It is always sad when someone thinks they are so superior, but all they are doing is making a strong case for post-natal abortion.

how is killing innocent people with abortion not nasty? this debate is pro-choicers patting each other on the back and bragging about how great killing babies with abortion is. and then pretending to be pro-life so they can give wishy washy arguements against their enthusiastic declarations of abortion. and banning. any serious ant- abortion posts. which isn't much of a debate.

I have never patted someone else on the back because they chose to abort. Nor have I patted someone on the back that chose not to. No one on here brags about how great abortion is. No one on here is pretending on either side. I am pro choice and I have stated it several times. I would personally not choose abortion for myself but I cannot be like you and call someone who chooses abortion for themselves a murderer or nasty. Because I do not know the circumstances that led up to their decision, nor do I care or need to know. I am requesting to ban your posts because you are not being objective and you are resorting to name calling. I have no problems or qualms at all with your choice to be prolife. My problem is that you are resorting to name calling and twisting others' posts out of context. You are using Godwin's law to try and make a point, you are repeating yourself over and over again, you are calling people murderers. If you could nicely post your views, without name calling or contorting others' posts, then I would have no problem with you.

Abortion kills cells that are part of a human being's body. That human being has bodily autonomy and integrity, and full ownership over their being.

No, abortion kills an unborn, developing human (embryo or fetus) in a woman's womb. Nice way to dehumanize what we all once were.

We all were once an egg and sperm. Sorry to be spouting facts and scientifically correct terms and all.

Dehumanized? We are cells, were cells, and will be cells.

And we will all be dust soon enough.

So, how about referring to the BORN as bunch of cells, too?

You refer to the unborn as just cells. Exactly what kind of cells? They are NOT the cells of the woman. You tell this to a child, they will think of it as something like our skin cells. And most abortions occur when the embryo has a beating heart. What is wrong with referring to the unborn as a human embryo or fetus? Why try to make it as insignificant as possible (which is ridiculous because none of us would be here if it weren't for the womb.) That's why I said you were DEHUMANIZING the unborn.

Fine---> You are a bunch of cells? I am a bunch of cells?

What is the point? Scientifically we all are cells. It's not an insult.

Grandpa is a bunch of cells, George Bush is bunch of cells, Mother Teresa was a bunch of cells.

Are you going to run screaming away because I've dehumanized them?

Week 1 Fertilization - Egg activation - Zygote - Cleavage - Morula - Blastula (Blastomere) - Blastocyst - Inner cell mass

Week 2 Bilaminar disc (Hypoblast, Epiblast)

Week 3 (Trilaminar embryo,
germ layers) Archenteron/Primitive streak (Primitive pit, Primitive knot/Blastopore, Primitive groove) - Gastrula/Gastrulation - Regional specification
Ectoderm: Surface ectoderm - Neuroectoderm - Somatopleure - Neurulation - Neural crest

Endoderm: Splanchnopleure

Mesoderm: Chorda- - Paraxial (Somite/Somitomere/Sclerotome/Myotome/Derm atome) -
Intermediate - Lateral plate (Intraembryonic coelom, Splanchnopleure/Somatopleure)

Extraembryonic/uterus Trophoblast (Cytotrophoblast, Syncytiotrophoblast)
Blastocoele - Yolk sack/exocoelomic cavity - Heuser's membrane - Extraembryonic coelom - Vitelline duct

Umbilical cord (Umbilical artery, Umbilical vein, Wharton's jelly) - Allantois

Placenta - Decidua (Decidual cells) - Chorionic villi/Intervillous space - Gestational sac (Amnion/Amniotic sac/Amniotic cavity, Chorion)

Histogenesis Programmed cell death - Stem cells - Germ line development

Organogenesis Limb development: Limb bud - Apical ectodermal ridge/AER
other structures: Eye development - Cutaneous structure development - Heart development - Development of the urinary and reproductive organs


During late week three the heart starts to develop. We are correct in saying that we are all just a bunch of cells. Even my son knows that, and he is seven. He knows that we are comprised of different cells, all formed together to make a human. The difference between a human embryo or a human fetus is not only what vehement prolifers call a "stage in development", but also it cannot live without the life support its mother gives it. No one is saying that a human embryo is a bunch of feline cells are we? No. I don't see why the argument always goes back to the definition of a z/e/f. IMHO that is not the issue. The issue is whether abortion should be legal or not. And as I stated before, I am all for it. It may not be a choice I would make but I feel the option should be there for whoever chooses to do so. No one should be allowed to dictate another being's personal life. (Being meaning a living, independent human, not dependent on someone else's body for all nourishment, oxygen, waste transfer, etc.) The only time anyone should be allowed to intervene in someone else's personal life is if there is a threat to person. Person meaning an established being (see above for definition). And who is to say that an abortion would be a way to intervene in someone else's personal life because there is a threat? Not only to the potential life (i.e. a woman who is a drug abuser and has had her other children removed from her home...those kids are now floating around in foster homes...but no one seems to be so devoted to them...and they are established beings by most philosophies, medical terms, and by law), but possibly the mother as well. You don't know every situation that a woman aborts in, so how can you be so quick to say its wrong? And a couple of sidenotes: 1. For those who do not know the difference between abortion and infanticide, please look it up, they are two totally different things...abortion cannot be infanticide because a z/e/f cannot be an infant...just showing how prolife views can be sketchy and skewed as well. 2. If there is one kind of abortion I am totally against at all, it is what is going on in Asia...that is convienence abortion: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,281722 ,00.html
NOTE: to the prolifers who think abortion IS infanticide, even this article shows that infanticide means "systematic killing of infants (girl infants in this case)soon after they are born.

she did...she said WE are cells were cells, and will be cells..."WE" meaning US ALL including the BORN

How often do pro-choicers refer to the born as a bunch of cells? And how often do they call the unborn a bunch of cells? If abortion is all about being in control of what goes on in your body, then why do you need to call an embryo or fetus just a bunch of cells to make it appear less human?

Have you even read the arguments about this? Trust me, every time someone says z/e/f, a few prolifers take it to the extreme...tell us we are DEHUMANIZING an UNBORN human being. So, you see, we don't win. Can't call them by their scientific names, because its dehumanizing, can't call them a bunch of cells because its dehumanizing. But both definitions are scientifically correct...all humans, be z/e/fs or newborns, or adults, all we are is a bunch of different cells compiled into one living mass. That does not mean that abortion is homicide...the act of homicide requires an ACTUAL human being, not a biological one. (However in some circumstances, when a woman is murdered, if she is past a certian stage in her pregnancy, then some laws report that as a double homicide)

Do you choose to do some things in your life that might be considered immoral to other people, like eating cows, eating meat, taking birth control pills...everyone does something in their lives that is considered immoral by someone else. Choosing to be pro-draft, pro-death penalty, pro-meat eating harms others. And we argue about that as well. I am pro choice, meaning I do not care what someone else CHOOSES. It is their choice. And I don't give a diddlysquat what someone else chooses unless it interferes with my ESTABLISHED life or my family's ESTABLISHED life. Someone else choosing abortion does not interfere with that, someone else choosing to be pro-draft or pro-death penalty does not interfere with that. Meaning I don't care who does what as long as their choice does not harm myself or my family's lives. And personal choices like which side you are on in all "wars of words" does not affect my family.

Was this whole post proving something? I didn't see it. All humans go through the embryonic stage, fetal stage, infant stage, adolescent stage, adult stage. But, our species stays exactly the same through all those stages. We start in the womb because we are VULNERABLE. We need a safe place to start out in and to grow our bodies more before we can be developed enough to live independantly. Since the fetus has to be in the womb, it of course needs to feed off the mother. Even after birth, the human is still not finish developing. The newborn's bones haven't even compeltely fused yet. It's just now, the newborn is developed enough to eat and breath like other born humans.

Yes, we are all a bunch of cells. The problems is, certain pro-choicers will ONLY say that when a pro-lifer wants to know why the unborn are always referred to JUST a bunch of cells! Some of you always have an answer to something. Call it what it REALLY is, especially if you don't go around calling born humans a bunch of cells.

And that pro-choicer I answered about calling it cells, he/she is implying that a fetus or embryo is no different than any kind of cells (like skin cells), that they are cells that are part of the woman, rather than what it REALLY is: a developing embryo or fetus IN a woman's uterus. There is NO reason to dehumanize the unborn.

No she was not referring to the fetus in likes to skin cells or as being a part of a woman's own cells. But it is true...we are all a bunch of cells. Get over it. It is fact. We are comprised of a bunch of different cells. So what if someone wants to call a z/e/f a bunch of cells...its true isnt it...and fyi I am one of those pro-choicers who will openly call any being at any stage in life a bunch of cells...because its true. As a matter of fact, I called DH a blob of cells minus neurons this morning...there should be no shame in calling someone what they are...be it human or human cells. We are not comparing an embryo to a cat's cells. So call it what you want, bottom line is we ARE all a bunch of cells.

Okay: try this: pregnancy involve a developing human being in the uterus inside the body of a host woman. It's made of human cells and is human in every detail except in miniature and immature form. Is that humanizing enough for you?

How about this: I don't give a monkey's if it's human, godly or Jesus H. Christ himself -- it is up to a fully sentient, born and legally recognised human female whether it is allowed to remain resident in her uterus. Just the way you or I or Jesus Christ or the entire Palin family in all its ludicrously-named glory would not be welcome moving in to someone's uterus, if a woman doesn't want this human in there, then it's her right to have it extracted. If it can't survive on its own outside, then gosh darn, rotten luck. It picked the wrong hotel to stay in.

Yeah and I am truly sorry you missed the point of this post. Maybe others will understand it better. Your user name throws me off.