Lol, that is the most ridiculous thing I've read in a while.

I don't think the moment of conception is identified in the bible as when life begins but it does say God knows people in the womb and/or forms people in the womb. Its most likely those passages are in one of the Psalms and that make people lean towards the moment of conception as the starting point.

Cf. Jer. 1:5
Psa. 139:13
Isa. 44:2

If you read those passages moment of conception argument becomes totally clear for an Evangelical.

So you say a zygote is not a human being and that makes it okay to kill it. The Nazis said Jews were not human beings and they thought it was okay to kill them too.

The truth is very strong arguments can be made that both zygotes and Jews are human beings. So while you may not agree with the Nazis....did you just figure it was their choice?

You are really starting to make no sense. So the value of human being doesn't really mean anything unless you have a direct responsibility? So what imposes the responsibility? Do you have a greater responsibility to oppose abortion than to help ethiopian mothers and children?

Come on, in your quote I said we won't agree upon that, do you want to have the nth go at it with me, just like you do with the rest of people who don't agree with you itt?

Jews who died suffered, felt pain and sorrow, had friends and loved ones, had hopes and dreams and didn't want to die. Zygotes have none of that, they are single cells.

This is the second time I read this, chances you said it the first time around? Most likely the first time got ignored though, dunno.

None of those passages imply that human beings become morally valuable at conception. They are about God's power and foreknowledge.

I may have written similiar posts, I don't know.

Isn't this overbearing?

Why is it that you get in a debate with someone then try to thrust responsibility on them? Lots of people believe things every day yet don't take action. Is everyone morally reprehensible then?

Not everyone in the world is passionate about every cause or an activist in them because they hold a strong opinion. It's not even practical for everyone to be an activist but it does give you a false sense of the moral high ground to be holding someone accountable for things when they aren't accountable. Stu has already assumed responsiblity for multiple children iirc so that means he has already lived up to his own standard whether he takes on more Ethiopian children or not.

what?

Sadly, I think it will be brushed off yet again.

Except that you can extrapolate from God's actions that people have value.

I mean if God will take the time out to form you in the womb then you must have value.

I don't know if moral value is the right term. I think of it as life having worth and the recognition of human life as having worth is worth instilling in people. Until you recognize another person as having worth you haven't set proper boundaries and probably won't respect those boundaries as much. I think that religious people just go with God's Word.

Look at that link I linked on the historical viewpoints. Who's opinion are you going to take? Aristotle, Plato, Tertullian, or God's Word as authoritative?

Lol..sry...It might not be you.

Someone earlier...might've been PingClown told Stu he needed to be paying for Ethiopians or something like that.

It's not that anyone thinks he should go to Africa and help everyone in the world who is in need. People have trouble seeing the consistency in thinking that people don't have a responsibility to help Ethiopians and at the same time maintain that every human being is equal in value (well there's one way to make this consistent).

If the Germans first put the Jews under general anethesia so that they would not suffer, not feel pain, not have hopes or dreams or any desires whatsoever.....would it be okay to gass the Jews in that state?

From a human rights standpoint that all human beings are equal is a beautiful concept. It's when people can start playing Caesar and turning their thumbs up and down on anybody for whatever reason they choose that life gets less stable due to de-valuation. It takes a lot of people together to stand up to the Caesars of the world.

Would they want to die? And the counterargument, already mentioned, is that fetuses don't have a developed consciousness to do any of that.

Look Stu, it is obviously not a clear cut case from a moral standpoint. A compromise has to be done. I think most prochoicers would admit that it is a vey difficult decision and certainly may have lasting negative effects on the directly involved and make the enablers feel uneasy.

Why don't you concede to the negative side of pro life? We might at least make some progress. You would have a rape victim give birth, an underaged girl living in poverty and not being able to provide for her baby give birth, etc., etc.

While under GA you don't have any consciousness, you are just a blob of cells.

Go to a hospital operating room and ask the guy under GA if we wants to die....he won't even process the question.

They had all of those and removing all of them would clearly be something they did not want and clearly a decrease in human well-being. Also the consequences would include grieving friends, people afraid of the same fate and so on. This just doesn't quite work with fetuses unless you ignore all neurobiology and all effect of human experience. I am not against protecting the weak; I simply think that being a person is more than being a living bag of cells. The degree in which a fetus cares or is aware of this world can not possible even be comparable even if there were hidden secrets of the brain/mind/soul we didn't know about.

Comparing the consequences of killing an adult jew and killing a fetus is just ridicilious.

Don't you ever think that the amount of human potential being wasted is scary or a great loss?

Why must every decision be based on the suffering of the live person only?

Scary, no. Great loss, yes, to an extent. Sad. definitely.

I like Sam Harris's opinion that science can be a source for morality and that good means reducing suffering.

Don't you ever think that if there weren't so many people around the world, the rest would have more resources and have a better life quality?

The unborn baby could have discovered the cure for AIDS, just like someone who never got a chance to go to medical/pharmaceutical school.

Human potential is also wasted when a 17-year old can't go to college or when a raped 12-year old girl dies in delivery.

I promise we're not the same person, lol.