86
Lawsuit seeks to overturn abortion regulations including Michigan’s 24-hour waiting period
(michiganadvance.com)
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
86 points (97.8% liked)
Michigan
842 readers
1 users here now
Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam in braccas mea vide
🫴
✋
Banner photos credits
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Human life starting at fertilization is a biological fact.
Biologists overwhelmingly agree that human life starts with fertilization (5337/5577 surveyed, or 96%).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/
edit: downvote all you want, it wont change the facts
You’re statement is full of shit as well as incorrect.
A cell is alive at fertilization.
But a cell is not a human.
Neither is a fetus.
Facts.
You also kill thousands of living human cells every time you take a poop, they are as much of a human being as a fertilized egg is.
Abortions for Lucifer!!!! 🤘
You can argue all you want but we will still give our abortion sacraments unto Baphomet. Praised be his name!
I'm not a christian, I'm a satanist, so... maybe not the dunk you're looking for lol.
Reminder that our argument is seemingly over tenet III:
Where I would argue there are two bodies involved, regardless the size, as you seem to be arguing.
But also, keep in mind tenet V:
Extra link just for fun: https://biologydictionary.net/organism/
I don’t care what your religion is. But a fertilized egg is not a human. Neither are the human cells that you poop out every three or four weeks. (Assuming you are as constipated as you sound)
Disputing basic Junior High biology 👍
Username checks out👍
😂🤣
I won't sit here and act like that isn't funny
Be well
https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2017/03/23/issues-law-medicine-one-stop-journal-anti-vaccine-anti-abortion-pseudoscience/
https://drjengunter.com/2015/12/30/should-the-national-library-of-medicine-index-anti-choice-journals/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Issues%20Law%20Med%22%5Bjour%5D
Note the articles about "abortion causing breast cancer" (it doesn't), "how to run a pro choice private practice", and why pharmacists should be able to refuse to dispense medication.
Forrest Valkai, a biologist on YT, has a fantastic response to this. He can argue about when/how life starts, but the argument isn’t about this, this is about bodily autonomy instead.
I'm actually really interested in watching whatever video you are referencing, are you by chance able to provide a link? I'm not closed minded, but I do generally try to listen to what the majority of scientist [in whatever relevant area of the topic of discussion] are saying.
edit: I'm unsure why this comment is being down voted but I'm genuinely interested in watching whatever video you are referencing, as simply by looking at their channel I was unable to find a video that is seemingly relevant to the topic at hand
Over the mothers body, or the babies body?
If it were a baby it would be able to survive outside of a womb.
You are correct, I guess it depends on the age, but there are US states that allow abortion "at any stage" (Colorado for example).
To ensure we are operating off of common definitions:
Embryo: An embryo is an initial stage of development of a multicellular organism.
Fetus: A fetus or foetus is the unborn offspring that develops from an animal embryo.
Regardless the "development stage", I would argue it is still a human.
It's not somehow a dolphin embryo that all the sudden turns into a human at birth.
I would argue at any stage, it is still a human organism, therefore human.
So now you're making your own arguments away from your original position? Got any scientists to back up your preconceived ideas? Find me some peer-reviewed articles that suggest (not prove cause that's very rarely how science works) that the cells developed are not dolphin embryos first. Since we're just jumping to whatever conclusion fits our narrative now...
Can you define what makes it a human?
Does Colorado allow abortion at any stage for a healthy fetus or does there need to be medical reasons beyond a certain point? Be honest.
If it's a fact then why did 240 scientists disagree? What were their findings? Science doesn't create facts, it supports or rejects hypothesizes based on the original question. Calling science fact was your first mistake. Missing the entire point of the argument by cherry-picking data sets that fulfill your narrative was the second.