And Carl goes on to say>>>

Sagan goes on to suggest that if abortion is murder, then masturbation must be "mass murder". The main problem with this conclusion is that it ignores the fundamental difference between a sperm and an egg prior to fertilization, and the zygote which results through fertilization. The difference is genetic. Sperm and egg cells in themselves are not complete. If left alone they will die after a few days, never developing into anything other than what they are. The sperm shares the genetic code of the man, the egg shares the genetic code of the woman. It is only in combination, when the 23 chromosomes from the father join the 23 chromosomes from the mother, through fertilization, that a new, biologically distinct human beings comes into existence. This one fertilized cell, in fact, contains all the information necessary for a lifetime of human growth.

So in fact, when male masturbates, technically its mass murder. Now I don't feel so good. smile.

But there you go! its in black and white.

TTM

Here is both sides of the fence, and IMO its still the woman choice.

And no charges on this issue ever! and This makes a lot of sence.

While life is to be cherished, especially human life desired by loving parents-to-be, life need not be be cherished absolutely or as vehemently as stated by some. Particularly when there is a social and other human cost to life not cherished or looked after in an increasingly over-populated world. Peace.
Posted by McReal, Monday, 18 October 2010 1:16:24 PM

Quality life should be more important as in all after the child lets say ends up in poverty or its all screwed up my being adopted................ and my favorite........ look at the 300 million starving around the world.

You tell me if they had a choice?

What do think they would say to you goody too shoes...HEY.....yeah! they would be tell you lot too........well you get the picture.

http://www.google.com.au/url?url=http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45712&rct=j&sa=X&ei=jsS7TNCwAY_EvQPS2M3gDQ&ved=0CDsQpwIwAw&q=abortion+laws+in+australia&usg=AFQjCNGNluOS2Ml9DrwssI862viV9Z32Rg&cad=rja

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAbortion_in_Australia&rct=j&q=abortion%20laws%20in%20australia&ei=jsS7TNCwAY_EvQPS2M3gDQ&usg=AFQjCNE6uHiNbhF6cXE2c3cK-zPvKbesig&cad=rja

The greens win the moral commonsense every time.

Love the way we think.

And that's right all the time.

Smile

TTM>

think than move, a defense of sperm has been mounted on OLO in other threads. Apparently god gets all bothered when they are deliberately wasted.

I did some very rough maths on that some years ago, the figures escape me but no matter how prolific a father someone is the proportion of waste is overwelming. Even for someone with 100 children 100 used sperm out of hundreds of millions over a lifetime does not make a good stewardship of sperm. Very wastefull indeed.

I also found it rather odd that a god's who's own son was supposedly celebate, who's longest running church is headed by suposedly celebate men should be concerned about sperm being wasted.

Almost as odd as the idea that a god who designed human reproduction so that a large number of conceptions don't make it through to birth regardless of the choices of the mother should be really upset by something like abortion.

R0bert

Indeed Think than Move, Robert also beat me in saying that even in a successful fertilization a mass murder (or even suicide) occurs every time.

Dig into any anti-Euthanasia motion and you will most often find some social conservative whose judgment stems out of distaste for promiscuity and eagerness to punish it whenever possible.

Also, I'm going to do an experiment- watch any following anti users- there is a high chance they will try to make 'secularized' excuse as to single out a fertilized egg (eg try to find a similar analogy to a 'soul'), but they will ever so carefully avoid the Fetus in Fetu analogy- and likely make excuses as to why they will not attempt to weigh it up.

By the way I'm not Stezza- that's another user.

A zygote is simply the initial cell formed after conception. I've been using the tern "fetus" for the sake of simplicity to describe every stage of development till birth. It's pointless using terms like blastocyst, embryoblast, zygote etc etc (there's many of these terms to describe many stages of development) on a layman's forum. The layman's term for it all is "fetus".

My points remains 100% intact:
1)The life of an "individual" person begins at conception, Not before, Not after.
2)Using various types of terminology doesn't change that fact
3)The fact that the individual at conception is not more fully formed than he/she is does not make him/her any lesser an individual than a fetus that's been 9 months in the womb
4)There's an almighty, pervasive TABOO against calling abortion what it really is, the killing of an individual life. It's a killing, and calling it an "abortion" is a nice way to get around the unpleasant facts regarding the act.
5)The belief that an individual life does not begin at conception is just that, a BELIEF. Just like a religious belief.

I support abortion, or whatever one wishes to call it. But let's be honest about it. We are killing an individual, existing human being. The pro abortionists need to come out of the Dark Age mentality they're in and wake up to reality and stop pretending that abortion doesn't kill an individual.

Rudy, I disagree abortion is killing an individual, even late term abortions for fetuses that would not survive outside the womb. Sure it is killing live tissue, but it is not a distinct entity capable of life as an individual on its own.

Appropriate-term Abortion is preferable to bringing an individual child into the world that is not properly wanted.