Betty Dodson with Carlin Ross

Better Orgasms. Better World.

 0 items

• Login
• Join

Search this site:

Human life does begin at conception. That's what conception means. But it hasn't reached a valid state. It's at the state that an ill person would have life support removed and it happens inside an existing human life, that is valid, which seems to be of no consiquence at all to these republitard law makers. They have no respect for that existing human life or her choices, because she's a woman. I think it's as simple as that.

As I think about it Jake, the subtle thing here is what defines "life" vs fertilization. Honestly, I don't feel like I began to be alive until I reached 30. Prior to that I was in some kind of strange holding pattern. But that's a whole other story... Granted I had to get fertilized before I got to have the life @ 30...

Scientifically speaking conception means that the egg has been fertilized, Jake E. 

The idea of a human entity created from that fertilization is generalized definition/misinterpretation of the scientific definition.  Fertilization is step 1 in the two part process which results in pregnancy. 

The egg must be fertilized but then it must also implant.  It is estimated that up to 2/3 of naturally fertilized eggs do not implant or spontaneously abort during the first week (so not due to birth control), the woman never having realized that she is pregnant.  A simple Google search will give you a ton of info on this.  Even if that estimate is generous (some suggest it's a conservative number), that's still the majority of fertilized eggs that fail to result in pregnancy.

Furthermore, according to your theory (in which "valid" life is self-sustaining life? - just checking), a fetus in the first twenty-four weeks of development (when half of fetuses can survive outside of the mother's womb) holds the same "person on life-support" status as a fertilized egg floating around the uterus, a comparison which I don’t think is justified.  At 24 weeks a fetus has eyes and skin (not fully developed); a fertilized egg has a bunch of chromosomes and that's about it.

If Republicans really wanted to prevent all of this "miscarriage" (provided we grant them their definition of life at conception), they really should be stuffing us women folk full of birth control...  The fact that a woman should have control over her own body is the more philosophical argument we could use (which doesn't mean it's wrong); we shouldn't use it, however, solely because we feel the Republicans stand correct on correct scientific ground, when they don't.  All of their misinformation contributes to a dangerous stigma around abortion and around birth control, specifically the pill and the IUD, which are the most effective types of birth control, along with sterilization.

Thanks lawrence and Sarah. I think the bill has got it's linguistic knickers in a twist. Life begins at conception, Personhood begins at birth, personhood means someone can physically remove you from your mother if your in danger. Before that it's impossible. 

My argument is women don't have to justify wether they want a baby or not to anyone else no matter what their arguments for or against or have anyone decide when life begins or not because everyone elses opinion is totally irelavent. Women physically have posession and can decide to try and concieve a  baby and birth it or terminate at their own risk. Without technology both choices have an element of risk. At the point a successful self induced abortion, (perhaps herbal) that no-one elses opinion is valid at all exept hers becomes a proven fact not conjecture.

So there you are, I've demonstated that women have total soveriegnty over their uterus with proof. Yet most people even here will think this slightly ridiculous. Because the respect  bias is still in favour of men, who fought to claim soveriegn land at their own risk, You can be turned away at a border or you can smuggle your way in but no land domain is as secure as a uterus. You can't get in to either do good or harm without the womans permission.  Again this is simply a fact. yet land soveiegnty is respected by the threat and use of violence. Order a man from most culture's off his soveriegn land and he will shoot you dead 1st. There's the source of the accepted subcobscious gender bias. I think we need to be motivated by peace not violence to both conciously and subconsciously respect both women and men.

What about a female zygote, embryo or fetus? Are they personhoods or just male ones?  In the US women are not equal citizens in the eyes of the law (the Equal Rights Act did not pass). Is seems that corporations, males (out of the womb and in it) are persons.  Are women only considered persons until they are born and then it is a hard shove back down the alley to second class citizen?  Do women still have to pay taxes? (I just did mine and I owe money to keep financing Exxon, Dick Chaney's various corporations and Monsanto).
I wish all of this contraception/abortion shit would go away. The economy and enviornment are spiraling down the toilet and nobody seems to give a damn. And they also don't seem to have any viable plan to pull us out of this mess.  Instead, they are using sex as a distraction and everyone falls for it everytime.
I know this is an angry post, but I am angry.  I am tired of hearing the powers that be or wannabe talking about me as if I don't exist.  It is my cunt.  I was born with it and I take it with me when I die (unless Ricky and the Pope want to put it in a jar for safe keeping)
I don't know what the problem is. Maybe if more men owned up to being gay or bi the world might leave women's bodies the hell alone.  Just a suggestion.  Any others?

The problem I have, and I steel myself against the sound of it, is I can see conception as the start of life. Science or no science that does make sense to me. It is merely a zygote and just a conglomerate of cells but it is the start of life, even though that start may not be successful it is a start. If I can see the logic in that then so will a lot of other people. It's where they take the argument from there that bothers me. It cannot be life in a legal sense because it is a bunch of cells inside a humanbeing who must have total autonomy over their own body in order to maintain their inalienable right to the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. 

It is intent that must count as well though. If I went to start a book and wrote one word on a page that would be the start of a book. I could go on and finish it or it could end there as just one word on a page but it would be the start. However if I had no intention of writing a book and just took a peice of paper and wrote one word on it that would just be one word on a bit of paper.

The nature of it is that life starts in women's bodies and so women have soveriegnty over life at it's very beginning. This is what freaks out the patriarchal religious folks, because they want men (via their made up divine idol) to have soveriegnty over life. 

Actually, I would suggest that life begins when the sperm and egg are first produced. They can't of themselves exist without another body enclosing them, but that doesn't seem to matter to Republicans (and other anti-abortion fanatics) at all. So, it's a moot point really. Hence the spilling of the seed argument in the bible. So women, you're in trouble every month, because of course, you let an egg go to waste. And you male masturbators, why, you're damned to hell for just thinking about it. Way I see it (note I am taking the piss here), we're all damned because we just can't help ourselves and our wicked thoughts. Be thankful of course, there is no god and therefore all of this is complete nonsense. I would note that quite a high percentage of zygotes actually don't make it paste about a month due to either something that the woman has consumed, or a genetic malfunction. Of course condoms would prevent the problem in the first place, as well as other issues. And of course, creepy males making hypocritical statements, when most of them would probably have sex with a woman on the sly and leave her pregnant and then cry out that she should keep the baby, even if it has been conceived out of wedlock (yet another sin), doesn't really help the matter. Life will run its course despite the best or worst efforts of people of any creed or colour trying to intervene. What I mean is, life succeeds or not, and we can help it on its way or intervene. Ironically, I should suggest that these same lawmakers are the same ones who support gun laws. Guns only have one purpose, and that is to harm life forms, including humans. So, lets allow one form of terminating life and disallow another? That makes sense if you're a right wing nutter.

That should have been embryo, not zygote.  Zygotes don't usually last more than a moment. :)

Well said Li. And sovereignty means just that, good or bad. and the bad would be exploited by the anti choicers.  We can't physically stop a woman anywhere in the world from aborting a baby because it's a girl not a boy. All we can do is give someone the information to make good informed decisions.  

99.999999% of women do just that with their reproductive decisions with overwhelmingly good healthy outcomes even in the most difficult conditions. Can Patriarchy's sovereign reign boast that 99.99999% of it's decisions have been good resulting in overwhelmingly healthy outcomes? :) I don't think so. So uteral soveriegnty is both stronger and far better managed, without any politicians interference. 

I'd say as a single group all over the world politicians are far more irresponsible with their sovereignty than the average mum. and I use the word mum as a substitute for a word that doesn't exist, for as a voluntary sisterhood equally recognising and giving equal kudos to all womens reproductive  potential with respect for her decision to have or not to have children.  It's kind of telling that there isn't an English word that does that with the same emotion power as mum. 

One of the most chilling things I know from my Catholic upbringing is that the Catholic Church believes that the souls of most of those born because of withholding contraception will spend all eternity being tortured in Hell. Do these people ever stop to consider the consequences of their own theology? Apparently they think that God wants every soul to have its fair shot at eternal damnation.

"A human zygote exists for about four days, and becomes a blastocyst on the fifth day."
Quote from Wikipedia. So it's a couple of days, not a moment. Altough the quote is misleading. It's not like it ceases to be and becomes something else. Acutually, zygote is really just the name for the embryos initial stage of development. So, it is an embryo, but you call it a zygote because it's in that very first stage of development.