Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

You have no idea what you are talking about.

 

That would take 20 years to have a baby that way. and cost millions of dollars.

This is what happens when a lack of knowledge and only your religious values guides you. You might as well just eliminate IVF if this is the way you feel.

 

I, for one, welcome our new chimera overlords.

 

Again I’m not going to claim expertise in this by my understanding from people that do this is that it’s practically very difficult to do that. Just moving an embryo could result in its destruction and as many of those undergoing IVF already have underlying issues preventing them from natural pregnancy it is problematic just working with embryos one at a time.

 

If the feeling is that embryos are people and should be protected like people the Catholic Church’s position might be the most intellectually consistent.

Human life should not be created artificially outside the human body so IvF should be banned.

 

America has shifted way to far to crazy land.

 

I’m dumber having read this

what led you to believe it was prudent talking about something you have very little understanding of and making that apparent

 

If it can't be done without killing babies, then it shouldn't be done. That is the way to do it morally and ethically.

 

It is already moral and ethical. It's immoral and unethical to impose your religious beliefs onto other people trying to have a family. What is moral and ethical is to stay out of their business and let them make family planning decisions on their own.

 

Except for the whole killing people part. It isn't moral or ethical to kill people, and it is moral and ethical to stop someone from killing people.

 

Your extremist view and opinion are just that—opinions, not facts. Imposing your extreme religious views on others is immoral and unethical, much like that of the Taliban.

 

No one is being killed. Stop acting like an embryo is a person. That's a religious belief. Not a scientific one.

 

I am not sure its a religious belief driving this position as much as a political one.

 

That religious view reminds me of the old end of life care debate during Bush, where people tried getting the courts to deny family from switching off mostly brain dead Terry Schiavo. Bush also famously banned embryonic stem cell research while Compassionately leaving the door open for IVF, which provided those embryos for research in the first place...

It mostly normal and accepted for the family to decide when to flip off the switch for end of life care to reduce suffering of the patient, to reduce costs for the family and healthcare system, and also because these patients wouldn't be alive without machines. We also have hospice care to reduce the chance of sending the patient's last day in a sterile and invasive ICU.

But with Schiavo, she was on the border of life and death and her final will didn't spell out this case. Religious humanists wanted to keep the lights on in hopes she'd [super]naturally recover or that "future medicine" (ironic) would bring her consciousness back.

Embryos can be considered living as much as a blood cell that's reformed into a stem cell and stimulated into an embryo is considered living. But is said blood cell human?

I doubt there will be any scientific credence to define embryos as human as we have no current means to gaze into that border of consciousness and unconsciousness (in order to ask those gentle innocent souls if they're alive), and embryos can't currently survive in a clone vat or elaborate machines independent of the meat factories state laws are compelling to host.

Even the condition of embryo as "future human" is arbitrary. Old Testament forbade the Jews from "spilling their seed." Do we enforce the same rules for these half-humans?

I don't want to get into the nasty details when it comes to women's eggs, but it'd probably be something hardcore like how devout orthodox Jainists approach all living beings.

I'm now hungry for a small forests worth of cashews.

 

So you would support the banning IVF?

As stated if the Axiom you start with is that embryos are people that would be the most intellectually consistent position. As is obvious not everyone starts from that axiom.

This ties into a point ive been making over the importance of mainting our democracy and Consitutional system. Such deep differences can be addressed through that process. If we lose that then the alternative for that is through violence.

 

Religion and politics are one in the same here.

 

If embryos are people can they be used as tax deductions or child support claims?

 

I can put one or a hundred in a cooler and drive in the carpool lane.

 

Did you hear about the pregnant woman in Dallas who did this? If not, google it.

 

Welfare king status, here I come!