North Dakota lawmakers vote that 'personhood' starts at conception

If a human life isn't created at conception, when during the pregnancy does it become a human life?

If it isn't a human life until the baby is actually born, how could it be so different from the baby a day earlier who is still inside the womb? A week earlier? A month?

Does it have to have fingers and toes to be a human life?

Does it have to be a heartbeat?

Is there ever some point along its development where the outcome is in question? Call it a zygote, call it an embyro. There's no denying what it will be in nine months, so where's the line?

Abortion should be a states rights issue, so in that sense I think this law is constitutional and legal.

I'm about 90% pro-choice, but I still think that states should be allowed to enforce their own rules on their own populations by their own volition. There's no sense in abortion being illegalised in New York against the wishes of the state's majority of liberals; and there's equally no sense in abortion being legal in the deep south where the majority are pro-life.

Of course in a constitutional republic, this wouldn't be an issue as the passing of such a law is an infringence of liberty; however America is now a democracy rather than a constitutional republic.

reply to post by quango


Sorry to bring the truth to you but even the God in the bible didn't recognized life until it was already out of the womb and independent from the women body with the first breath.

The reason? you should ask god he actually was a very intelligent being after all when decided no to make abortion an issue in the bible.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


I agree, that is why while this just a bill it will not have any repercussions until is become into referendum to be voted in an election.

Like I said the first state that tried to do this was Colorado, but the people in the state voted against it.

Why? because when it comes to rights specially those that targets only women nobody wants to deal with that.

reply to post by marg6043


So if life begins outside the womb...

a woman goes into labor, starts having contractions, is rushed to the hospital, and when she gets there has a change of heart and decides to abort baby instead of give birth.

That would be okay?

reply to post by quango


Like I said you should ask god, he seems pretty good at answering all those questions.

After all God saw it all and made man and women in Its image, so I Imagine that pregnacy and abortion was something he knew very well.

reply to post by marg6043


Ok.

Thanks for the honest attempt at discussion.

reply to post by quango


No, is not an attempt at staying away from discussion, is just trying to not deviate into a contest of will that will only leave to anger and resentment as you already can tell where I stand when it comes to abortion rights.

I stay away from your uterus or private parts and I expect you to stay away from mine.

Still I have contributed quite extensively about the topic of the thread, North Dakota vote that "pershohood" starts at conception.

Because this topic is in alternative news the political aspect of the issue is the main subject.

Thanks for your honesty also.

Originally posted by quango
If a human life isn't created at conception, when during the pregnancy does it become a human life?

If it isn't a human life until the baby is actually born, how could it be so different from the baby a day earlier who is still inside the womb? A week earlier? A month?

Does it have to have fingers and toes to be a human life?

Does it have to be a heartbeat?

Is there ever some point along its development where the outcome is in question? Call it a zygote, call it an embyro. There's no denying what it will be in nine months, so where's the line?

I believe I addressed this. According to all scripture that brings up the issue (including that which is said to have come from the God of the Bible), the soul enters the body at first breath.

So that is the answer to what is "different." First breath.

Though, as I said, I encourage a dogmaless society, I also think that taking the various scriptures as a benchmark makes most sense.

Therefore, it is "animal" until first breath. Then a soul enters and it is "human."

reply to post by Amaterasu


WRONG.
The Bible doesn't say that 'personhood' starts AFTER the first post-womb, breath.
Scriptures on abortion

The Holy Scriptures speak of a fetus as a person, not simply tissue that can be discarded if found to be a bother or nuisance. Since the fetus is a person from the moment of conception, then the destroying of the fetus is killing a person. "In the past, some people have mistakenly speculated that perhaps the body might be in the process of formation for some time, and then 'God breathes a soul into it.' They had it backward. The life that is present forms matter into a body for itself' (Joseph Breig, "Life Forms Matter," The Catholic News, Jan. 24, 1974, p. 8).

"Your hands shaped me and made me. Will you now turn and destroy me? Remember that you molded me like clay. Will you now turn me to dust again? Did you not pour me out like milk ... and knit me together with bones and sinews? You gave me life and showed me kindness, and in your providence watched over my spirit" (Job 10:8-12 NIV).

"Before I was born the LORD called me; from my birth he has made mention of my name...and now the LORD says--he who formed me in the womb to be his servant..." (Isaiah 49:1, 5).

"The word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations’" (Jeremiah 1:4-5).

In the following passages we note that personality is ascribed to the unborn.

"For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that fully well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be" (Psalm 139:13-16).

"Sons are a heritage from the LORD, children a reward from him" (Psalm 127:3).

Exodus 21:22-25 relates how Israel was to judge a circumstance relating to the death of the unborn:

"If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman's husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, wound for wound, bruise for bruise."

All of the latter deals with unintentional hurt that comes to a pregnant woman; how much more will divine penalty come upon those who intentionally discard the fetus? The Gospel of Luke ascribes personality to the fetus within Elizabeth:

"When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit... As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy" (1:41, 44).

Mere tissue does not leap for joy; only personhood leaps for joy. The Bible regards the fetus as having personality. In Galatians, Paul speaks of himself as a person while still in his mother's womb, but more a person consecrated by God for a holy mission (compare Jeremiah 1:5 for the same accent):

"But when God, who set me apart from birth, and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles..." (Gal. 1: 15-16).

Since the Bible regards the fetus as personality, then the aborting of the fetus is murdering personality.

Some verses from Scripture dealing with murder are then appropriate for study, such as Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man." Also, read Exodus 23:7: "Have nothing to do with a false charge, and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty." Note I Peter 4:15: "If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer..."

"For all the talk of freedom and self-determination, the abortion movement is at its heart a movement denying rights to a silent segment of humanity and soliciting public sanction, support and subsidy to its own cause"

(Donald P. Shoemaker, ABORTION, THE BIBLE AND THE CHRISTIAN, Hayes Publishing Co., 1976, p. iv).

[edit on 20-2-2009 by Clearskies]

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

WRONG.
The Bible doesn't say that 'personhood' starts AFTER the first post-womb, breath.

Hmmm... I never said ANYTHING about the Bible itself. What you offered was interpretation and suggestion. It is in the Talmud that the question of when the soul enters the body comes up (specifically!) and the answer is (equally specifically!) at first breath.

So...since the God of the Bible (which was what I said) is said to have given the Hebrews the Talmud, I am NOT wrong.

So you can either accept passages that could easily be seen as metaphor and open to interpretation as your benchmark - or you can choose the very specific description in the Talmud.

Me? I'll use the Talmud (and the many other scriptures around the globe that say the exact same thing).

reply to post by Amaterasu

I don't follow the Talmud, like most other Christians.
The Talmud is a Rabbinical COMMENTARY on interpretation of the Tenach.
Not Authoritative to me.

Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

I don't follow the Talmud, like most other Christians.
The Talmud is a Rabbinical COMMENTARY on interpretation of the Tenach.
Not Authoritative to me.

Not a problem. Take what you will.

As for me, I will use not that simple piece alone, but all the many such writings from Gods around the globe. Seems like the right choice to me.

reply to post by Clearskies


That is a misinterpretation that religious and bible thumper anti abortionist chose to claim that the bible talks about abortion.

That is not truth as God "was referring to the soul" and we all know that in the bible in many instances the references of the soul as an independent entity from the body is talk about.

While the body goes back to dust so the soul will reunite with is maker

That means the soul never dies.

Good try.

“Let the day perish in which I was born. ... Because it shut not up the doors of my mother's womb, nor hid sorrow from my eyes. Why died I not from the womb? Why did I not give up the spirit when I came out of the belly? ... Or as an untimely birth I had NOT been; as infants which never saw light.”

Job 3:3, 10-11, 16

Job 13:16 tells us very much about how Job saw the matter of being a fetus. He saw it as “not having being,” or as we would say, “not having existence.” That is exactly what the text says and that is what any common sense person would accept as the teaching of Job.

“And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, ‘My wrath is kindled against you, and against your two friends: for you have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job has.’”

Job 42:7

The simple truth is, when Job was still a fetus within the womb of his mother and had never seen the light of day, that fetus was reckoned as “NOT HAVING BEEN” — and that is how God and the Bible defines the status of the fetus.

See my friend, I can nick pic from the bible too.

How the bible define a human being?

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

Genesis 2:7



That tells all.

Marg,

Debating over what Bible verses show the beginning of live is irrelevant IMO, because it is still just a religious system's commentary on the issue. Whatever legal definitions are set should be made on a scientifically verifiable basis.

Personally I think that the cutoff should be viability, with minimal medical intervention. Although this is admitadly a murky definition in itself and can vary from fetus to fetus, it isn't at conception.

I concede a difference between potential life, and actual life. To make an example from the animal kingdom (which were are in fact part of,) it's the difference between a chicken egg that is fertalized moments ago, and one where the chick can be hatched.

It is more and more difficult to define viability, though, especially since moden medicine keeps pushing back the gestational age--in many cases unethically, in my opinion.

reply to post by asmeone2


I know but while scientifically is many doctors in the same agenda as the anti abortionist that will fall flat in their butts to claim that fetuses feel pain even when they are a glob of blood in the womb.

The agenda will never stop because the truth is not what is been look after.

So if bible verses are to be use I have plenty of instances in the bible also that talks about the soul, but abortion the bible do not mention at all.



[edit on 20-2-2009 by marg6043]

reply to post by asmeone2


Remember this case,

“At what point is a human fetus viable? ... a government witness testified in U.S. District Court in Nebraska that a 20-week fetus can feel pain, suggesting the fetus is a living being. Neonatology specialists have countered, however, that a 20-week fetus cannot yet survive outside the mother’s womb. ... [Dr. Avroy] Fanaroff 2 [notes], ‘There may be a beating heart, there may even be some gasping attempts at breathing, but this is not a baby that can be resuscitated — it is not viable,’ ... ‘such signs of life typically ‘last only seconds.’ ...

What, then, differentiates between live birth and viable birth? The maturity of the lungs, Goldsmith said. ‘It is the ability of the lungs to exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide,’ he said, which explains the reason why a non-viable fetus in 1973 can be a viable baby today.”

“Analysis: Advances Redefine Fetal Viability,”



www.askelm.com...

[edit on 20-2-2009 by marg6043]

reply to post by marg6043


Even if it is "vaible" a child born at 20 weeks is probably going to have severe mental and physical handicaps--if you have seen that show about the deaf/blind triplets, they were born at about 28 weeks if I recall, imagine 20! The child would be alive, yes, but have a severely diminished quality of life.

reply to post by asmeone2


Yes you are right, it will survive under very careful monitored care of a doctor and luck.

Still as the medical community keeps improving the life of premature fetuses this will become and issue.

Still no medical community can ever imitate a woman womb when it comes to the delivery of a healthy human child.

But they are trying even if is to prove that they can and even if the result is a vegetable that still can breath with life support.

Then you wonder who are really the monsters here that anti abortionist keep claiming are out there when they refer to pro abortion, people that will gladly see a child in a very despicable health conditions as long as is breathing for their cause.