Bill Clinton goes on tirade against pro-life students

But it says nothing about if it started at conception or later before birth.

 

That may be the case, but it is not clear when one can clearly be called a "person."

In that verse, it says that God knew him before he was formed. Was he a person before he existed?

 

I would use the term "embryo." Egg includes unfertilized eggs, which are not capable of producing life on their own.

 

A human is a human at conception. What else would they be.

 

Human, yes.

The debate of personhood is more vague. That's why I don't think personhood is the best basis for the pro-life position. There are some out there who don't even think newborns are "persons." That's the danger of getting into the personhood debate.

Person or not, it is human life and is not for us to kill.

 

Pro-choice advocates! just joking!!!!

 

There has to be something wrong in the mind of anyone who would consider killing the life that is inside of her womb. This argument about when life starts is nothing but a cover up for a depraved point of view. I'll bow out of this debate for it like casting pearls before the swine.

 

Again, quote where I mentioned premarital sex. I did not, so you are exposed as a liar.

 

It would be so nice to know what Scientists consider to be "life"
That way we could compare a newly conceived human whatchamacallit to the characteristics that scientists use to determine if something is alive....

I wonder where I could find that... OH, I know, I know.. .the internet!!!

And my college Biology book...

Let's see... according to this website http://www.essortment.com/characteristics_rbrc.htm

The following are characteristics of life:

Theme #1 - Cells All living things are composed of one or more cells. Different types of cells have different "jobs" within the organism. Each life form begins from one cell, which then will split. These cells split, and so on. After this has happened several times, differentiation is undergone, when the cells change so that they are not the same thing anymore. Then they are used to begin to put together the final organism, some cells, for example, as the eyes, some as the heart, etc. The only arguable exception to th
is is viruses. They are not composed of cells, but are said to be "living."

Theme#2 - Organization
Complex organization patterns are found in all living organisms. They arrange themselves on very small levels, grouping like things together. On larger levels, they become visible. This also has to do with differentiation, as the cells are organized in a manner that makes sense for the organism after they change to what they’ll be in the final organism.


Theme#3 - Energy Use
All organisms use energy. The sum of the chemical energy they use is called [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]metabolism[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. This energy is used to carry out everything they do. Autotrophs (plants) use [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]energy[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR] from the sun for photosynthesis, to make their own ‘food’ ([COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]glucose[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]). Heterotrophs (animals and humans) must ingest food for this purpose.

Theme#4 - Homeostasis
All organisms have stable internal conditions which must be maintained in order to remain alive. These include temperature, water content, heartbeat, and other such things. In a way, this has to do with energy use, because a certain level of energy must be kept within the body at all times. For this, obviously, humans must then ingest food on a regular basis. Not all conditions are for the body to maintain itself; though most are.

Theme#5 - Growth
All organisms grow and change. Cells divide to form new, identical cells. Differentiation happens, as well, when cells mutate into other types of cells, making a more complex organism. Organisms growing, changing, and becoming more complex is called development. Single-celled organisms do grow as well, but they will only become slightly larger – this is nearly unmeasurable.

Theme#6 - Reproduction All organisms reproduce in order to continue the species' life. This is combining genetic information (in [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]sexual [/FONT][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]reproduction[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]) or splitting into two organisms (in asexual reproduction) in order to create another of the same [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]species[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR]. In sexual reproduction, the new organism will have some characteristics from the mother, and some from father. It may look like either of them, or it may not. In asexual [COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif][COLOR=blue! important][FONT=verdana,sans-serif]reproduction[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR], the new organism is an exact copy of the first. Sometimes, not every member of a species is able to reproduce. As long as others are (which we know they can, if they still exist today) then it does not threaten the species. (Except for mules, but don't worry about them, they are a bizarre anomoly.)

Wow, according to my observation, a newly conceived human being in their mother's womb has all the characteristics of life...

Now if that "thing" is alive, what is it? Duh... a human being...
And since the Bible says that Humans are the only creature that was made in God's image, and since Humans are the only creatures in which God breathed a soul into... then the human life is sacred...

Even according to the strict scientific method, it can be proven that abortion kills something that is alive....

And that something is a human baby.

 

Then what unacceptable sexual behaviors were you referencing in post #63? What else am I to gather that is unacceptable sexual behavior, other than pre or extra-marital sex? Here is what you said, as a reminder:

 

I know exactly what I said. I wasn't specifically addressing premarital sex, nor was I advocating nor condemning such. I am making an observation that over history, the church (both Catholic & Protestant) has had a problem with sex as anything but a means of procreation. From Augustine to the persecutors of Margaret Sanger, to denying anasthetics during labor & delivery, the church has been in the forefront of demonizing the act of lovemaking and all for making painful the resulting pregancies because "God ordained it".

You went down a path of false accusation. Repeating them doesn't make them true.

 

If I did sometimes, I would probably be banned!!! :laugh:

 

Very well put; I agree wholeheartedly! :thumbs:

 

Thanks, Dagwood. I would also like to point out, that the only person I called out on this thread had repeatedly and continually beat his strawman to death. I have tried to maintain civility and respect to others, despite the tone and passion by some. In any case, I hope it got people to think a little bit.

 

I don't say much here because it is impossible to reason with most people when emotions run so high.

It is funny thought that now I will probable be castigated because I don't stand with the majority here in Conservative -ville, but in reality, I have never had anything to do with any abortion period. Just because abortion is not an important issue with me is enough to be called a murderer. How silly!

 

Hmmmmmmm!! Clinton IS believable, but Tim is NOT????
Curiouser & curiouser are the opinions emanating from this thread!!

 

Likewise. I have been married to the same girl for 34 years, had 3 kids with her, and never had any personal involvement with an abortion. That said, I still have my opinions, and as you can tell, not afraid to challenge to prevailing winds. :thumbs:

 

False assumption on my part. For that I am sorry. I honestly couldn't think of any other behavior other than pre or extramarital sex. The aspect you mention did not cross my mind. But now that you mention it, you tipped your hand in different manner. Since you disparage those who think abortion is not acceptable for birth control (since they oppose all b.c.), does that mean you think abortion is o.k. as mere birth control?

And your defense of M. Sanger is quite disturbing, but quite telling based on your depraved and unbiblical worldview.

 

Margaret Sanger was terribly persecuted for merely distributing information about how women could avoid pregnancy. There are portions of her lifestyle that I have issue with, but the former is where I defend her.

As to disparagement, what are you talking about? As I am against abortion as a routine and regular method of birth control, I don't get your drift? I truly don't know what lines you are reading between to get some of this stuff.