Life does not begin at fertilization...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I'm surprised (but glad) it failed.
 
Tonight, I had the esteemed pleasure of seeing this on the news... with like 6-7 family members... 2 of which are extremely religious.

The others are religious enough, including myself... but I also can smell fallacy a mile away. 3 doctors were in the room, plus myself, 2 religious religious fam members (who are super awesome mind you).

Well, I blatantly disagreed, and explained why I think this is complete HORSE****! They were appalled (I usually keep my mouth shut about this stuff). I was 2 glasses of wine deep (enough to be a little loose with the lips), but my argument was sound.

We don't celebrate the day you were conceived... we celebrate your birthday.

Yes, I do think there is a certain responsibility as physicians to do no harm. But in this case, and I bring this example up all the time... In Jewish law (not jewish BTW... jew by association though), if the fetus is harming the mother, you must sacrifice the fetus, and save the mother. By this southerner interpretation of life... that would be murder. Yet, the argument by jewish law is that "the mother can live to have more children".

What I really enjoyed was the female African American OB/GYN on the news report who said that this was a good thing, and we need to stop killing the future.


Um... hello... over population. I'm not saying go and abort every fetus out there... but I am saying that it is a CHOICE. 95-99% of legislators did not go to medical school... and it appalls me that some medical professionals do not understand that it is a CHOICE!!!!!

Side note: I've had to witness 2 abortions in my lifetime. Two of my very close female friends were ditched by their boyfriends, and I had to go to the clinic with them in Canada. Abortions are free in Canada, and they are covered by your provincial health care plan. You can have up to two abortions in your lifetime. Needless to say, the staff were the most professional, courteous I have ever seen.

You are allowed to have your personal views, but ultimately, it is the decision of the patient, and as a physician you can choose not to perform the procedure, or refer them elsewhere.

/endrant
 
blehm98 said:
it's as if this thread was started to say "I dare you to disagree"
Click to expand...

I am actually pretty happy about it. Regardless of how I feel about abortion the legal confusion this law would cause in the time it would have taken the supreme court to declare it unconstitutional would have been massive.
 
p648029-sperm_fertilizing_egg-spl.jpg
 
ppfizenm said:
I am actually pretty happy about it. Regardless of how I feel about abortion the legal confusion this law would cause in the time it would have taken the supreme court to declare it unconstitutional would have been massive.
Click to expand...

Seriously. Using an IUD or Plan B = murder? Throwing out unused embryos after successful IVF = murder? Miscarriage = involuntary manslaughter? :laugh:
 
The problem was the wording of the law was going to cause issues with in vitro fertilization (you fertilize more eggs than you're going to use thus wasting them), and possibly most hormonal birth controls. Not just talking about Plan B, but even regular pills (while also inhibiting fertilization) can make it tough for a fertilized egg to implant in the uterus (which would be illegal).
 
Not to mention... what do you do about ectopic pregnancies? I was really frightened of the consequences of this law.
 
It's pretty obvious that a zygote is alive but equally obvious that life does not begin at conception, as sperm and egg cells are already alive before conception.
 
Yes! I'm so relieved this didn't pass...👍

Edit: On a side note, does it frustrate anyone else when people spout the idea that "a new life begins at conception" is a scientific fact? :bang:
 
The zygote is alive, in the bological sense, but it does not have any attributes that confer it personhood.
 
CodeBlu said:
You are allowed to have your personal views, but ultimately, it is the decision of the patient, and as a physician you can choose not to perform the procedure, or refer them elsewhere.

/endrant
Click to expand...

Laws like this hurt physicians in that they reduce our options to treat our patients.

gettheleadout said:
Yes! I'm so relieved this didn't pass...👍

Edit: On a side note, does it frustrate anyone else when people spout the idea that "a new life begins at conception" is a scientific fact? :bang:
Click to expand...


I vehemently dislike scientific illiteracy.
 
I think people are too extreme left or right about this. Yeah, we get it, it makes some more sense to abort if you were raped, or it'll hurt the mother and all that jazz. But how many abortions are because of these situations and how many are because of herpy-derp teens (or adults) taking advantage of medicine?? And not advantage in the good way.
The whole IT'S A CHOICE argument, I saw somewhere up there isn't much of an argument... if we lived by peoples choices, well most of us wouldn't live at all (not because of abortion, just general haters hatin').
And then there's all the different levels of abortions, like when the baby is already quite a couple months in. I'm pretty sure it's alive then, no?
I'm not trying to get into an argument--though it'll probably get into one that I'll barely follow--I just get disgusted with overly-opinionated people whether I agree or disagree with them. Especially when it has to do with an innocent life (or life-to-be) who has no say in the argument.

/rant
 
Life is not the issue here. It is the 'when' that matters. A plant is alive but we rarely consider its life to be worth protecting. To determine the 'when' for humans, we have to agree on when the essential nature (the continuous experience of "self" that we all share) of human beings begins. Is it a cognitive moment such as one's first moment of self awareness? Or, is it the point in development where sensation begins? Or, perhaps, something else all together. I believe that once a human develops its "self", then it should be protected from destruction.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe so many people here are okay with murder. You will all be terrible doctors. Also, medical advice, spam, and porn.
 
Camy99 said:
I think people are too extreme left or right about this. Yeah, we get it, it makes some more sense to abort if you were raped, or it'll hurt the mother and all that jazz. But how many abortions are because of these situations and how many are because of herpy-derp teens (or adults) taking advantage of medicine?? And not advantage in the good way.
The whole IT'S A CHOICE argument, I saw somewhere up there isn't much of an argument... if we lived by peoples choices, well most of us wouldn't live at all (not because of abortion, just general haters hatin').
And then there's all the different levels of abortions, like when the baby is already quite a couple months in. I'm pretty sure it's alive then, no?
I'm not trying to get into an argument--though it'll probably get into one that I'll barely follow--I just get disgusted with overly-opinionated people whether I agree or disagree with them. Especially when it has to do with an innocent life (or life-to-be) who has no say in the argument.

/rant
Click to expand...

Just so you know, teens account for a very low percentage of abortions. Most women who get an abortion are already mothers, and many are in relationships or married. Many times it's not a choice of convenience but of necessity (as in, I can't support another kid).

There are always abuses of the system (in medicine, govt services, etc) and that is sad and wrong. However, people take those examples to make blanket statements and don't realize the complexity and hard choices that many people have to make. Ultimately, that's why it should still be a choice. I agree that there is a high number of abortions, and we should do something to reduce the number of abortions. However, that should not involve taking away a woman's right to choose.
 
Personhood starts when you dont require another person to eat and breath for you.....you know those essential human functions.

Hell couldnt you make the argument that masturbation is essentially genocide? I mean where does this stop?
 
I can't believe that this didn't pass! I'm outraged!

I mean, can you believe that some pretty fat percentage of the time a fertilized egg will pass through the uterus on its way out to die because it failed to implant? MURDERERS. 😡😡
 
I was very proud of Mississippi as I was watching the votes come in.

I think the compelling reasons to vote 'no' were the lack of exceptions for rape and incest as well as the unknown for IVF eggs, ectopic pregnancy, and miscarriage.

A woman's right to make choices over her reproductive health and body should be compelling on its own. Sadly it is not.


(abortion, and other medical care, in Canada is not FREE. It's paid for by tax payer dollars. Interestingly there are not laws governing abortion, leaving the practice to be regulated by *gasp* physicians)
 
Barcu said:
Just so you know, teens account for a very low percentage of abortions. Most women who get an abortion are already mothers, and many are in relationships or married. Many times it's not a choice of convenience but of necessity (as in, I can't support another kid).

There are always abuses of the system (in medicine, govt services, etc) and that is sad and wrong. However, people take those examples to make blanket statements and don't realize the complexity and hard choices that many people have to make. Ultimately, that's why it should still be a choice. I agree that there is a high number of abortions, and we should do something to reduce the number of abortions. However, that should not involve taking away a woman's right to choose.
Click to expand...

Piggy backing and extending...

Recognizing that laws against abortion do not stop the rate of abortion, the problem really is the high number of unwanted pregnancies. Comprehensive sexual education (not just abstinence only), BC provided through insurance companies are steps in that direction.
 
I'm really glad the move failed. I felt it was too vague and would cause slippery slope cases. I am totally pro-choice and the thought that if a woman was having a life-threatening pregnancy (ectopic for example) and was forced to put her life in grave danger for the sake of that unborn baby.... I don't know. I just can't fathom the stupidity of it.

My body, my choice.
 
ppfizenm said:
I am actually pretty happy about it. Regardless of how I feel about abortion the legal confusion this law would cause in the time it would have taken the supreme court to declare it unconstitutional would have been massive.
Click to expand...

Okay? You disagree with this stupid amendment, but you mock other people that voted down this stupid amendment? Do you want us to congratulate you on the cognitive dissonance?
 
link2swim06 said:
Hell couldnt you make the argument that masturbation is essentially genocide? I mean where does this stop?
Click to expand...

"For that matter, any masturbatory emissions, where the sperm is clearly not seeking an egg, could be termed reckless abandonment." -Elle Woods
 
I live in Mississippi. We are not as ignorant, poor, or ultra religious as people think. Im glad the bill passed. Im not pro abortion, but im also not pro oppression.
 
pkwraith said:
Okay? You disagree with this stupid amendment, but you mock other people that voted down this stupid amendment? Do you want us to congratulate you on the cognitive dissonance?
Click to expand...

I can be happy it didn't pass but upset that the legal definition of when life begins is being decided on by people with no formal scientific, medical, or religiousto training. Im not denigrating Mississippians, I just don't feel the majority of americans have the training to decide this.
 
JESSFALLING said:
To determine the 'when' for humans, we have to agree on when the essential nature (the continuous experience of "self" that we all share) of human beings begins. Is it a cognitive moment such as one's first moment of self awareness? Or, is it the point in development where sensation begins? Or, perhaps, something else all together. I believe that once a human develops its "self", then it should be protected from destruction.
Click to expand...

If you go by that standard, I could have aborted my 15 month old not too long ago, because she is just starting to understand that she is a separate person from me. Coming into selfhood is an ongoing process, so I don't think it's reasonable to expect to draw a boundary based on that criteria. Some would argue that severely mentally handicapped people never emerge into selfhood. It's a bad line to be drawing.

I think there does need to be a clear and unambiguous line drawn about when you can abort and when you can't, I just think it can't be much more than arbitrary. We're never going to be able to latch onto a single moment and say "That's when life begins, that's when there's a person in there and not just a bundle of embryonic tissue."
 
kg062008 said:
I live in Mississippi. We are not as ignorant, poor, or ultra religious as people think. Im glad the bill passed. Im not pro abortion, but im also not pro oppression.
Click to expand...

Um, the bill didn't pass. Failed in favor of prochoice pretty overwhelmingly.
 
ppfizenm said:
I can be happy it didn't pass but upset that the legal definition of when life begins is being decided on by people with no formal scientific, medical, or religiousto training. Im not denigrating Mississippians, I just don't feel the majority of americans have the training to decide this.
Click to expand...

This may seem like a stupid question, but please, humor me: How exactly is science useful here? How can you quanitfy personhood by scientific metrics (other than DNA sequencing, which would tend to substantiate claims that a zygote is a "human being")? I'm pro-choice for sure, but I think you've overstated the role of science in what is fundamentally a philosophical/moral issue.
 
BHaus9 said:
This may seem like a stupid question, but please, humor me: How exactly is science useful here? How can you quanitfy personhood by scientific metrics (other than DNA sequencing, which would tend to substantiate claims that a zygote is a "human being")? I'm pro-choice for sure, but I think you've overstated the role of science in what is fundamentally a philosophical/moral issue.
Click to expand...

Some argue that personhood depends on developmental milestones like brain activity or viability outside the womb, so it could be useful to have scientific knowledge of when these milestones happen.
 
kexy said:
Some argue that personhood depends on developmental milestones like brain activity or viability outside the womb, so it could be useful to have scientific knowledge of when these milestones happen.
Click to expand...

But ultimately, I think the decision about WHICH particular developmental milestone to designate as the beginning of "humahood" has to be arbitrary, or at the very least, unamenable to scientific inquiry. Sure, you can demonstrate when a fetus is viable, and once you've decided that viability outside the womb is a preriquisite for personhood, that's useful information to have. But how is science going to tell you that viability outside the womb is what makes for a "valid human life" to begin with? Hell, if we're going to use brain activity or respiration or limb development as our measure of worth, there are quite a few adults I should be able to off without consequence.
 
BHaus9 said:
This may seem like a stupid question, but please, humor me: How exactly is science useful here? How can you quanitfy personhood by scientific metrics (other than DNA sequencing, which would tend to substantiate claims that a zygote is a "human being")? I'm pro-choice for sure, but I think you've overstated the role of science in what is fundamentally a philosophical/moral issue.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Besides science and medicine being intrinsically melded there are specific fields of science that deal with only pre-natal issues and even fertility.
 
BHaus9 said:
But ultimately, I think the decision about WHICH particular developmental milestone to designate as the beginning of "humahood" has to be arbitrary, or at the very least, unamenable to scientific inquiry. Sure, you can demonstrate when a fetus is viable, and once you've decided that viability outside the womb is a preriquisite for personhood, that's useful information to have. But how is science going to tell you that viability outside the womb is what makes for a "valid human life" to begin with? Hell, if we're going to use brain activity or respiration or limb development as our measure of worth, there are quite a few adults I should be able to off without consequence.
Click to expand...

My area of expertise is neurosci. I believe life begins when the body is capable of sustaining brain growth and development unassisted ie when a child can survive outside of the womb with medical assistance. Consrquentially I feel the legal definition of death is when no brain activity remains and cannot be restored. As science progresses my definitions will likely change which is one of the good things about science; it is relevant to its time.

We all are brains housed in shells that support it.
 
ppfizenm said:
Seriously? Besides science and medicine being intrinsically melded there are specific fields of science that deal with only pre-natal issues and even fertility.
Click to expand...

Knowing how to perform a procedure is not the same as knowing whether said procedure is ethically permissible.
 
ppfizenm said:
My area of expertise is neurosci. I believe life begins when the body is capable of sustaining brain growth and development unassisted ie when a child can survive outside of the womb with medical assistance.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this. But "belief" is not scientific fact, and I don't think a voter requires an advanced degree in science (or really a degree of any kind) to understand or evaluate your view. I suspect most pro-life activists are aware that a six-week old fetus will not survive outside the womb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
How much weight does boyfriend resident at an institution carry
Replies
11
Views
1K
throwawayftw
T
L
When does the november burst of II actually begin?
Replies
4
Views
2K
LizzyM
LizzyM
premedbarista
how much does a good MCAT score make up for a not so good GPA/sGPA?
Replies
5
Views
935
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
A
"Guaranteed quality of life" and attrition
Replies
7
Views
1K
lioneljohn
L
A
Does this count as clinical?
Replies
4
Views
613
asterok
A
Top