![]() |
Quote:
i say life does not start at conception and could not see how it does. therefore, no, i do not think it 'may' start at conception, because what happens at conception is not life. i still contend that if you believe that life starts at conception, then by all means treat your conception as such - but do not insist that others MUST do the same when there is no proof for it. |
Quote:
|
Bababoo,
I'l just chime in with two pennies worth in response to this question that you posed: "Also, answer me this (yes or no): would you say that life may start at conception, we just can't be sure?" It's really not a "yes" or a "no". My observation has been that life continues. Where it starts is for you to find. Now, if the thinking is in reference to the stage 16 mitosis embryos that are sitting in liquid nitrogen waiting for their viability to expire before they are disposed of as "medical waste", my opinion is that the use of the "embryonic stem calls" they contain be used to expand existing cell lines, and hopefully fine a purpose better than being discarded. Maybe some remedies for devastating diseases will be found. And, please, don't bring the fear of "cloning" into the discussion. DTS |
Baba,
You might have missed my response above, cause you keep asking... "When does life really begin?" The best I answer I can say is that it continues. Can I ask you a question? Have you ever attended a funeral for a first trimester miscarriage? Me neither. |
Quote:
i cannot fathom thinking that way. i cannot fathom that the product of conception is somehow as valuable as a human being as you or i. why? because it is not a human being. it is not a sentient, able human being. it really is that simple. the abortion discussion/debate is such old hat for me and isn't really interesting -- but this all came out of the SD law that got voted down yesterday. the problem with that is that there is no health exception, no rape exception, no incest exception, and no way to twist the wording of the law to pretend that those exceptions exist in any way. that's simply unenlightened thinking. we're worried about "killing" clusters of multiplying cells, but we're not worried about ruining the life of an ACTUAL, LIVING HUMAN BEING by forcing her to carry her rapist's baby to term? that's cruel. plain and simple. so basically this bill says some lives are more important than others. and i just cannot figure out how something that could not survive on its own is worth more than a human being? beats me. let's make crazy examples now. if pro-lifers are so concerned with masses of cells being "human beings" then by all means I don't understand how they shower, brush their teeth or do anything that would otherwise kill bacteria or other microorganisms. life is life is life, right? if we essentially evolved from monkeys, then who are we to assume that the bacteria in your mouth is not the root of the next step in evolution? can you for sure refute that? then you're a killer too so get off your horse. i contend you should stop brushing your teeth and showering because you cannot say for 100% sure that there is no basis to this ridiculous argument i have just made. sound stupid and illogical to you? that's how "life starts at conception" arguments by and large sound to me. |
Bababoo,
"I was writing whilst you were posting the earlier one. At any rate, I am not sure what you mean by that (especially outside the context of those stored in nitrogen tanks). Please explain" Explanation: Human eggs are harvested at fertility clinics. They are ferilized in vitro (in a petri dish) to be implanted. As excess embryos are created for implantation, those that aren't used are stored in liquid nitrogen (-300) until they are no longer viable (alive). There are over 400,000 presently. We don't have that many "serrogate mothers" to receive them. Would you prefer that they become "medical waste" for disposal or would you rather they be used as a source of "embronic stem cells" to expand existing cell lines and further the research that seeks cures to diseases such as Parkinsons, Alsheimers (sp), some forms of cancer, neurological damage...and many other applications. |
Brian are you saying as a "very serious" christian that we "basically evolved from monkeys?
|
Quote:
I'll let Brian answer your question. My understanding is that it had a whole lot to do with blue-green algae that existed for over 2 billion years before other life forms evolved. I have to check the pre-cambrian fossils and get back to you. |
Quote:
i feel that the portion regarding forcing a woman to carry her rapist's baby to term and the psychological trauma that could ensue was compeltely legitimate. it seems to lay a hierarchy to human life if we are to assume that conception equals life in this situation for the sake of argument. and obviously i was being ridiculous and irrational in my example of bacteria evolving into humans. however, it cuts to the very root of our conversation. you say that since i cannot be SURE that life does not start at conception, that we should err on the side of caution and not have abortions. i say that if we cannot be SURE that bacteria is not the next step in human evolution, then we should err on the side of caution and not kill it. it seems like perfectly sound logic....don't get tripped up by the ridiculous and impossible hypothetical i used to illustrate that. |
Dts, as a christian i disagree. I think God created the universe and earth and people. But lets not debate about that. We are going to disagree and neither one of us is going to budge. My problem comes when a self-titled "serious christian" says we basically evolved from monkeys. As a christian you either believe in all the bible or none of it. You can't pick and choose what you want to believe in it. Either its all god inspired and god breathed or its just a nice collection of stories.
|
Quote:
It does not mean that you have to act ignorantly and pretend that things which are sound science are not true. Being a Christian does not mean that you have to be unrealistic, unintelligent, and unwilling to question things. You can read whatever you want into my statement that I am a serious Christian. I take my faith and my relationship with God very seriously and I do my best by Him at all times. I may not be your version of a Christian, but I am a Christian all the same. Your reading of my faith is irrelevant. |
Quote:
If this is "the chicken or the egg" discussion...leave me out. I went into that one once long ago in a Philosophy 101 class. No answer was found, though I still shake my head thinking about some of the arguements presented. If you know the answer to your queston...enlighten me. |
Brian not judging your faith just clarifying. I just dont agree with it. Gen 1-27 says god created man in his own image. I fail to see how one can draw we evolved from monkeys and you forget that science cannot prove we evolved from monkeys, just like i cannot prove that god created us. Being a chrisitan doesnt mean that you are unintelligent or unquestioning but you do have to have faith. Either god created the world and man or he didnt. Either he died and rose again or he didnt. It's not as gray as you make it seem. I agree there are gray areas in christendom. However, creation and his death aren't one of them. Because the bible basically revolved around those two points.
|
Quote:
did God create man? Yes. do I believe that God just laid man down as step one? No. Do I believe in evolution? Absolutely. Do I believe evolution is God's work? Yes. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.