Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v Wade

SpaceShredder

Sparrow
Protestant
Which was then put in the womb, correct. You didn't grow in some petri dish but in your mother's womb.
No, the eggs are fertilized outside the womb and kept in a fridge for a while. For a period of time, I existed as a viable embryo in a fridge. Then, I was thawed out and inserted into the womb. I was, human life, in a fridge for a while. Unless, you consider me when I was frozen as non-existent? I suppose that's possible. But I was certainly "thawed" out outside of the womb and kept outside the womb temporarily until the transfer took place. At that point did I exist?
 

get2choppaaa

Hummingbird
Orthodox
The externalities are inconsequential to the morality. Now do you see what I'm saying?
Yes. It's still true.

A life is lost either way. That is a net negative.
I'm looking for a value judgment of one over the other. Both are human life. However, I value the 3 year old much more (As would most people). That much is obvious right? However, with such a discrepancy in value, should the intentional destruction of both be considered equally under the law as "murder"? For they are clearly not valued equally in the eyes of everyone on the planet. In fact, most people would abandon 100 embryos for the life of their three year old.

I think the destruction of the embryo should be illegal, but not classified as "murder." For that implies equal value to the toddler.
That's not biologically nor biblically supported.
 

Thomas More

Crow
Protestant
Yes, you are one of God's creations and God loves you infinitely, in spite of the sinful circumstance of your conception. Your parents should not have conceived you in a test tube, but that is their sin, not yours.
I don't see the conception of an embryo as a sin in and of itself. The technology was not foreseen in the biblical days, either by the writers of scripture, or by early Church tradition, so they didn't address it directly. However, the problem with IVF is that multiple embryos are created, and the most viable one is selected. The rest are frozen, in case the first implantation fails. It is possible that even if one embryo is brought to term in the mother, another will be used and brought to term as well. However, it is usual for some or all of the excess embryos to be discarded.

These are literally just clumps of cells, far short of a fetus, but if you consider that the sacred human life is formed at the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, then it is already murder to dispose of them. After all, they are able to be implanted in a womb and carried to term.

So, I would say that forming an embryo, implanting it and carrying it to term would not be a sin, but disposing of excess embryos would be.
 

Max Roscoe

Ostrich
Orthodox Inquirer
This argument follows the same lazy rhetoric that many libertarians and Bolsheviks depend on. It reminds me of the common retorts that you cannot "legislate morality" or that crime is the result of "oppressed (insert victim race/class) responding to (insert twitter strife of the week)."
We can and should legislate morality.
In fact, it is imperative that we do so in order to reverse the termination of pregnancy (from all means), and more broadly, stem the tide of fornication.
 

SpaceShredder

Sparrow
Protestant
I don't see the conception of an embryo as a sin in and of itself. The technology was not foreseen in the biblical days, either by the writers of scripture, or by early Church tradition, so they didn't address it directly. However, the problem with IVF is that multiple embryos are created, and the most viable one is selected. The rest are frozen, in case the first implantation fails. It is possible that even if one embryo is brought to term in the mother, another will be used and brought to term as well. However, it is usual for some or all of the excess embryos to be discarded.

These are literally just clumps of cells, far short of a fetus, but if you consider that the sacred human life is formed at the moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, then it is already murder to dispose of them. After all, they are able to be implanted in a womb and carried to term.

So, I would say that forming an embryo, implanting it and carrying it to term would not be a sin, but disposing of excess embryos would be.
I can see that. Not sure about it being considered “murder” though. Maybe a different legal category should be invented.
 

Thomas More

Crow
Protestant
I can see that. Not sure about it being considered “murder” though. Maybe a different legal category should be invented.
I agree that I can't quite see destruction of an embryo in the same category as killing someone already born, and not even in the same category as destroying a fetus that has developed organs and limbs. I can see how people might not even consider any moral downsides to it, seeing the good in artificial conception, and not recognizing the embryos in the same category as an unborn baby.

However, if God knows you as soon as you were formed in the womb, that probably applies to the fertilization of an egg in a test tube as well. I have always viewed artificial conception as a blessing to parents who are unable to have a child normally, so this is a difficult contradiction for me.
 

coldpillow

Sparrow
Protestant
No, the eggs are fertilized outside the womb and kept in a fridge for a while. For a period of time, I existed as a viable embryo in a fridge. Then, I was thawed out and inserted into the womb. I was, human life, in a fridge for a while. Unless, you consider me when I was frozen as non-existent? I suppose that's possible. But I was certainly "thawed" out outside of the womb and kept outside the womb temporarily until the transfer took place. At that point did I exist?
If God formed you in the womb, how do you know you existed in the fridge?
 

NarrowTruth

Chicken
Orthodox Inquirer


Josh Gerstein quoting Banker Janet Yellen. Their Talmud isn't silent on their "rights" in this matter either.
"He who gives of his seed to Molech incurs no punishment.”
—Sanhedrin 64a
[Babylonian Talmud, the religion of Esau-Edom (Mt SEEer -> modern Jewry]

“Esau-Edom is modern Jewry.”
—1925 Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. 5 page 41

“Strictly speaking, it is incorrect to call an ancient Israelite a “Jew” or to call a contemporary Jew an “Israelite” or a “Hebrew.”
—Jewish Almanac 1980, p. 3



 

coldpillow

Sparrow
Protestant
I'm not sure what part you missed, but God didn't form me in the womb. I became a viable embryo outside the womb. And if I didn't exist at that point, then what was I? Just a clump of cells?
God forms our soul, does he not? Is that the same as our body? I believe the Body is the temple of our soul.

If God forms us in the womb, then you can't be just a clump of cells, you wouldn't have existed outside the womb. Conception technically can exist outside the womb, after conception there is something known as 'implantation'.

Implantation is when a fertilized egg, or blastocyst, has attached to the lining of the uterine wall. It marks the beginning of pregnancy. The medical community, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the National Institutes of Health, agrees that a person is not pregnant until implantation has occurred. Medically speaking, successful implantation (not fertilization or conception) equals the start of a pregnancy.
To form in the womb never makes it clear whether its conception or implantation. However, considering that implantation can only include the womb, and that conception can be outside the womb, one can put two and two together and say implantation is the start of a new life and soul, otherwise most souls would be ejected from pregnancy by default, which seems ridiculous.

Abortion can only happen in terms of 'clinical pregnancy, which is when humans know the baby is alive, which is why abortion is wrong.

Establishing the proportion of fertilized oocytes and early human embryos that proceed to term may help policy makers in their evaluation of when the life of a new human individual begins and in determining the nature of protection to be accorded to it. The rate of spontaneous abortions, although increasing with age, overall does not exceed 15%. However, abortion rates refer only to ‘clinical pregnancy’
 

SpaceShredder

Sparrow
Protestant
God forms our soul, does he not? Is that the same as our body? I believe the Body is the temple of our soul.

If God forms us in the womb, then you can't be just a clump of cells, you wouldn't have existed outside the womb. Conception technically can exist outside the womb, after conception there is something known as 'implantation'.


To form in the womb never makes it clear whether its conception or implantation. However, considering that implantation can only include the womb, and that conception can be outside the womb, one can put two and two together and say implantation is the start of a new life and soul, otherwise most souls would be ejected from pregnancy by default, which seems ridiculous.

Abortion can only happen in terms of 'clinical pregnancy, which is when humans know the baby is alive, which is why abortion is wrong.

Alright got it. I was just a clump of cells while outside the womb.
 

PillBoxer

Sparrow
Someone’s going to have to fill me on in how it’s a religious practice in Judaism to have an abortion such that you’d claim your rights were violated.
 

coldpillow

Sparrow
Protestant
Ok I get it, I was a single zygote with no soul.
There was a zygote uninhabited, meaning no soul, eventually it was implanted, and then a soul inhabited it, that soul is you. You are a soul, that is the essence of what makes someone human. The body is just what the soul, or human, inhabits while on earth, and in the afterlife, you get a new body, which you then inhabit.
 

DanielH

Ostrich
Moderator
Orthodox
All three articles are an attack or represent an attack against the major Christian groups in this country, and all were published today. The demons are upset it seems.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20220510_214509_945.jpg
    IMG_20220510_214509_945.jpg
    52.5 KB · Views: 29
  • IMG_20220510_214512_066.jpg
    IMG_20220510_214512_066.jpg
    78.8 KB · Views: 29
  • Screenshot_20220510-214559_Brave.jpg
    Screenshot_20220510-214559_Brave.jpg
    290.1 KB · Views: 29

The Penitent Man

Kingfisher
Protestant
All three articles are an attack or represent an attack against the major Christian groups in this country, and all were published today. The demons are upset it seems.
This is great. I like seeing the enemies of Christ drop the facade and manifest themselves. The more clear and explicit their attacks, the more we will see who falls to their side. There will be no cover of ambiguity remaining, it will be a clear choice. No more ambivalence.
 
Top