrorists that took the towers down on 9-11?

You make Him out to be evil.

The fact that you would support shows your morality...or lack thereof.

So you believe a woman should be able to get an abortion for any reason...throught the entire nine months? Yes or no

Its hypocrisy if you say no....she can only kill part of the time.

A pagan praying for me?

I am a sinner saved only by the Grace of God. Christ is my Savior and He will protect me from evil...even on this forum.

Your name is sacreligious....so don't pretend. You mock the Lord and Savior.

Your god is evil....someone who creates someone for evil to do the will of Satan...the ruler of this world.

I question nothing concerning the Lord....I question your words and actions...they speak for themselves. Anyone with the Holy Spirit could see.

You are anti-christ.

Your comment from a pagan I will dismiss.

His plan is not to cause evil to happen. Is He responsible for your vile and hate filled position? No you are. You are responsible for your views and your actions.

His plan is perfect and He knows what you will do...but He does not cause you to do it.

The fact that you would even mention the word Lord...turns my stomach.

If what you say is right...then if someone murdered you...that would be ok, right? All part of his plan. LMAO

The fact is you are trying to derail the topic...because you don't want to address it.

That is not what this debate is about. These are non biased..sources that confirm overwhelmingly that life starts at conception.

Wondering however about your comment....you obviously condone abortion on demand for any reason throughout the entire nine months...right?

No it would not know if someone killed it. Does someone who is sleeping know what is going on? Do you think if someone shot them in the head...they would know someone just killed them?

The unborn in the womb...can cough, move, suck its thumb, kick, roll.

And you know proof positive that an unborn does not feel pain?

Killing someone in the womb can cause distress and emotional trauma...not only for the woman but for others in the family.

Does a newborn have goals?

So when is it killing is ok with you....give me an exact date....since we are talking about slaughter. I would think you would want to be right. So when is it?

You give a date of 22-24 weeks. My niece was born at 23 1/12 weeks over 21 years ago. She just graduated from college in pre-med and is going into medical school. She felt pain...as she had to endure over 20 surgeries. So don't tell me what you state is accurate.

You are for choice......the womans right and then you state she can't get a late term abortion. Do you think you have the right to impose your morality on other women who don't care?

Would terminating your life be wrong? What if someone thought you were horrible and wanted to get rid of you? Was Hitler a good guy...? He wanted to get rid of people too. You just said...terminating a late term baby is wrong? LMAO And then you ask the question....why is terminating the life of someone wrong? Honey your position is not cohesive...or logical.

If there is something wrong with abortion...why are you a pro-abort?

I don't place much weight on statistics. Obviously you do. But you have not really researched this topic to know the bias of the places doing them. If the stats were irrelevant to your argument why did you throw them in? LOL

If you think there is nothing wrong with abortion...why make the laws more restrictive? ARen't you pro-choice? What are you?

Your position makes no sense....allow abortion until?????time, but make more restrictions on abortion.

You have no clue about this topic.

Your post and mouth are vile....no wonder you have the views that you do. Abortion is not funny unless you are just sick.

The First International Symposium on Abortion came to the following conclusion:

The changes occurring between implantation, a six-week embryo, a six-month fetus, a one-week-old child, or a mature adult are merely stages of development and maturation. The majority of our group could find no point in time between the union of sperm and egg, or at least the blastocyst stage, and the birth of the infant at which point we could say that this was not a human life.

The Official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:

Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a human being—a being that is alive and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.

http://www.epm.org/resources/2010/Mar/8/ scientists-attest-life-beginning-conception/

And from the National Review Online

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/226168/when-life-begins/robert-p-george

Modern science long ago resolved the question. We actually know when the life of a new human individual begins.

A recently published white paper, “When does human life begin? A scientific perspective,” offers a thorough discussion of the facts of human embryogenesis and early development, and its conclusion is inescapable: From a purely biological perspective, scientists can identify the point at which a human life begins. The relevant studies are legion. The biological facts are uncontested. The method of analysis applied to the data is universally accepted.

Your life began, as did the life of every other human being, when the fusion of egg and sperm produced a new, complete, living organism — an embryonic human being. You were never an ovum or a sperm cell, those were both functionally and genetically parts of other human beings — your parents. But you were once an embryo, just as you were once an adolescent, a child, an infant, and a fetus. By an internally directed process, you developed from the embryonic stage into and through the fetal, infant, child, and adolescent stages of development and ultimately into adulthood with your determinateness, unity, and identity fully intact. You are the same being — the same human being — who once was an embryo.

It is true that each of us, in the embryonic and fetal stages of development, were dependent on our mothers, but we were not maternal body parts. Though dependent, we were distinct individual human beings. That is why physicians who treat pregnant women know that they are caring not for one patient, but for two. (Of course, in cases of twins and triplets physicians are caring for more than two!)

Why, then, do we seem so far from a consensus on questions of abortion and embryo-destructive research?

Perhaps because the debate over when human life begins has never been about the biological facts. It has been about the value we ascribe to human beings at the dawn of their lives. When we debate questions of abortion, assisted reproductive technologies, human embryonic stem cell research and human cloning, we are not really disagreeing about whether human embryos are human beings. The scientific evidence is simply too overwhelming for there to be any real debate on this point. What is at issue in these debates is the question of whether we ought to respect and defend human beings in the earliest stages of their lives. In other words, the question is not about scientific facts; it is about the nature of human dignity and the equality of human beings.

Robert P. George is McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University.

Condic, a senior fellow of the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person, published her conclusions in a white paper titled "When Does Human Life Begin?" In the report she addresses the topic using current scientific data in human embryology.

An associate professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine, Condic received her doctorate in neurobiology from the University of California, Berkely. Her teaching focuses primarily on embryonic development, and she directs the University of Utah School of Medicine's course in human embryology.

As a scientist and as director of a medical school course in human embryology, I have been considering the general question of when human life begins for quite a few years. The argument put forward in the white paper has grown out of discussions with philosophers, scientists and ethicists, as well as out of my own research in this area.

Yet this topic has come to the fore in the lead-up to the presidential election. While the topic of when life begins has generally been avoided by politicians and government officials, recently a number of prominent figures have offered their interpretations, making this a timely subject to consider with scientific rigor and neutrality.

Q: You define the moment of conception as the second it takes for the sperm and egg to fuse and form a zygote. What were the scientific principles you used to arrive at this conclusion?

Condic: The central question of "when does human life begin" can be stated in a somewhat different way: When do sperm and egg cease to be, and what kind of thing takes their place once they cease to be?

To address this question scientifically, we need to rely on sound scientific argument and on the factual evidence. Scientists make distinctions between different cell types (for example, sperm, egg and the cell they produce at fertilization) based on two simple criteria: Cells are known to be different because they are made of different components and because they behave in distinct ways.

These two criteria are used throughout the scientific enterprise to distinguish one cell type from another, and they are the basis of all scientific (as opposed to arbitrary, faith-based or political) distinctions. I have applied these two criteria to the scientific data concerning fertilization, and they are the basis for the conclusion that a new human organism comes into existence at the moment of sperm-egg fusion.

Here is her research in the paper.

http://www.westchesterinstitute.net/images/wi whitepaperlife_print.pdf

A United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. All of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.

Dr. Alfred M. Bongiovanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the University of Pennsylvania, stated:

“I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception.... I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of human life....

I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty...is not a human being. This is human life at every stage.”

Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the University of Descartes in Paris, was the discoverer of the chromosome pattern of Down syndrome. Dr. LeJeune testified to the Judiciary Subcommittee, “after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”

Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”

Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive.... It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception.... Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”

Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of Colorado Medical School: “The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view a simple and straightforward matter—the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological, political, or economic goals.”

A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who would specifically testify that life begins at any point other than conception or implantation. Only one witness said no one can tell when life begins.”

Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception:

Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and Rutgers, is unsympathetic to the prolife cause. Nevertheless, he affirms unequivocally, “The basic fact is simple: life begins not at birth, but conception.”

Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was a cofounder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.

Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”

Dr. Landrum Shettles was for twenty-seven years attending obstetrician-gynecologist at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York. Shettles was a pioneer in sperm biology, fertility, and sterility. He is internationally famous for being the discoverer of male- and female-producing sperm. His intrauterine photographs of preborn children appear in over fifty medical textbooks. Dr. Shettles states,

I oppose abortion. I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest—that human life commences at the time of conception—and, second, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.

The information comes from Medical textbooks, Medical dictionaries…from universities such as Harvard and from such medical institutions as Mayo Clinic. Others come from Scientific Encyclopedias. NOTHING CHRISTIAN ABOUT THE SOURCES.

The following references illustrate the fact that a new human embryo, the starting point for a human life, comes into existence with the formation of the one-celled zygote:

1. "Development of the embryo begins at Stage 1 when a sperm fertilizes an oocyte and together they form a zygote."

[England, Marjorie A. Life Before Birth. 2nd ed. England: Mosby-Wolfe, 1996, p.31]

2."Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).

"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."

[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

3. "Embryo: the developing organism from the time of fertilization until significant differentiation has occurred, when the organism becomes known as a fetus."

[Cloning Human Beings. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, MD: GPO, 1997, Appendix-2.]

4."Embryo: An organism in the earliest stage of development; in a man, from the time of conception to the end of the second month in the uterus."

[Dox, Ida G. et al. The Harper Collins Illustrated Medical Dictionary. New York: Harper Perennial, 1993, p. 146]

5."Embryo: The early developing fertilized egg that is growing into another individual of the species. In man the term 'embryo' is usually restricted to the period of development from fertilization until the end of the eighth week of pregnancy."

[Walters, William and Singer, Peter (eds.). Test-Tube Babies. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1982, p. 160]

6."The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, thezygote."

[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

7."Embryo: The developing individual between the union of the germ cells and the completion of the organs which characterize its body when it becomes a separate organism.... At the moment the sperm cell of the human male meets the ovum of the female and the union results in a fertilized ovum (zygote), a new life has begun.... The term embryo covers the several stages of early development from conception to the ninth or tenth week of life."

[Considine, Douglas (ed.). Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia. 5th edition. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1976, p. 943]

8."I would say that among most scientists, the word 'embryo' includes the time from after fertilization..."

[Dr. John Eppig, Senior Staff Scientist, Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, Maine) and Member of the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 31]

9."The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."

[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]

10. "The question came up of what is an embryo, when does an embryo exist, when does it occur. I think, as you know, that in development, life is a continuum.... But I think one of the useful definitions that has come out, especially from Germany, has been the stage at which these two nuclei [from sperm and egg] come together and the membranes between the two break down."

[Jonathan Van Blerkom of University of Colorado, expert witness on human embryology before the NIH Human Embryo Research Panel -- Panel Transcript, February 2, 1994, p. 63]

11."Zygote. This cell, formed by the union of an ovum and a sperm (Gr. zyg tos, yoked together), represents the beginning of a human being. The common expression 'fertilized ovum' refers to the zygote."

[Moore, Keith L. and Persaud, T.V.N. Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects. 4th edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1993, p. 1]

12."The chromosomes of the oocyte and sperm are...respectively enclosed within female and male pronuclei. These pronuclei fuse with each other to produce the single, diploid, 2N nucleus of the fertilized zygote. This moment of zygote formation may be taken as the beginning or zero time point of embryonic development."

[Larsen, William J. Human Embryology. 2nd edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997, p. 17]

13. "Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed.... The combination of 23 chromosomes present in each pronucleus results in 46 chromosomes in the zygote. Thus the diploid number is restored and the embryonic genome is formed. The embryo now exists as a genetic unity."

[O'Rahilly, Ronan and Müller, Fabiola. Human Embryology & Teratology. 2nd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1996, pp. 8, 29. This textbook lists "pre-embryo" among "discarded and replaced terms" in modern embryology, describing it as "ill-defined and inaccurate" (p. 12}]

14. "Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)... The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual."

[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

15. "[A]nimal biologists use the term embryo to describe the single cell stage, the two-cell stage, and all subsequent stages up until a time when recognizable humanlike limbs and facial features begin to appear between six to eight weeks after fertilization....

"[A] number of specialists working in the field of human reproduction have suggested that we stop using the word embryo to describe the developing entity that exists for the first two weeks after fertilization. In its place, they proposed the term pre-embryo....

"I'll let you in on a secret. The term pre-embryo has been embraced wholeheartedly by IVF practitioners for reasons that are political, not scientific. The new term is used to provide the illusion that there is something profoundly different between what we nonmedical biologists still call a six-day-old embryo and what we and everyone else call a sixteen-day-old embryo.

"The term pre-embryo is useful in the political arena -- where decisions are made about whether to allow early embryo (now called pre-embryo) experimentation -- as well as in the confines of a doctor's office, where it can be used to allay moral concerns that might be expressed by IVF patients. 'Don't worry,' a doctor might say, 'it's only pre-embryos that we're manipulating or freezing. They won't turn into real human embryos until after we've put them back into your body.'"

[Silver, Lee M. Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World. New York: Avon Books, 1997, p. 39]

None of these sources mention God...or personal beliefs.

Can't wait to hear your reply...the Jackster. Hoping you are investigating some of the information I gave.

If the child won't survive why not let it be born anyway? Why go in and kill it...cut it apart...dissect it.....?

And no women if she was dying on the table would be allowed to die. The child would be induced...

What you want them to do is to play God.

Why bring up capital punishment? To take the focus off of the unborn and abortion?

You want to talk about that make a debate...would be happy to debate that there.

And for your information....I AM NOT FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. Just because someone is pro-life...does not mean they can't be against it.

Do you think a newborn would know if someone killed it? Because it really does not know what is going on.

Is killing someone who is severely mentally disabled ok? How about someone in a comma? Pain is not an issue...anyone can be put under and then killed. This has to do with morality and the right for a human being to live...even if they can't or are unable to speak for themselves.

Your position is hypocritical. You are playing God....its a crap shoot for you.

You have no way of knowing the exact point when something is viable...or feels pain...yet you are willing to let that go...and guess. Is it 24 weeks? 23 1/2? And does the unborn feel emotion? How do you know?

There are two involved in an abortion. The woman that carries the baby and the one she carries. Abortion should just not be about the woman. The unborn is not a part of her. The baby has its own circulatory system, fingerprints, heart, organs...etc. Louise Brown the worlds first test tube baby...was not a part of her mother she was not even conceived in her mother...but in a Petri dish. She used her mothers body as a safe sanctuary to grow.

You give statistics on the occurrence of abortion. First of all there are no statistics that are accurate...most all are biased. Guttmaucher Institute is an arm of Planned Parenthood, the majority of the board members are pro-abortion. There is bias. As of late we have seen clinics all over the country, doctors exposed who are doing late term abortion. It is going on all over and not reported...why? They are guilty. There are far more than the statistics show. But with that said...the Pro-aborts position is based on CHOICE...and the right of the woman TO CHOOSE.

How then can you tell her...that she can't, that because of YOUR particular morals she can't decide for herself? You enslave her....your position is hypocrisy.

People know when they sign up for service that the possibility of war could be an issue. If they felt that strongly against it...they should not sign up. For those that were drafted they still had a choice. There were people exempt because of religion and faith.

Less than 1% of ALL ABORTIONS...are done for health reasons, rape, incest. Bad things happen and when they do should we also do more bad things because of that one bad thing? Does one bad thing...with another bad thing (abortion)...equal something good?

If a woman is dying on the table...and I don't mean emotional issues...I mean dying...then steps should be taken to start labor.

If you are for choice then you must allow the woman to choose...what is best despite what you think morally? And most pro-aborts don't do this. They make a big deal out of CHOICE...THE WOMANS BODY....HER MORALITY....and then they tell her that she can't...her reason is not good enough.

Its hypocrisy.

Is a sperm cell human> Yes Is an egg human? Yes. Do they make a human being? No, not unless they come together...and are fertilized.

I do not find the topic of abortion something to be laughed at...it is not funny. So I don't like sarcasm when it comes to killing unborn children.

The fact is science says that which is in the womb is a living human.

This is not about anything other than killing the innocent life in the womb...not about adoption, war, gay marriage, the elderly, the disabled...none of that. Bringing all that up..is a way to take the focus off of that which is being slaughtered and defended by people like you.

We have decided as a nation when the unborn is viable because we have laws as to when abortion becomes illegal. Your position is pure hypocrisy. You enslave the woman to your morality...and you tell me I don't have the right to do it. Your position is all over the place...nothing consistent. The woman...deserves choice...its her body....a crock...because you take that away from her. It should be your opinion as to when a woman should be able to kill..because God forbid you would not want to deny choice to women. Right?

No you said abortion should be off limits at a certain point. Hypocritical position. You don't know the truth about when life starts based on science....and you don't have enough knowledge to be consistent in position.

No matter what stage the unborn is in....it is still a living human being.

I just don't understand the rationale of you pro-aborts on when viability should be.

What is wrong letting nature take its course? If the child will die it will die naturally. Why go in and kill it?

I am not sure....what great movie has been made...like the old classics?

They are full of violence and sex...lacking in content.

I do believe most the stuff on television is junk...especially the reality TV shows.

What movie has hit epic proportions in the last ten years?

I grew up watching the Soaps and I was not alone. (I am 57 years old) I watched As the World Turns, Guiding Light, Bold and the Beautiful, The Young and the Restless. I remember when they started out as 15 minute shows...then went to 30 minutes.

Let me tell you...during my college days...(1974-48) everyone juggled their class loads around the Soaps...especially The Young and the Restless. They were watched by all ages...and people got emotionally involved in them.

Television is powerful.

First thing in the morning...I turn on the television. I love going to movies..watching movies...but I connect better with television.

My all time favorite show....Frasier. I could recite the episodes. I feel in love with the characters and I know it sounds funny but feel like I know them intimately.

My dad was the same with Mash.

Movies can't do that.....they can't connect people to characters on a personal level.

I believe in God. I believe that He is in complete control. But I also believe that He allowed us free will, stepped back to allow us to exercise it.

It is in our nature that we sin. It is not in Gods nature to sin. It is by our free will that we sin.

I believe God knows what we will do before we do it..but I don't believe He causes us to do it. If that were the case he would be the author of evil...and would create people with the purple to sin.

You are avoiding my question.

No God....the choice of the woman....no restrictions.....

Yes or no....you believe abortion should be allowed throughout the entire nine months....because it is the woman's choice, her body?