When will “Pro-Lifers” make taking a person off life support illegal because you are ending a life??? If a few fertilized cells is a human being that every effort to keep them alive is required, how can they not make it illegal to not keep a person alive through any means possible as well? You don’t give a crap about those human beings’ quality of life, why should anyone take your quality of life into consideration at all? You just should be happy to be kept alive even if your body is begging to die!

Are frozen embryos human beings with the same human rights as you and me?
By your standards it sounds like they are, yet we do not require the parents attempt to birth every fertilized embryo collected (at least not yet). Are we going to charge couples that do not attempt to bring these human beings to term with their murders if they don’t bring them to term? If the parents are killed and the embryos are still being kept frozen by the clinic, will those who run the clinic be required to find hosts for these human beings and if they do not, will they be responsible for murdering the unwanted human beings?

Reproduction in most mammals is very similar to a parasitic infection. I know that sounds horrible to say because no one wants to think of their child as being similar to a parasite… but it doesn’t mean that it is not true. Until a baby takes that first breath of air outside of the womb, it is technically not alive. If that breath never comes, the child is considered to be stillborn. The problem with most abortion laws post Roe is that a fetus that is clearly dead in the womb cannot be removed even if it endangers the woman’s health. How ridiculous is that?!?! Just like with Republicans trying to prevent trans children from receiving any medically approved treatments, governments restricting medically necessary treatments based on non-expert data and public opinion is the stupidest thing we allow to happen in this country. If medical associations have cleared treatments as safe and beneficial to a patient’s well-being, then politicians should just shut the fukk up and work on real issues that are effecting our nation! These forced birther twitches do not give a crap about the unborn children.

OK, if you can define a developing human being (in the womb) as being 'sub-human' because it's not fully 'developed', how would you define those of us at the opposite end of the continuum, who have begun to 'un-develop' (deteriorate).

BTW I'm the grandpa of an aborted trisomic baby. I've NEVER been a "Forced Birther".

You rephrased my point better than did I.

If you aren’t using religion to define when life begins, what are you basing your claim that “life begins at conception” on, exactly? Not science. (Unless you are simply saying that the “life process” begins with conception and ends in death, which is true, but doesn’t change the fact that the splitting cells which occur immediately after conception still do not constitute what is defined as being a “life” by science or medicine.

I'm 100% agnostic, and I did not intend to invoke nor involve "Jewish law, Judaism, Jesus, Islamic tradition", Christianity nor any of the other varieties of voodoo normally referred to as religion.

Dunno. But it’s not an unreasonable assumption.

This is merely YOUR opinion. In fact, in the words of the poet Jesus ain’t say that! If it was an issue he’d have said something about it, amirite?

Jesus was raised in Judaism and According to Jewish law the fetus is regarded as a part of the mother's body and not as a separate being until it begins to egress from the womb during parturition, and attains the status of 'nefesh,' which means soul in Hebrew.

And the third Abrahamic religion?

In the Islamic tradition, this point is generally recognized as 120 days after conception, at which time, according to the Hadith, the process of “ensoulment” occurs; that is, the time in which the soul (r??) enters the fetus post-conception.

What about Thou shall not kill? That should be understood as Thou shall not murder. Otherwise going to war or supporting capital punishment and (a Republican favorite) defending oneself with deadly force as need would ALL be forbidden.

So we don’t even have any mention of abortion in any of the three religions. 0-for-3.

Freedom of religion has to include freedom from other people’s religion! But you Christofacists want to impose their minority view on everyone else and We the People are having none of it.

Elizabeth your victim blaming isn’t playing very well in this space because telling Putin to help himself to Ukraine because the West doesn’t care is counterintuitive — and that’s putting it mildly.

Besides ducking my would you defend Ontario question you also haven’t offered links to whomever has convinced you to parrot the Russians. Was the guy’s name William Bradley? I googled him and didn’t find any of the William Bradleys that turned up was remotely close to being a geo strategist or even a politics pundit. So how about a couple of links?

Answer, please.

That fact however, does not preclude the legitimacy of the need to terminate some human life under certain conditions.

Go ahead and legitimize the desirability of ending certain human life under certain conditions, just don't try to rationalize it on the basis of it being somehow "subhuman".

UNBELIEVABLE!

NATO's process for allowing additional countries to join was decided when the original treaty was ratified by its original members. Biden had nothing to do with it. Letting Russia change it would be a bad idea. Just opening negotiations to let Russia change it would also be a bad idea.

No one is suggesting anything like that. Have I said anything remotely resembling that? No, I have not.

You're missing my point, completely! I'm just not sure if you're missing it on purpose. :)

I knew you didn't! :-)

So, 2024 will be the first presidential election post-Roe and I'm thinking that fact alone will more than trump a lot of the angst over Biden being the Democratic nominee. I suppose he's more than capable of screwing it up but, I hope Biden starts leaning into this issue, full-throttle.

I knew you didn't! :-)

Amusing is one word for it. They must have been a bunch of misogynistic men who don't love or respect women.