I'm not an embryologist, but I have a feeling I've had more education on the subject than you. Yes there are differences, but for the most part, the early stages of development are identical in almost every single mammalian species.
What education have you had. I now have 2 science degrees (1 business one), and work in the medical industry where embryonic development is something which is seen, noted, taken records on, and examined in our daily work.
The early stages being the cell division? Because if we're talking chromosomal make-up, antibody behavior, and specific protein systhesies...there are differences
Scientists cannot even define what makes up a persona, much less what causes it and when it develops.
I know. So why just assume that it's a lump of cells, when you can accurately be described as everything from a lump of cells to a "bag of mostly water" (note the Star Trek: TNG reference)
Many, many people disagree entirely with your opinion that someone is a "person" at conception. There is no definitive proof for either side.
I know that. Which is why I err on the side of caution.
But going with the assumption that one is a person with full rights upon conception, we then have doctors and families in a very difficult position. Potentially lose yourself/wife/signficiant-other? Lose a child you do not know and have no attachment to (beyond hormonal drive)? Both are horrible outomes and it is an incredibly difficult decision to make. One that requires a great deal of opinion to come to. In the case of a mother's safety, how can you force someone to make that call in either direction?
No more attachment beyond hormonal drive? I seem to remember mourning with my friend as his wife miscarried their first child. She wasn't far along, but it wasn't just a normal drive. You automatically assume that parents do not have an emotional investment on a zygote or fetus. Some may have no attachment, but then some others do. Either way, it is besides the point, because the person is a person. How we emotionally regard them is not relevant.
Isn't that what freedom of choice is about?
No, that's not what freedom of choice is all about. If abortion was limited to in the case of the mother's life, it wouldn't be a problem. Instead, abortion is all about the mother's convience and comfort.
Of course, then you have all the legal ramifications of defining a zygote as a human being. If a woman drinks while she is 2 weeks pregnant, is she guilty of child abuse? If she miscarries during a car accident, is the guilty party tried for manslaughter? If a husband hits his pregnant wife, should he be tried twice for domestic abuse? If someone accidently aborts their child through ignorance (ex. certain herbs or medications), should they be tried in court? Could the father sue?
All these things would have to be worked out. I believe much of the same arguements took palce when African Americans were declaired to having the same full rights as everyone else. When their humanity was regarded as being legitimate. It took a bit of time for it to get worked out (voting rights, afirmative action, etc)...but we're getting there as a society.
It is simply my opinion that it is unethical to make abortions illegal since the definition of when a zygote becomes a human being is nonexistent and to outlaw it would put a definitively human woman in a position for risk.
And it is simply my opinion that it is unethical to have legal elective abortion, because it amounts to having no difference to a woman taking her todler into the woods and shooting him in the head....or a person poisoning a mentaly disadvantaged person. Not ascribing the developing person human rights is no different than when the same rights were not granted to those who were slaves or the Jews in the 1930's-40's in Nazi territories.
~Jeordam
ex-Admin at wotmania (all things wot & art galleries)
Saving the Princess, Humanity, or the World-Entire since 1985
Saving the Princess, Humanity, or the World-Entire since 1985
Anti-Abortion CBS Super Bowl commercial
- 27/01/2010 05:35:37 PM
2122 Views
I think that its a fantastic idea...
- 27/01/2010 05:46:17 PM
1524 Views
agreed... somewhat.
- 27/01/2010 05:52:26 PM
1473 Views
See, that's the debate here...
- 27/01/2010 06:03:01 PM
1178 Views
depending on the developmental stage, an embryo might be nothign more than a clump of cells.
- 27/01/2010 07:18:25 PM
1164 Views
You make baby Allah cry. *NM*
- 27/01/2010 07:58:01 PM
651 Views
was it the dog comparison?
- 27/01/2010 07:59:22 PM
1293 Views
yeah except islam allows abortion in certain conditions
- 28/01/2010 05:43:29 AM
1218 Views
Shall we be technical....
- 27/01/2010 09:28:20 PM
1203 Views
And since when are you a trained eye?
- 27/01/2010 09:52:05 PM
1337 Views
A valid question
- 27/01/2010 10:07:16 PM
1096 Views
If there's a chance the mother might die...
- 27/01/2010 07:30:54 PM
1203 Views
What if the "real" preson is an asshole? I'd gamble on the baby who has the potential to not be.
- 27/01/2010 08:44:57 PM
1242 Views
I wasn't commenting on the commercial, I did that further below.
- 27/01/2010 08:59:17 PM
1205 Views
Which is why I'm against elective abortion
- 27/01/2010 09:33:59 PM
1278 Views
Then we are in accord.
- 27/01/2010 10:00:32 PM
1230 Views
I want to see an atheism Superbowl ad
- 27/01/2010 06:21:02 PM
1337 Views
Go ahead and pay for one....
- 27/01/2010 06:37:18 PM
1407 Views
how does atheism take anything away?
- 27/01/2010 07:20:49 PM
1251 Views
LOL It only "takes away" mental enslavement.
- 27/01/2010 07:50:56 PM
1251 Views
Who says?
- 27/01/2010 09:42:07 PM
1221 Views
You're not "open" to anything.
- 27/01/2010 10:02:03 PM
1341 Views
I don't need your sadness dude...or your pity.
- 27/01/2010 10:19:43 PM
1307 Views
Personally speaking
- 27/01/2010 10:36:45 PM
1141 Views
Tolerance much?
- 27/01/2010 08:11:12 PM
1376 Views
Don't read an emotion into that I didn't put into it.
- 27/01/2010 09:44:37 PM
1070 Views
Your comment is rude and narrow minded. Regardless of what emotion you feel
- 28/01/2010 03:20:11 PM
1165 Views
Fortunately, positivity doesn't appear to be the qualifying characteristic
- 27/01/2010 08:26:28 PM
1254 Views
Well there is a difference between...
- 27/01/2010 09:47:36 PM
1425 Views
The fact is that it was a positive message, whether you agreed with it or not.
- 27/01/2010 09:52:47 PM
1212 Views
I don't think it is the same thing
- 27/01/2010 07:17:19 PM
1162 Views
Followed by an add of all the babies that should have been aborted? *NM*
- 29/01/2010 05:53:43 PM
649 Views
The problem is the hyprocrisy of CBS.
- 27/01/2010 07:56:58 PM
1409 Views
And they claim this is the result of you liberal types pissing and moaning.
- 27/01/2010 08:40:57 PM
1236 Views
"the buggery agenda"
- 27/01/2010 08:47:28 PM
1295 Views
I know, I loved it! I might start using that instead of Fagenda. 
*NM*
- 27/01/2010 09:03:53 PM
656 Views
*NM*
- 27/01/2010 09:03:53 PM
656 Views
You might need to rework titles too. "Most Buggered", "Her Buggerness"
- 27/01/2010 09:06:44 PM
1398 Views
I really, really hope a pro-choice group buys the next ad space
- 27/01/2010 08:09:16 PM
1213 Views
Replace Hitler with Ben Affleck and I'd help pay for it. 
- 27/01/2010 08:12:25 PM
1132 Views
- 27/01/2010 08:12:25 PM
1132 Views
That would work also. The main thing is to pick someone who has committed crimes against humanity
- 28/01/2010 10:57:28 AM
1013 Views
But how would you folks argue on the internet then? I'd still have Stalin... *NM*
- 27/01/2010 08:49:17 PM
636 Views
*brain explodes*
- 27/01/2010 08:30:51 PM
1054 Views
are your sinuses clear now? *NM*
- 27/01/2010 08:54:18 PM
617 Views
*NM*
- 27/01/2010 08:54:18 PM
617 Views
Oddly enough, they aren't.
- 27/01/2010 08:59:27 PM
1315 Views
the super bowl is no place for political messages, no matter how thinly veiled.
- 28/01/2010 05:15:13 AM
1100 Views
Are you saying that CBS should be required to run an opposing ad? *NM*
- 28/01/2010 05:19:39 AM
616 Views
if they are going to approve a political message, they should be required to air the opposite view
- 28/01/2010 05:27:33 AM
961 Views
The problem with Pro-Choice is...
- 28/01/2010 02:12:13 PM
1180 Views
Not really a fair comment
- 28/01/2010 02:44:21 PM
1131 Views
Re: Not really a fair comment
- 28/01/2010 03:27:03 PM
1186 Views
I can't see Youtube at work and am out the next couple of nights so I can't see it till the weekend
- 28/01/2010 03:36:48 PM
987 Views
I know you were going to tell me that it was slanted...
- 28/01/2010 03:57:37 PM
1226 Views
That is unfair on me
- 28/01/2010 04:18:07 PM
1304 Views
...which is yet another argument for publicly funded healthcare
- 28/01/2010 03:46:25 PM
1159 Views
Re: ...which is yet another argument for publicly funded healthcare
- 28/01/2010 04:03:46 PM
1263 Views
I don't think it's so much a matter of supplying misleading information,
- 28/01/2010 11:07:24 PM
1192 Views