(06-26-2022 04:08 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 04:01 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 03:45 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 03:23 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(06-26-2022 03:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  “ I fail to see why our lefties want so badly to define the developing fetus as not alive and/or not human, except that such definitions would prohibit them from doing what they want to do.”

If you didn’t mean to imply that, you should clarify what the quoted statement meant - especially the “prohibit them from doing what they want to do” part.

You all want to preserve the ability to use Plan B and/or IUDs, and a belief that life begins at conception would hinder that - you yourself worried about that in the post that started this sub thread. (Post 1576)

I have presented a rational basis for life starting at conception, and so far all I have gotten from you is I don’t think so, without any specifics or science to back it up.

I don’t have an agenda for thinking this way - in fact, it goes against the results I would prefer to see - but it seems self-evident, and nobody has presented anything factual to the contrary.

So, when do you think life starts, and why do you think that?

I don’t think one has to believe life starts after fertilization to support IUDs and Plan B. That’s the problem with your statement that says policy outcomes dictate a personal belief.

That post you reference clearly, and explicitly said that I didn’t want states to LEGALLY define life as starting at fertilization.

You’ve now, intentionally or accidentally, changed that post to be about my personal belief on when life begins.

I don’t believe people should eat a lot of meat, but I’m so not support a law limiting meat consumption. One’s personal beliefs do not always translate to policy positions.

My understanding from that post was that you didn’t want to see fertilization legally defined as the beginning of life since that would provide a platform to outlaw IUDs and Plan B. Is that wrong?

I have asked you when you think life begins. What did you say?

It doesn’t matter when I think life begins with respect to this statement - all that matters is I don’t think we should LEGALLY define life beginning at fertilization.

If we leave when life begins out of the legal code, we do not have to deal with the fact that mainstream fertility treatments would be legally considered murder, without some extra cutout for them.

A simple as possible - regardless of one’s personal belief as to when life begins, I do not want our laws to define it as happening at fertilization.

OK. As for as the legal definition, we are in agreeement that we don't want to see that, although on a personal basis I agree with it, and you choose to keep your personal opinion to yourself. But if there are attempts, as you worry, to restrict IUDs and morning after pills, this will come up,and I am sure the Democrats will argue that life DOES NOT begin at conception,but at some later date, and I wonder what they will present to support that. But I guess we leave that until it happens.

My personal thoughts are as I said,but I have no problems with the use of PlanB or IUDs, or with abortion on demand up to some point, the only question being what is the appropriate point for the status of the (whatever)to change from removable clump of cells to human deserving of governmental protection. I will not have a position on that to lobby for.