What's your platform?

TBR......"I'm offended..."

I did not mean to offend. Maybe a penance is in order? I'm not religious, but I think most penances are performed from the kneeling position. Lmfao

"I for one don't want anything from china never did and never will. "

A significant percentage of parts in the device you used to post that were manufactured there. So... going offline?

I'm offended...

;-)

Life for me started at about 14-15 when I discovered what that funny looking thing between a girls legs was for.

O wait... I think a slow miserable death started then.. Lol

Erotic....."Huh?"

Ooops. My bad. That was TBR's quote. Sorry.

@Amanda

"Erotic....."Any definition of when "life" begins is problematic""

HUH?

Uhh . . .

Erotic....."Any definition of when "life" begins is problematic"

I agree. Even the viability issue is problematic. A 20 week birth is fairly viable in Manhattan. How about in the backwoods of Tennessee? Not so much. The only line is that is not problematic is conception. But if I am missing an argument on that stance, I am more than willing to hear you out and give it complete medical scrutiny and will admit if I am wrong.

I for one don't want anything from china never did and never will. In this day and age we sure as shit don't need our medicines made in china.

"Any definition of when "life" begins is problematic."

Exactly, so its super easy to poke holes in anyone's proposal. Viability... So someone with a broken back, kept alive with an iron lung, is no longer a person because they are not viable?

I get that there are problems with the definition of "heartbeat" for the start of person-hood, like the fact that many women don't know they are pregnant 21-23 days after fertilization, not to mention the rape and incest issues.

Since we're never going to come up with a definition everyone likes, the only hope is to come up with a solution everyone hates, but not hate badly enough to risk destroying the country over.

I agree with Bill Clinton when he said that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare."

Any definition of when "life" begins is problematic.

Heart beat is an autonomic activity, meaning you do it without thinking. Someone with significant brain damage rendering them in a coma can maintain normal heart rhythm.

Further, if we are looking at the fetal heart beat, this starts oftentimes before the woman knows she is pregnant. So there really is no choice there.

The current standard is "age of viability," meaning the child can maintain life on it's own. When the standard was developed, that was defined as 24 weeks. But with medical advances, that gotten down to 20 or so weeks.

The point is that any standard would be objectionable to someone.

My opinion is that we leave it as it is, and let the woman and her doctor decide what is best for her...

"What's funny is that I indeed asked you that very question (at least twice)."

Wrong. You asked when I did (become alive, as individual life), which implies current law, which is set by SCotUS using the 9th Amendment retained rights and reference to rights beginning at birth.

What no one asked is what I think it SHOULD be. Unlike many, I don't allow my "want to be" to alter my understanding of "what is".

There is a HUGE difference between descriptive and prescriptive comments.

And, I would be okay with a Constitutional amendment banning all abortions after a heartbeat is detectable, EXCEPT when the mother's life is at risk or the fetus has defects making it unlikely to be viable after birth... note, this includes DNC after miscarriage.

AZ......"Funny that no one has bothered to ask what I think the definition should be..."

What's funny is that I indeed asked you that very question (at least twice). Yet you still found the need to write 7 paragraphs to get to your answer of "brain function sufficient to maintain life-support.... the heartbeat. About 3-4 weeks after fertilization."

Ok, that's a reasonable line in the sand. So once you have enough brain activity to sustain a heartbeat, it should no longer be permissible to kill that individual?

8inch...... So it is your contention that being able to breath air on your own is the definition of life?

If you want to get technical, every animal inside its mother or an egg, is not alive until it's born or hatched and breathes.
We are fetuses until we're born.

Thats why the medics clear the baby's lungs and mouth of fluids, to help them breathe.

If a baby doesn't breathe.... it's not a live birth.

"When did your (you as an individual) life begin?"

Adding "as an individual" changes it to asking when I became a person. According to SCotUS, February 1967, the date of my birth, because the Constitution has a couple references to rights of person-hood beginning at birth. Though, the state where my mother was could have chosen to define it a couple months earlier if they chose viability vs birth... that is, could have been born and survived.

There is nothing magical about the moment the sperm enters the egg that makes it more "alive".

Funny that no one has bothered to ask what I think the definition should be... like if we were going to propose an amendment to the Constitution to overrule Roe v Wade, which is what the Constitution says we should do when we disagree with current law. Shows the black-and-white, shirts-vs.-skins, one-side-or-the-other, if-you're-not-for-me-you're-against-me partisan world we live in.

If I were asked, then I would say that what makes me, "me" is mental function, and that we should use the same definition for start of person-hood that we use for end. That is, brain function sufficient to maintain life-support.... the heartbeat. About 3-4 weeks after fertilization. About a 1-2 weeks after a woman would be "late" for her visit from aunt flow.

That definition pleases none of the extremists on either side of the debate, which is why it is probably the right one.

All birth control legal (hell, supplied by government free of charge!!!!). Chemical abortion legal, with doctor certification of lack of heartbeat. After that, abortion only legal if a doctor certifies the mother's life is at significant risk (defense of the life of the mother).

BUT, that would require Constitutional amendment, which is unlikely given our current state of politics.

As George said, "What is Life?"

AZ...... Could you possibly try to weasel your way out of answering a question without sounding as obvious? You know damn well that I wasn't asking when did humans first come to being (which is what you answered). So let's take your diversionary tactics out of the equation. Please either answer the following.....

When did your (you as an individual) life begin?

"But yet again, you did not answer my question as to when life begins. Why is that?"

Life began at least one time, more than 3 billion years ago. The sperm is alive. The egg is alive. They join together to be a living fertilized egg. There is no point in the reproductive process that life does not exist, and therefor, no point where life begins. Just like a heart, extracted for transplantation is "alive".

AZ....."Now give me two references in the Constitution that imply person-hood begins at fertilization."

I never made that assertion.

But yet again, you did not answer my question as to when life begins. Why is that?

Abortion is covered by the 9th... retained rights. Which, if you love the Constitution, then you know it says "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

The rights, as they existed under British Common Law, all still exist, unless the Constitution specifically alters them.

The Constitution also establishes the SCotUS as the top court, and if you love the Constitution, then you should love this. And SCotUS says that government has a role to play in deciding if medical procedures are safe and effective, but beyond that, it is between a doctor and a patient as to which medical procedures to be performed, and just as states can't make laws limited the rights granted by the 2nd amendment (the right of the National Guard to have guns), the states can't make laws that limit rights continued by the 9th amendment.

And I don't claim to be a Constitutional scholar, but I do bother to go read about what I talk about, before I talk about it.... unlike others that just spew shit words out their ass. AND, unlike many that claim to love the Constitution, but really only mean the 2nd Amendment, I actually love ALL of the Constitution.

BTW: the Heller decision overturning the Washington DC ban on handguns relied more on the 9th Amendment (retained, non-enumerated right to defend your person and home) than the 2nd (need for well trained militia lead by officers appointed by states and trained and equipped according to federal guidelines).

And, there is no need for me to answer the question on "born" and "citizenship" as I already know where you want to go. Non-citizens have rights. yes, non-citizen PEOPLE have rights, and what we're actually talking about is when you become a person. The two references to when you become a citizen imply when you become a person in the eyes of the law. Becoming a citizen at birth, implies you become a person at birth.... or, Supreme Court allows a state to decide person-hood begins when you could be born and survive (viability).

Now give me two references in the Constitution that imply person-hood begins at fertilization.

AZ.......Still waiting for your answer. Is it your contention that the definition of life or death is brain function? The presence of, being life and the absence of, being death?

In 2018, the Supreme Court ruled that the fetus' only inherent constitutionally protected right is the right to be born, overturning a High Court ruling that a fetus additionally possessed the children's rights guaranteed by Article 42A of the Constitution.

The Constitution doesn't mention abortion, it certainly doesn't specify it as a protected right as it does the right to keep & bear arms.

O hell ya. How did forget mathematician.

2out...... I won’t even pretend to know more about math than him. I hated math in school, even though I got straight A’s. But biology? Did ya notice his push towards an ideological argument with the “soul” comment? Lol

Joe n amanda give it up. AZ is an expert in pretty much all areas. He's a doctor, criminal lawyer, philosopher, constitutional lawyer, economist, and anything else that might come up.