Ireland legalizes the killing of the unborn

[Roy]

It's actually a very complicated issue, as noted in this NYTimes article.

Welfare has often been accused of encouraging poor unwed mothers to have more babies because they get additional funds for additional children.
Some states attempt to limit that, to discourage additional children born into poverty families.
It is suspected that this would increase the abortion rate, as pregnancies would still occur, but no additional funding would be available.

So, it's complicated.

It looks complicated. That in itself might have an effect if funding was uncertain.

[Mountain Man]

Just to bury Dimbulb and Ignorant Roy a little deeper using a source that Dimbulb first appealed to...

Source: Quora.com

The difference between a human zygote and a human skin cell is a biological (i..e scientific) one, regardless of any pro-life or pro-choice (i.e., political or philosophical) preferences.

Biologically, a zygote is the first stage of the life cycle of a human organism. It possesses DNA of an organism independent of its mother, created from genetic material from two different organisms (sperm and egg, fertilized). It is the beginning point for all future development of that individual human organism. No human beings exists on this planet that was not first at one point in their life-span, a zygote.

Compare to a skin cell, which is simply a type of cell belonging to an existing organism, of a genetic identity corresponding to that organism, which will not develop any further as an independent organism. No human being on this planet was ever solely a skin cell at any point in their life-span.

It is important to consider, biologically, that there is a difference between a cell, a group of cells, an organ, and an organism. All organisms are comprised of cells, groups of cells, and organs, but not all cells, groups of cells, or organs are by themselves individual organisms.

----------

To directly answer the question, the zygote is a separate organism. Given nothing except nature proceeding on its course, within a few months a child will be born. The skin cell following normal course of events will remain a skill cell until it dies.

The difference is pretty obvious and it shouldn’t take someone being pro-life to see it.

----------

A zygote already is a genetically distinct, totipotent, individual organism of the human species—that’s not debatable, it’s basic biology.

A skin cell is none of those things. It is not genetically distinct, it is not totipotent, and it does not meet the biological criteria of an individual organism.

----------

A skin cell is not a complete human being. A “zygote”/“embryo”/“fetus” is.

https://www.quora.com/According-to-p...uman-skin-cell

© Copyright Original Source

Seriously, you guys are coming across as utter morons for even disputing this.

[Cow Poke]

It looks complicated. That in itself might have an effect if funding was uncertain.

It's a classic case of the law of unintended consequences - if you offer some help to get somebody out of an immediate and temporary bind, and they discover they can get more money by intensifying the problem... plus, our government is notorious for assuming that "if we do X", the affect will be "Y", when the average person can easily game the system.

[Roy]

Seriously, you guys are coming across as utter morons for even disputing this.

So either (i) we're utter morons, and/or (ii) you don't understand what we're saying. Given the biological incompetence of your claims, your inability with logic and your recent inability to understand what you are yourself saying, let alone what anyone else is, I'm sufficiently confident that anyone whose opinion matters (and most whose doesn't) will correctly conclude (ii).

[Roy]

It's a classic case of the law of unintended consequences - if you offer some help to get somebody out of an immediate and temporary bind, and they discover they can get more money by intensifying the problem... plus, our government is notorious for assuming that "if we do X", the affect will be "Y", when the average person can easily game the system.

Yeah - and it's exacerbated by some people's greed and uncaringness. We've had occasional problems in the UK with people trying to claim child benefit for children who have left home/died/never existed/been passed around multiple 'parents'.

[Cow Poke]

Yeah - and it's exacerbated by some people's greed and uncaringness. We've had occasional problems in the UK with people trying to claim child benefit for children who have left home/died/never existed/been passed around multiple 'parents'.

Yes sir, and it's often portrayed as a 'minorities' problem, but if I remember correctly, it's pretty much an "equal opportunity abuse" situation.

[lilpixieofterror]

No.

Yeah you are and you’re too full of your own pride to just admit you were wrong and made a bad argument. It’s pretty typical for you though, but another day and another bad, anti science, argument from the faithful abortion supporters. Nothing new there.

[lilpixieofterror]

Thing is, I didn't actually get any details wrong. I used the term "life", which scientifically speaking has a fairly well-defined meaning and is used interchangeably with the terms "life-form" and "organism". It's also a fact that there is a clear distinction between something being "alive" and meeting the scientific definition of "life". Your skin cells are alive, at least in their early stage, but they are not life since they do not have the attributes that science uses to describe life (they don't organize, adapt, self-sustain, metabolize, respond to stimuli, etc.). A skin cell is part of an organism, but it is not an organism in and of itself.

I just assume that you did get a detail wrong, but it doesn’t matter because it’s just Roy picking nits without addressing the actual argument made.

Dimbulb claims to have a science degree, so either he knows this and is trying to score rhetorical points by playing dumb, or his degree is only suitable for lining the bottom of a bird cage.

His degree is in psychology, which means it’s irrelevant to this debate.

[One Bad Pig]

I just assume that you did get a detail wrong, but it doesn’t matter because it’s just Roy picking nits without addressing the actual argument made.



His degree is in psychology, which means it’s irrelevant to this debate.

His thesis is certainly not in the field of psychology - but it's not in biology either.

[Roy]

His thesis is certainly not in the field of psychology - but it's not in biology either.

I have no idea what field starlight studied, but I do know he has more than one degree. Not that it matters, since this is high-school material.

[Cow Poke]

I have no idea what field starlight studied, but I do know he has more than one degree.

You know that he SAYS he has more than one degree.

[Bill the Cat]

... Not that it matters, since this is high-school material.

Exactly right. The biological difference between a self-contained and self-directing organism and a simple specialized part of that organism is basic Bio 101.

[Roy]

You know that he SAYS he has more than one degree.

Hmmm... true. I believe him though.

[stfoskey15]

It's actually a very complicated issue, as noted in this NYTimes article.

Welfare has often been accused of encouraging poor unwed mothers to have more babies because they get additional funds for additional children.
Some states attempt to limit that, to discourage additional children born into poverty families.
It is suspected that this would increase the abortion rate, as pregnancies would still occur, but no additional funding would be available.

So, it's complicated.

Where's the NYTimes article? I just see something from NCSL.

[Cow Poke]

Where's the NYTimes article? I just see something from NCSL.

DRAT, I'll find it when I get back from court.