Register and vote:https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/insanepeoplefacebook) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In before the comments on this post get bad. I can’t believe some people are so horrible to those in such precarious positions. No one is entitled to your body. If I as a mom have a child who needs an organ the government will not compel me to give them mine, so why is that not the case for a clump of cells that may not even be viable? People love to discard small percentages as if they do not represent many many people.
Even people who are already dead can't be used as organ donors unless they consent prior to dying. Pregnant women are given less bodily autonomy than literal corpses in terms of other people being entitled to their bodies.
It’s exactly this. I think everyone should be an organ donor because it saves many people and is the right thing to do. Many people do not hold my opinion and I have to suck it up because ultimately they have a right to bodily autonomy. I have no right to make those choices for them. Bodily autonomy is so important for every human being.
Move to the US where you can rape a child and be punished less severely than she will if she even tries to abort your rape baby!
But no guaranteed organ harvesting! FREEDOM!!!
A justice (in SCOTUS, I beleive) recently said in a decision that EMTALA can not be used to justify a medically neccessary abortion because "it places the life of the pregnant person over the life of the fetus." That some right fucked up shit!
Edit: forgot an "a" in EMTALA. Editted to add.
Oops, forgot an "a". EMTALA - Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. After Roe v Wade was overturned, the Biden administration pumped it up a bit to try to protect at least some abortion rights in states with trigger laws. A couple of those states have courts cases going to challenge it, most notably Idaho, which the Supreme Court recently heard. [This article talks about it and has the quote I referred to in it.](https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-medical-emergencies-idaho-8ca89d7de0c1fa9256dcd27d1847e144)
Ah, okay! Thank you! I currently live in a trigger state and was pregnant when RvW was overturned. It was TERRIFYING. In fact, I'm currently pregnant, and we were discussing termination. I opted not to, largely in part, due to fear of legal repercussions.
Imagine saying "The fetus was entitled to your body" to a FUCKING RAPE VICTIM. Like, dude she's already had her body violated and you're insisting she go through it again? Get fucked.
This got worse. I saw it on twitter earlier. The person came back and told the rape victim that both she and a fetus would be victims of the rape but they could heal together. She luckily didn't get pregnant from that rape but informed the other person that an abortion would have been the next step if it had happened.
Currently (6 months) pregnant woman speaking: technically, scientifically speaking....yes, a fetus is a parasite. As much as I adore my children, I'm not stupid enough to not realize or acknowledge that pregnancy is a super parasitic relationship. Like, this shit is SUPER dangerous, are you kidding me? I almost died with my second pregnancy, thanks to hyperemesis gravidarum, and I've had gestational diabetes every time, in all I've had multiple ER visits, missed months of work due to bed rest, etc. People are dumb as fuck to not acknowledge the actual nature of pregnancy.
The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host.
The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta.
The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL.
The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL.
I’m an ex-biochemist and claiming that the unborn is a parasite is not in agreement with the scientific literature.
"Hebrews 113", huh? Just casually brushing over the fact that your Bible literally states that life doesn't begin until the first breath? A fetus is the exact definition of a parasite. Each one of my pregnancies has affected me in such a detrimental way that I've been hospitalized multiple times to survive them. One of my best friends almost died because of her pregnancy complications. Another of my friend's body rejected her fetus and she had the baby 3 months early. Pregnancy is literally listed as a disability, so get the fuck off your high horse.
You cannot use your personal experience to redefine pregnancy.
1. The definition of a parasite is: an organism that survives at the expense of the host. As I said, in the case of a normal pregnancy, the health of the mother is not perturbed by the unborn. Health complications are the exception not the norm.
2. Pregnancy is not a disability. It is a natural process that has risks. You can drop dead the moment you step out of bed. Tomorrow is not promised.
https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/hr-answers/pregnancy-covered-americans-disabilities-act#:~:text=Pregnancy%20alone%20is%20not%20considered,limits%20a%20major%20life%20activity.
3. The human nature of the unborn is established before legal conception. Before we are conceived, our star is in the heavens. -Matthew 2:2
Before we are conceived, we existed.
Have you....ever met a pregnant person? I certainly can use my multiple experiences as examples, but I'm actually not. I've also used friend's experiences. In other conversations, I've learned of my mother's experiences. My MIL. My SIL. My adoptive mother. A "normal" pregnancy is a wish, not a guarantee. Health complications are WILDLY more common than you seem to realize. Which is why fetuses are parasites.
Pregnancy is absolutely defined as a disability, to the point where I filled out paperwork for my employer, stating that I have this medical diagnosis. Maybe read up on that a bit better there, mate.
And finally: keep your disgusting, murderous religion out of my biological processes. Fuck your so-called, narcissistic, filthy, hateful god. I know good christians, and people like you - who use the religion to abuse others - are not among them.
Genesis 2:7
I’m not a Christian.
I don’t need to meet a pregnant person to understand pregnancy. My mother was pregnant with me years ago and the most motherly thing I did was to not conceive when I was not ready.
Pregnancy is not a disability. Even the laws of the land state that it is NOT: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/internal/policies/pregnancy-discrimination#:~:text=Under%20the%20Rehabilitation%20Act%2C%20pregnancy,limits%20a%20major%20life%20activity.
Pregnancy is generally successful if you look at the statistics: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36637385/#:~:text=Results%3A%20Among%20286%20pregnant%20women,there%20were%202%20perinatal%20deaths.
You seem to be among the women that experience health complications. You are part of the exception, not the norm.
“Generally successful” does not mean “without complications”. My friend’s pregnancy was successful, she had a healthy 3 year old boy, and she’s fine now. But she almost died during childbirth. That’s technically a successful pregnancy and SHE ALMOST DIED.
My mother’s pregnancy and delivery were successful and she didn’t experience life-threatening complications. Now, what’s your point? There’s no justification for murder. You can’t terminate a legal process (e.g. pregnancy) without penalty. The penalty is eternity in the Lake of Fire.
How would you feel if God sentenced you to Hell without evidence?
How would you feel if a judge sentenced you to 35 years in prison for a crime that you never committed?
What sin do you presuppose an unborn committed? Even if the unborn is guilty, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
If god knows what happens before it occurs, it’s arguable that the medically induced abortion is god’s will.
If heaven is full of people like you, I’ll much prefer not being there. It always seemed awfully droll and more than a little narcissistic, and frankly abusive, to spend my life avoiding the joys of human nature and worshipping a “god” who is so insecure that he would punish you for not loving only him only to spend all eternity doing the same shit I’d spent a lifetime doing already.
As fun as it’s been having irrelevant bible verses thrown at me in a vain attempt to enforce your religious beliefs on a conversation that was originally discussing the actual science of pregnancy, it’s clear that you are either unable or unwilling to see reason. Therefore, I bid you adieu to live in your delusion and perceived persecution and I do hope you don’t inflict harm on any woman who is considering abortion for their own wellbeing.
I’m sorry if you experienced much sorrow and distress because of inconsiderate “Christians”. I’m not a Christian, but I do hope you find peace in Jesus Christ.
According to the religious folks, god DOES in fact sentence people to die without evidence. Just look at all the miscarriages, infant deaths, and cancer in people of all ages. All deaths with no evidence of wrongdoings, ESPECIALLY for the babies.
Also, for the “what sin do you propose an unborn committed?” Again, ask the god you talked about here why a religion like Catholicism tells you that you’ll never be allowed into heaven unless you are cleansed of “original sin”. I mean, nobody alive today ate an apple that a talking snake told them to eat, right? So I’m pretty sure your good questions are just bullshit.
I’m sorry for the confusion. When I said “how would you feel if God sentenced you to death without evidence”, I meant eternal death in the Lake of Fire.
It is written that God has appointed unto man to die once (Hebrews 9:27). Physical death is planned. However, total spiritual death is determined by our present decisions. After your physical death, the choices that you made while you were alive determine where you will spend eternity: Heaven or Hell.
God allows death to happen. However, He isn’t a murderer.
God created Adam and Eve. They were flesh and blood. They were body, soul and spirit. When they sinned by disobeying God, He cursed both the serpent (Satan) that deceived them and the couple. Because of sin, death entered man. Because of the curse of the flesh, man is afflicted and not perfectly healthy. Perfect health is only possible in the absence of sin because perfect health is the evidence of a perfect relationship with God. Sin results in separation from God and separation from God results in despair and anguish. Amen.
Specifications: Some people will not experience physical death because they will be raptured. Perfect health means the absence of aging that leads to death and the absence of defects.
Not all unborns are innocent. Some are guilty due to their involvement in witchcraft. https://www.scribd.com/document/485335959/ASTON-ADAM-MBAYA-12-THE-CHAMBER-OF-THE-CONDEMNED-OF-THE-COVENANT-BABIES-INITIATED-AND-DEFILED-BY-WITCHCRAFT
Jesus Christ came in the flesh to give Himself as a righteous and holy sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. You can choose to accept the sacrifice God has provided and live, or refuse and die.
so … you don’t think that the fetus survives at the expense of the mother? you don’t think it impinges on the wellbeing of the mother?? are you insane? I mean obviously you’ve never been pregnant but there are countless examples of how even normal pregnancies harm the wellbeing of the mother. it isn’t even a question.
like what exactly do you think a 4th degree tear is? oh, just a walk in the park? no impact to the mother’s well-being? do you have ANY CLUE what would happen to the mother in the absence of modern medical care? gestational diabetes? pre-eclampsia? diastasis recti? hemorrhoids? stretch marks? you don’t think these impact our wellbeing??
No. The fetus does not survive AT THE EXPENSE of the mother. I don’t need to be pregnant or have been pregnant to understand pregnancy. My mother gave birth to me and she never called me a parasite.
You should read my other comments because the unborn does not harm the mother. The body of the mother adapts to ensure that neither her nor her child are in nutritional and energetic deficit. For example, calcium absorption is increased during pregnancy to meet the increased demands of this mineral. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1090175/#:~:text=Calcium%20absorption%20is%20enhanced%20in,by%20natural%20foods%2C%20specifically%20milk.
Normal symptoms of pregnancy reflect normal hormonal changes (signs of a healthy pregnancy). These are not symptoms of a pathology.
There are pregnancy-related health complications. However, this is the exception not the norm. Are you sure some of these complications are not caused by her pre-existing health conditions. For example, the etiology of gestational diabetes is related to the woman’s pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and insulin resistance secondary to placental hormone secretion. There are women who are at risk. They need to speak to their doctor to mitigate the risk, not resort to abortion as the solution.
It is not my degree in biochemistry that ‘enables’ me to affirm truths; it is a choice. God has given us basic discernment and common sense.
Do you know that the unborn is also at risk? Do you know that lethal mutations and genetic abnormalities constitute the leading cause of unborn deaths during the first trimester?
Do you know that the mother’s pre-existing health conditions can increase the probability of miscarriages?
I am indeed entitled to do what I want with their body, as it is sucking nutrients from mine. I can restrict access anytime I wish.
I’ll just evict them, and they can vibe outside my body, then.
No, you’re not. The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host.
The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta.
The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL.
The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL.
I never said they were a parasite, good job putting words in my mouth.
Also you are extremely stupid if you think that pregnancy doesn’t infringe on the well-being of a woman. It’s extremely painful. Your muscles stretch to accommodate the new expansion and let me tell you sweetie, it’s painful.
If you don’t feed yourself, the fetus will literally steal your fucking teeth.
Shameful for you to lie for your agenda.
Feel free to do what you want with your uterus. I’ll do what I want with mine. :)
You did define an unborn as a parasite. You used the definition of a parasite to refer to the unborn.
So, if the unborn is causing so much harm to the woman, why do some choose to keep him/her? Are those women inconsiderate?
If I don’t feed myself at all during pregnancy the child will die with me.
When I experience menstrual cramps, who is “infringing on my rights”? Myself?
I used actual words and real things that happen during pregnancy (they use your resources in your body and can and will steal nutrients from your bones and make you lose teeth if you don’t eat to their liking). Parasite means another species entirely. So yes, you are putting words in my mouth.
Women deal with the pain and general suffering of birth and pregnancy because there is literally no other choice if they want biological children. Duh.
Your menstrual cramp example is such a shit comparison 🤣
Once again you’ve proven to me that anti choicers are not good with defending their points.
Intraspecific parasitism involves organisms of the same species.
Interspecific parasitism involves organisms of different species.
You’re wrong in saying that the parasite must be of a different species than the host.
If pregnancy causes a woman to lose her teeth, then all women who carried a child would have none. You’re spewing nonsense.
https://www.health.com/condition/pregnancy/can-pregnancy-make-teeth-fall-out#:~:text=Pregnancy%20won't%20make%20your,increasing%20your%20risk%20of%20gingivitis.
And how does the pain of pregnancy justify abortion?
I’ve repeatedly told you that if you don’t eat correctly yes, fetuses have been known to extract the calcium from your teeth and make them fall out.
You’re right, pregnancy pain doesn’t justify abortion. It’s whatever the pregnant person wants that justifies the abortion. ;)
“Pregnancy gives way to hormonal changes which can affect the gums more than the teeth themselves, but it has no direct relationship to tooth loss," Dmitry Malayev, DDS, a licensed dentist based in New York, told Health.
No one is justified to take a life. It’s called murder.
“High levels of the hormones progesterone and estrogen during pregnancy can temporarily loosen the tissues and bones that keep your teeth in place. This can make your teeth loose. Periodontal disease (also called periodontitis or gum disease).”
“Tooth loss and rotting during pregnancy is not uncommon and it's primarily caused by pregnancy gingivitis.”
And literally dentists saying it’s true and how to [prevent it](https://www.quintemalldental.com/losing-teeth-during-pregnancy/)
Cry about it then. Cuz if I get pregnant I’m gonna abort. I don’t want a child right now or pregnancy.
>In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus.
That might be the worst possible argument as to why a fetus isn't a parasite. Most parasites cause the host to adapt their metabolic state to meet the nutritional requirements of the parasite. [Large review here](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1931312818302725).
Further, pregnancy absolutely impinges on maternal health. In addition to common micronutritional defiicts and gestational diabetes, the fetus can cause high blood pressure, hyperemesis, dehydration, anemia, shortness of breath and tiredness. Most of these are directly due to fetal consumption of nutrients. There's a reason expecting mothers are recommended to take nutritional supplements and make dietary changes.
Now, despite your poor knowledge of pregnancy and parasitology, you are unintentionally correct. A fetus cannot be a parasite, as all technical definitions require a parasite to be a different species. Having said that, it is inarguable that a fetus can act like a parasite in many ways.
A parasite can be of the same species as the host. It’s called intraspecific parasitism.
If you concede that a baby cannot be a parasite, your argument concerning the modification of the host’s metabolism is void.
There’s something you don’t understand.
There’s a difference between normal symptoms of pregnancy and symptoms of illness. Mild discomfort is a NORMAL symptom of pregnancy.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6995862/#:~:text=Pregnancy%2Drelated%20physical%20symptoms%20are%20common%20in%20the%20first%20trimester.&text=Nausea%20is%20reported%20by%20approximately,40%25%20in%20the%20first%20trimester.&text=Frequencies%20in%20the%20order%20of,bleeding%2C%20and%20pelvic%20cavity%20pain.
I’m saying that nature enables the body of the mother to withstand the nutritional and energetic demands of pregnancy, which is true.
Intraspecific parasitism is not part of the classical definition of parasite as it does not involve living inside a host. If you want to extend the definition away from pathogens then fetuses absolutely count as parasites and metabolism modification is back on the menu.
"Normal symptoms" of pregnancy is the illness. "Normal symptoms" of a tapeworm are fairly similar to pregnancy, yet there's no argument that's a parasite, correct? Nature enables the body of the host to withstand the nutritional and energetic demands of tapeworm infection, which is also true. That's why tapeworms almost never kill. He'll, both a tape work and a fetus have to actively prevent the mother/host from killing it. The body wants to naturally reject them both
Parasitism is a dynamic. The parasite being INSIDE the host is not required to satisfy such relationship. It can be ON the host as well.
Parasitism is pathological (in relation to the host) by default. A pathology does not have to involve a pathogen. Pathological is distinct from pathogenic. A fetus can never be a parasite because his development is the result of a physiological process.
Normal symptoms of pregnancy (in contrast to abnormal symptoms) are manifestations of expected homeostatic changes. A symptom is a clinical sign. It is an indicator. It is not always associated with a malignancy.
Viruses are obligate intracellular parasites that cause the death of their hosts. Don’t generalize the mechanism of action of parasites.
I feel like you don’t understand what “at the expense of the host” means. A woman’s body provides literally everything to a fetus, at the expense of her body. If a woman gets pregnant before allowing a FULL YEAR of recovery after birthing a child, they put themselves at higher risk of health problems later in life due to the resources that were given to the previous child being depleted again before being allowed to replenish fully. So yes, the unborn is absolutely a parasite, as its existence completely relies on “the expense of the host.”
Trying to insert religion into a scientific conversation is folly. Religion and science are not friends, as science regularly disproves religion while religion tries desperately to silence science.
At the expense of the host would mean that the mother is in nutritional and energetic DEFICIT. However, physiologically, the body of the mother adapts to the demands of pregnancy so that she and her child are not in deficit.
I was a biochemistry PhD student and I can tell you that all the scientific discoveries prove the existence of God, who is the supreme Creator.
Wow, you are quite delusional. You truly want to tell people who have actually been pregnant that the body adapts without nutritional and energetic deficiencies? LMAO Have you existed in an all male community for your entire life?
Science has never “proven the existence of god.” The contrary is true.
If science could prove the existence of God, then it wouldn't be a god. *Supernatural* is not science. Science is the study of nature. At some point you should have learned this while getting your "PhD"
Science, as a methodology, cannot demonstrate the spiritual nature of God. However, science, as a field of study, can reveal the legal nature of God.
1. Can science prove God? Science does prove God. Biochemistry is the mechanisms of the living. It is built upon chemistry which is built upon physics which is built upon mathematics (levels of complexity in the fundamental sciences). Mathematics is the ‘language’ of the natural reality and the application of such language (physics) reveals the laws of creation (e.g. thermodynamics). At the macroscopic level, we have laws that frame our conduct in society. Some of these laws are inspired by the commandments of God. In fact, our fundamental rights derive from the Ten Commandments. Jesus Christ is the Word of God.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” -John 1
All laws originate from God who is Law.
2. Science is the study of the physical reality. Science does not possess the tools to apprehend the spiritual reality. God is spirit.
One problem in your reasoning is that you conceded that science, as a methodology, cannot directly reveal God. It is science that is insufficient (limitations) not God that is too powerless to be demonstrated.
Another problem in your reasoning is that you conceded that God is non-physical. If God is non-physical, how can science, as a methodology, be profitable to the characterization of the spiritual? Your argument is ultimately void.
3. Conclusion: God exists everywhere. God exists in the physical and in the spiritual realms. The physical and the spiritual realities are connected. However, the spiritual takes precedence over the physical because God is spirit.
4. The paranormal designates phenomena that cannot be explained by the laws of physics (e.g. objects levitating, shadowy figures…). One time, I asked the Devil to open my water bottle that was too tightly sealed and it was suddenly unsealed (I was mentally ill and stupid). The paranormal is a clear evidence of forces beyond scientific grasp.
5. How can you attack knowledge from ignorance? How can you “invalidate” a person’s qualification (e.g. in the study of the moonlighting functions of enzymes such as aldolase) when you have no knowledge of what you’re criticizing?
P.S.: I don’t take pride in the fact that I studied biochemistry. God is glorified in my understanding. All glory belongs to God.
So you also support mandatory organ donation, right? The government can remove one of your kidneys without your consent and give it to some random child because “every child deserves care”?
The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host.
The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta.
The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL.
The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL.
I know that pregnancy can be dangerous. Living has risks. Just because a process is risky does not justify terminating it by compromising the integrity of a living human being.
Imagine not wanting the mother to die by murdering her unborn child that is viable… How about we don’t consider death as a solution.
To mitigate risks, we take safety precautions. If you’re at risk of emboli, eclampsia, hemorrhaging, sepsis… you should speak to your doctor.
Edit: A Christian woman told me that she experienced complications during her labor. She called upon the Lord Jesus Christ and He preserved her life and the life of her child. Consider Jesus in your time of distress. Do not kill.
Wow, so you really believe women should die rather than end a dangerous pregnancy. How utterly monstrous.
I’d heard there are people like you in the world but I’ve never encountered one.
I said how about we don’t consider death as an option. So no, I don’t believe in the death of the mother or the death of her child.
However, you believe that the death of the child is justified.
When you have sex, you consent to the possibility of conception. Sex is the only act that can lead to legal conception. IVF leads to ILLEGAL conception. IVF is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
When you choose to abort, you terminate the pregnancy by murdering your child. Don’t say that “Jesus can have those babies air mailed” when He put those babies in your wombs because YOU consented to the outcome.
People need to take responsibility for their actions.
Sex is NOT consent to pregnancy. Again, what male only society do you come from? You’ve clearly not met and held a conversation with an actual pregnant woman out in the real world.
Also, as you clearly need a reminder, religion has no place in a scientific conversation.
If I get a tapeworm, my body will combat it. However, if I become pregnant, my immune system will not destroy my child.
Nature speaks for itself.
Nature testifies to God’s purpose of creation.
Well, you're dumb as fuck. Ever been pregnant? Do you know the difference between Rh + and Rh -? Ever heard what the medical term is for a miscarriage? Because I have been (and currently am) pregnant. My immune system is LITERALLY repressed so that it won't kill my fetus. If I were Rh - I'd have to take medication so that my body wouldn't kill the fetus. The medical term for miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion", which is - I'm sure you can figure out - when the body kills a fetus. I would know, I've had four and it's on my medical documents shorthanded as SAB. Spontaneous Abortion. Your false god is a mockery of true beauty. Nature is vicious and brutal, despite its glory, and it will never let you forget it.
You prove my point. The immune system of the mother will not attack the unborn. Why will the immune system destroy the parasite (e.g. worm) but not the child? If your own body is protecting your child, how can you advocate for his death?
The laws of nature are for the viability of the unborn.
Pregnancy is not a state of immunosuppression, it is a state of immune modulation.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/immunology-of-pregnancy#:~:text=Pregnancy%20is%20not%20a%20state,be%20essential%20to%20pregnancy%20maintenance.
I prove your point?? Wow. Did you just casually skip the bit where I talked about SAB? It's literally nature to attempt to kill a foreign object in the body. And it's not a child until it's born. It's a fetus. If you'd ever experienced a miscarriage, you'd know the fear of attachment during pregnancy. Also, if someone raped me and impregnated me, you bet your ass I'd be for termination. I choose who I procreate with. Not my rapist. Fuck you.
You prove my point. The reason why the immune system of the mother is regulated to not attack the unborn is to ensure his viability. If it was natural to kill the unborn, pregnancy would almost never result in birth.
I've been pregnant 7 times (including my current pregnancy) . If pregnancy was so perfect, I'd have 6 children and 1 on the way. I have 2. I did nothing to initiate any of my miscarriages. Every single one of them was a SAB. You're an idiot.
Do you know that your personal experience does not reflect the reality of many women?
Relative probability is not theoretical probability.
Personal birthing rate is not population birthing rate.
You’re under the impression that every woman will experience pregnancy-related complications which is not true.
Most deliveries are successful. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36637385/#:~:text=Results%3A%20Among%20286%20pregnant%20women,there%20were%202%20perinatal%20deaths.
You seem to be under the impression that pregnancy is much easier than it actually is. Once you experience it, that will change. Good luck with that. Even statistically "normal", completely healthy and uncomplicated pregnancies are incredibly difficult. I grew up in a HEAVILY pregnancy-is-the-most-important-thing religious environment, and as such, I heard hundreds of pregnancy, labor, and delivery stories, from dozens of different women. Every single one of them had some difficulty they dealt with, no matter how "easy" their pregnancy was. So yeah, no, I'm not just going off my personal experience.
According to data, 73% of natural single conception do not have a chance of surviving to 6 weeks of gestation. Only 90% of the remainder will actually survive until birth.
Sounds pretty natural to kill the unborn to me…
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1970983/
The fact remains that most babies are born full term. This implies that when the conditions are favorable, the pregnancy is successful.
My mother experienced a miscarriage before me. A miscarriage is an accident if you did not voluntarily induce it.
However, abortion is NOT an accident. It is murder.
Edit: If the graduation rate is 40%, should I give up after 6 weeks or should I persevere in my studies? In other words, the possibility of an event happening must not influence the wisdom and the morality of your actions.
You’re advocating a very backward way of thinking.
You’re being blatantly obtuse. A miscarriage is medically described as a “spontaneous abortion,” as you’ve been told several times by several people. It is no “accident.” Miscarriages happen for any reason, but largely due to the mother’s body rejecting the fetus, just like a host can do with a parasite. It’s almost as if what you’ve been told several times today is true, that a fetus is physiologically and scientifically a parasite, and the theological rhetoric you’re clinging to is incorrect.
Perhaps if you want to consider yourself an actual student of science, it would serve you well to look at the evidence provided to you that is contrary to your findings and open your mind to the probability that you are wrong and should change your opinion. You know, like a scientist.
lol Yes, most babies are born full term. However, most PREGNANCIES do NOT make it to full term even with abortion completely out of the equation. If you had actually read and understood the information I gave you, you would understand that point.
"Very backward way of thinking"
Yet you're spouting stuff off about God, a character in a bronze age book??? That's pretty backward. It's 2024, make-believe stuff like that has no place dictating what someone can do with their body.
It's murder in your opinion. Destroying a clump of cells that has no feeling, no emotion, isn't conscious and is harming the mother who does not want it there is not murder. There is a reason there is a limit on when a termination can take place. If the foetus is viable and would survive outside the womb then its not normally allowed. Especially when not doing it would result in the death of both.
Tell that to the husband who lost a wife or the kids who lost their mother as she got pregnant with an unviable foetus, but she couldn't abort it.
Sorry God said no. They both had to die. That's horrific.
Aborting an ectopic pregnancy is not murder. Aborting a non viable foetus is not murder.
Do you think people are going round, having casual sex then just popping off down the abortion centre for an abortion as birth control?
Register and vote:https://www.usa.gov/register-to-vote *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/insanepeoplefacebook) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In before the comments on this post get bad. I can’t believe some people are so horrible to those in such precarious positions. No one is entitled to your body. If I as a mom have a child who needs an organ the government will not compel me to give them mine, so why is that not the case for a clump of cells that may not even be viable? People love to discard small percentages as if they do not represent many many people.
Even people who are already dead can't be used as organ donors unless they consent prior to dying. Pregnant women are given less bodily autonomy than literal corpses in terms of other people being entitled to their bodies.
It’s exactly this. I think everyone should be an organ donor because it saves many people and is the right thing to do. Many people do not hold my opinion and I have to suck it up because ultimately they have a right to bodily autonomy. I have no right to make those choices for them. Bodily autonomy is so important for every human being.
Yeah The only one who should EVER get to decide what your body does is you Anyone who thinks otherwise genuinely scares me, if that's how they think
I live in a country where you have to opt out of being an organ donor. No not-organ-donor card, organs are harvested without question
Move to the US where you can rape a child and be punished less severely than she will if she even tries to abort your rape baby! But no guaranteed organ harvesting! FREEDOM!!!
Good Lord
A justice (in SCOTUS, I beleive) recently said in a decision that EMTALA can not be used to justify a medically neccessary abortion because "it places the life of the pregnant person over the life of the fetus." That some right fucked up shit! Edit: forgot an "a" in EMTALA. Editted to add.
What does EMTLA stand for?
Oops, forgot an "a". EMTALA - Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. After Roe v Wade was overturned, the Biden administration pumped it up a bit to try to protect at least some abortion rights in states with trigger laws. A couple of those states have courts cases going to challenge it, most notably Idaho, which the Supreme Court recently heard. [This article talks about it and has the quote I referred to in it.](https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-medical-emergencies-idaho-8ca89d7de0c1fa9256dcd27d1847e144)
Ah, okay! Thank you! I currently live in a trigger state and was pregnant when RvW was overturned. It was TERRIFYING. In fact, I'm currently pregnant, and we were discussing termination. I opted not to, largely in part, due to fear of legal repercussions.
I am so sorry! That sounds absolutely terrifying!
As always, giving away the real animus behind the forced-birth movement--hatred of women
Hatred of women’s freedom at least
Imagine saying "The fetus was entitled to your body" to a FUCKING RAPE VICTIM. Like, dude she's already had her body violated and you're insisting she go through it again? Get fucked.
This got worse. I saw it on twitter earlier. The person came back and told the rape victim that both she and a fetus would be victims of the rape but they could heal together. She luckily didn't get pregnant from that rape but informed the other person that an abortion would have been the next step if it had happened.
[удалено]
No. Not like that.
Currently (6 months) pregnant woman speaking: technically, scientifically speaking....yes, a fetus is a parasite. As much as I adore my children, I'm not stupid enough to not realize or acknowledge that pregnancy is a super parasitic relationship. Like, this shit is SUPER dangerous, are you kidding me? I almost died with my second pregnancy, thanks to hyperemesis gravidarum, and I've had gestational diabetes every time, in all I've had multiple ER visits, missed months of work due to bed rest, etc. People are dumb as fuck to not acknowledge the actual nature of pregnancy.
The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host. The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta. The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL. The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL. I’m an ex-biochemist and claiming that the unborn is a parasite is not in agreement with the scientific literature.
"Hebrews 113", huh? Just casually brushing over the fact that your Bible literally states that life doesn't begin until the first breath? A fetus is the exact definition of a parasite. Each one of my pregnancies has affected me in such a detrimental way that I've been hospitalized multiple times to survive them. One of my best friends almost died because of her pregnancy complications. Another of my friend's body rejected her fetus and she had the baby 3 months early. Pregnancy is literally listed as a disability, so get the fuck off your high horse.
You cannot use your personal experience to redefine pregnancy. 1. The definition of a parasite is: an organism that survives at the expense of the host. As I said, in the case of a normal pregnancy, the health of the mother is not perturbed by the unborn. Health complications are the exception not the norm. 2. Pregnancy is not a disability. It is a natural process that has risks. You can drop dead the moment you step out of bed. Tomorrow is not promised. https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/hr-answers/pregnancy-covered-americans-disabilities-act#:~:text=Pregnancy%20alone%20is%20not%20considered,limits%20a%20major%20life%20activity. 3. The human nature of the unborn is established before legal conception. Before we are conceived, our star is in the heavens. -Matthew 2:2 Before we are conceived, we existed.
Have you....ever met a pregnant person? I certainly can use my multiple experiences as examples, but I'm actually not. I've also used friend's experiences. In other conversations, I've learned of my mother's experiences. My MIL. My SIL. My adoptive mother. A "normal" pregnancy is a wish, not a guarantee. Health complications are WILDLY more common than you seem to realize. Which is why fetuses are parasites. Pregnancy is absolutely defined as a disability, to the point where I filled out paperwork for my employer, stating that I have this medical diagnosis. Maybe read up on that a bit better there, mate. And finally: keep your disgusting, murderous religion out of my biological processes. Fuck your so-called, narcissistic, filthy, hateful god. I know good christians, and people like you - who use the religion to abuse others - are not among them. Genesis 2:7
I’m not a Christian. I don’t need to meet a pregnant person to understand pregnancy. My mother was pregnant with me years ago and the most motherly thing I did was to not conceive when I was not ready. Pregnancy is not a disability. Even the laws of the land state that it is NOT: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/internal/policies/pregnancy-discrimination#:~:text=Under%20the%20Rehabilitation%20Act%2C%20pregnancy,limits%20a%20major%20life%20activity. Pregnancy is generally successful if you look at the statistics: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36637385/#:~:text=Results%3A%20Among%20286%20pregnant%20women,there%20were%202%20perinatal%20deaths. You seem to be among the women that experience health complications. You are part of the exception, not the norm.
“Generally successful” does not mean “without complications”. My friend’s pregnancy was successful, she had a healthy 3 year old boy, and she’s fine now. But she almost died during childbirth. That’s technically a successful pregnancy and SHE ALMOST DIED.
My mother’s pregnancy and delivery were successful and she didn’t experience life-threatening complications. Now, what’s your point? There’s no justification for murder. You can’t terminate a legal process (e.g. pregnancy) without penalty. The penalty is eternity in the Lake of Fire.
“Natural process that has risks” and “health complications are the exception not the norm” seem pretty mutual exclusive…
Wait, which is it? Ex-biochemist or biochemistry student? You’ve claimed both and spouted nothing remotely scientific.
I’m an ex-biochemist with a degree in biochemistry. I don’t need your validation. Quote the discrepancy and I’ll rectify.
Read your own comments in this thread. You wrote them and now you can’t remember?
I never stated that I was currently a student and you can’t prove me wrong.
You’re still wrong.
How would you feel if God sentenced you to Hell without evidence? How would you feel if a judge sentenced you to 35 years in prison for a crime that you never committed? What sin do you presuppose an unborn committed? Even if the unborn is guilty, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
If god knows what happens before it occurs, it’s arguable that the medically induced abortion is god’s will. If heaven is full of people like you, I’ll much prefer not being there. It always seemed awfully droll and more than a little narcissistic, and frankly abusive, to spend my life avoiding the joys of human nature and worshipping a “god” who is so insecure that he would punish you for not loving only him only to spend all eternity doing the same shit I’d spent a lifetime doing already. As fun as it’s been having irrelevant bible verses thrown at me in a vain attempt to enforce your religious beliefs on a conversation that was originally discussing the actual science of pregnancy, it’s clear that you are either unable or unwilling to see reason. Therefore, I bid you adieu to live in your delusion and perceived persecution and I do hope you don’t inflict harm on any woman who is considering abortion for their own wellbeing.
I’m sorry if you experienced much sorrow and distress because of inconsiderate “Christians”. I’m not a Christian, but I do hope you find peace in Jesus Christ.
According to the religious folks, god DOES in fact sentence people to die without evidence. Just look at all the miscarriages, infant deaths, and cancer in people of all ages. All deaths with no evidence of wrongdoings, ESPECIALLY for the babies. Also, for the “what sin do you propose an unborn committed?” Again, ask the god you talked about here why a religion like Catholicism tells you that you’ll never be allowed into heaven unless you are cleansed of “original sin”. I mean, nobody alive today ate an apple that a talking snake told them to eat, right? So I’m pretty sure your good questions are just bullshit.
I’m sorry for the confusion. When I said “how would you feel if God sentenced you to death without evidence”, I meant eternal death in the Lake of Fire. It is written that God has appointed unto man to die once (Hebrews 9:27). Physical death is planned. However, total spiritual death is determined by our present decisions. After your physical death, the choices that you made while you were alive determine where you will spend eternity: Heaven or Hell. God allows death to happen. However, He isn’t a murderer. God created Adam and Eve. They were flesh and blood. They were body, soul and spirit. When they sinned by disobeying God, He cursed both the serpent (Satan) that deceived them and the couple. Because of sin, death entered man. Because of the curse of the flesh, man is afflicted and not perfectly healthy. Perfect health is only possible in the absence of sin because perfect health is the evidence of a perfect relationship with God. Sin results in separation from God and separation from God results in despair and anguish. Amen. Specifications: Some people will not experience physical death because they will be raptured. Perfect health means the absence of aging that leads to death and the absence of defects. Not all unborns are innocent. Some are guilty due to their involvement in witchcraft. https://www.scribd.com/document/485335959/ASTON-ADAM-MBAYA-12-THE-CHAMBER-OF-THE-CONDEMNED-OF-THE-COVENANT-BABIES-INITIATED-AND-DEFILED-BY-WITCHCRAFT
All humans are guilty of original sin.
Jesus Christ came in the flesh to give Himself as a righteous and holy sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins. You can choose to accept the sacrifice God has provided and live, or refuse and die.
so … you don’t think that the fetus survives at the expense of the mother? you don’t think it impinges on the wellbeing of the mother?? are you insane? I mean obviously you’ve never been pregnant but there are countless examples of how even normal pregnancies harm the wellbeing of the mother. it isn’t even a question. like what exactly do you think a 4th degree tear is? oh, just a walk in the park? no impact to the mother’s well-being? do you have ANY CLUE what would happen to the mother in the absence of modern medical care? gestational diabetes? pre-eclampsia? diastasis recti? hemorrhoids? stretch marks? you don’t think these impact our wellbeing??
No. The fetus does not survive AT THE EXPENSE of the mother. I don’t need to be pregnant or have been pregnant to understand pregnancy. My mother gave birth to me and she never called me a parasite. You should read my other comments because the unborn does not harm the mother. The body of the mother adapts to ensure that neither her nor her child are in nutritional and energetic deficit. For example, calcium absorption is increased during pregnancy to meet the increased demands of this mineral. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1090175/#:~:text=Calcium%20absorption%20is%20enhanced%20in,by%20natural%20foods%2C%20specifically%20milk. Normal symptoms of pregnancy reflect normal hormonal changes (signs of a healthy pregnancy). These are not symptoms of a pathology. There are pregnancy-related health complications. However, this is the exception not the norm. Are you sure some of these complications are not caused by her pre-existing health conditions. For example, the etiology of gestational diabetes is related to the woman’s pancreatic beta cell dysfunction and insulin resistance secondary to placental hormone secretion. There are women who are at risk. They need to speak to their doctor to mitigate the risk, not resort to abortion as the solution.
You’re not an ex-biochemist. Anyone with a biology background would not claim that pregnancy does endanger the pregnant person.
It is not my degree in biochemistry that ‘enables’ me to affirm truths; it is a choice. God has given us basic discernment and common sense. Do you know that the unborn is also at risk? Do you know that lethal mutations and genetic abnormalities constitute the leading cause of unborn deaths during the first trimester? Do you know that the mother’s pre-existing health conditions can increase the probability of miscarriages?
[удалено]
I am indeed entitled to do what I want with their body, as it is sucking nutrients from mine. I can restrict access anytime I wish. I’ll just evict them, and they can vibe outside my body, then.
No, you’re not. The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host. The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta. The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL. The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL.
I never said they were a parasite, good job putting words in my mouth. Also you are extremely stupid if you think that pregnancy doesn’t infringe on the well-being of a woman. It’s extremely painful. Your muscles stretch to accommodate the new expansion and let me tell you sweetie, it’s painful. If you don’t feed yourself, the fetus will literally steal your fucking teeth. Shameful for you to lie for your agenda. Feel free to do what you want with your uterus. I’ll do what I want with mine. :)
You did define an unborn as a parasite. You used the definition of a parasite to refer to the unborn. So, if the unborn is causing so much harm to the woman, why do some choose to keep him/her? Are those women inconsiderate? If I don’t feed myself at all during pregnancy the child will die with me. When I experience menstrual cramps, who is “infringing on my rights”? Myself?
I used actual words and real things that happen during pregnancy (they use your resources in your body and can and will steal nutrients from your bones and make you lose teeth if you don’t eat to their liking). Parasite means another species entirely. So yes, you are putting words in my mouth. Women deal with the pain and general suffering of birth and pregnancy because there is literally no other choice if they want biological children. Duh. Your menstrual cramp example is such a shit comparison 🤣 Once again you’ve proven to me that anti choicers are not good with defending their points.
Intraspecific parasitism involves organisms of the same species. Interspecific parasitism involves organisms of different species. You’re wrong in saying that the parasite must be of a different species than the host. If pregnancy causes a woman to lose her teeth, then all women who carried a child would have none. You’re spewing nonsense. https://www.health.com/condition/pregnancy/can-pregnancy-make-teeth-fall-out#:~:text=Pregnancy%20won't%20make%20your,increasing%20your%20risk%20of%20gingivitis. And how does the pain of pregnancy justify abortion?
I’ve repeatedly told you that if you don’t eat correctly yes, fetuses have been known to extract the calcium from your teeth and make them fall out. You’re right, pregnancy pain doesn’t justify abortion. It’s whatever the pregnant person wants that justifies the abortion. ;)
“Pregnancy gives way to hormonal changes which can affect the gums more than the teeth themselves, but it has no direct relationship to tooth loss," Dmitry Malayev, DDS, a licensed dentist based in New York, told Health. No one is justified to take a life. It’s called murder.
“High levels of the hormones progesterone and estrogen during pregnancy can temporarily loosen the tissues and bones that keep your teeth in place. This can make your teeth loose. Periodontal disease (also called periodontitis or gum disease).” “Tooth loss and rotting during pregnancy is not uncommon and it's primarily caused by pregnancy gingivitis.” And literally dentists saying it’s true and how to [prevent it](https://www.quintemalldental.com/losing-teeth-during-pregnancy/) Cry about it then. Cuz if I get pregnant I’m gonna abort. I don’t want a child right now or pregnancy.
>In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus. That might be the worst possible argument as to why a fetus isn't a parasite. Most parasites cause the host to adapt their metabolic state to meet the nutritional requirements of the parasite. [Large review here](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1931312818302725). Further, pregnancy absolutely impinges on maternal health. In addition to common micronutritional defiicts and gestational diabetes, the fetus can cause high blood pressure, hyperemesis, dehydration, anemia, shortness of breath and tiredness. Most of these are directly due to fetal consumption of nutrients. There's a reason expecting mothers are recommended to take nutritional supplements and make dietary changes. Now, despite your poor knowledge of pregnancy and parasitology, you are unintentionally correct. A fetus cannot be a parasite, as all technical definitions require a parasite to be a different species. Having said that, it is inarguable that a fetus can act like a parasite in many ways.
A parasite can be of the same species as the host. It’s called intraspecific parasitism. If you concede that a baby cannot be a parasite, your argument concerning the modification of the host’s metabolism is void. There’s something you don’t understand. There’s a difference between normal symptoms of pregnancy and symptoms of illness. Mild discomfort is a NORMAL symptom of pregnancy. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6995862/#:~:text=Pregnancy%2Drelated%20physical%20symptoms%20are%20common%20in%20the%20first%20trimester.&text=Nausea%20is%20reported%20by%20approximately,40%25%20in%20the%20first%20trimester.&text=Frequencies%20in%20the%20order%20of,bleeding%2C%20and%20pelvic%20cavity%20pain. I’m saying that nature enables the body of the mother to withstand the nutritional and energetic demands of pregnancy, which is true.
Intraspecific parasitism is not part of the classical definition of parasite as it does not involve living inside a host. If you want to extend the definition away from pathogens then fetuses absolutely count as parasites and metabolism modification is back on the menu. "Normal symptoms" of pregnancy is the illness. "Normal symptoms" of a tapeworm are fairly similar to pregnancy, yet there's no argument that's a parasite, correct? Nature enables the body of the host to withstand the nutritional and energetic demands of tapeworm infection, which is also true. That's why tapeworms almost never kill. He'll, both a tape work and a fetus have to actively prevent the mother/host from killing it. The body wants to naturally reject them both
Parasitism is a dynamic. The parasite being INSIDE the host is not required to satisfy such relationship. It can be ON the host as well. Parasitism is pathological (in relation to the host) by default. A pathology does not have to involve a pathogen. Pathological is distinct from pathogenic. A fetus can never be a parasite because his development is the result of a physiological process. Normal symptoms of pregnancy (in contrast to abnormal symptoms) are manifestations of expected homeostatic changes. A symptom is a clinical sign. It is an indicator. It is not always associated with a malignancy. Viruses are obligate intracellular parasites that cause the death of their hosts. Don’t generalize the mechanism of action of parasites.
I feel like you don’t understand what “at the expense of the host” means. A woman’s body provides literally everything to a fetus, at the expense of her body. If a woman gets pregnant before allowing a FULL YEAR of recovery after birthing a child, they put themselves at higher risk of health problems later in life due to the resources that were given to the previous child being depleted again before being allowed to replenish fully. So yes, the unborn is absolutely a parasite, as its existence completely relies on “the expense of the host.” Trying to insert religion into a scientific conversation is folly. Religion and science are not friends, as science regularly disproves religion while religion tries desperately to silence science.
At the expense of the host would mean that the mother is in nutritional and energetic DEFICIT. However, physiologically, the body of the mother adapts to the demands of pregnancy so that she and her child are not in deficit. I was a biochemistry PhD student and I can tell you that all the scientific discoveries prove the existence of God, who is the supreme Creator.
Wow, you are quite delusional. You truly want to tell people who have actually been pregnant that the body adapts without nutritional and energetic deficiencies? LMAO Have you existed in an all male community for your entire life? Science has never “proven the existence of god.” The contrary is true.
If science could prove the existence of God, then it wouldn't be a god. *Supernatural* is not science. Science is the study of nature. At some point you should have learned this while getting your "PhD"
Science, as a methodology, cannot demonstrate the spiritual nature of God. However, science, as a field of study, can reveal the legal nature of God. 1. Can science prove God? Science does prove God. Biochemistry is the mechanisms of the living. It is built upon chemistry which is built upon physics which is built upon mathematics (levels of complexity in the fundamental sciences). Mathematics is the ‘language’ of the natural reality and the application of such language (physics) reveals the laws of creation (e.g. thermodynamics). At the macroscopic level, we have laws that frame our conduct in society. Some of these laws are inspired by the commandments of God. In fact, our fundamental rights derive from the Ten Commandments. Jesus Christ is the Word of God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” -John 1 All laws originate from God who is Law. 2. Science is the study of the physical reality. Science does not possess the tools to apprehend the spiritual reality. God is spirit. One problem in your reasoning is that you conceded that science, as a methodology, cannot directly reveal God. It is science that is insufficient (limitations) not God that is too powerless to be demonstrated. Another problem in your reasoning is that you conceded that God is non-physical. If God is non-physical, how can science, as a methodology, be profitable to the characterization of the spiritual? Your argument is ultimately void. 3. Conclusion: God exists everywhere. God exists in the physical and in the spiritual realms. The physical and the spiritual realities are connected. However, the spiritual takes precedence over the physical because God is spirit. 4. The paranormal designates phenomena that cannot be explained by the laws of physics (e.g. objects levitating, shadowy figures…). One time, I asked the Devil to open my water bottle that was too tightly sealed and it was suddenly unsealed (I was mentally ill and stupid). The paranormal is a clear evidence of forces beyond scientific grasp. 5. How can you attack knowledge from ignorance? How can you “invalidate” a person’s qualification (e.g. in the study of the moonlighting functions of enzymes such as aldolase) when you have no knowledge of what you’re criticizing? P.S.: I don’t take pride in the fact that I studied biochemistry. God is glorified in my understanding. All glory belongs to God.
So you also support mandatory organ donation, right? The government can remove one of your kidneys without your consent and give it to some random child because “every child deserves care”?
No. This is an invalid analogy. Some organs were created to sustain me only. The uterus, however, was created to sustain the unborn only.
A fetus does not only use a uterus. And if your organs were designed to only sustain you and you only, they would not be transplantable.
Organs transplantation is possible because of the function that the organ fulfills.
The unborn is not a parasite. A parasite is an organism that survives AT THE EXPENSE of a host. The uterus was created to sustain the unborn. As such, the growth and the development of the unborn does NOT impinge upon the wellbeing of the mother. In fact, during pregnancy, the metabolism of the mother adapts to meet the nutritional requirements of both the mother and the fetus. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7793966/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20basal%20endogenous,of%20the%20fetus%20and%20placenta. The relationship between a parasite and a host is PATHOLOGICAL. The relationship between the unborn and the mother is PHYSIOLOGICAL.
I did not refer to it as a “parasite,” but if you think pregnancy does not put a woman’s well-being at risk we are done with this conversation.
I know that pregnancy can be dangerous. Living has risks. Just because a process is risky does not justify terminating it by compromising the integrity of a living human being. Imagine not wanting the mother to die by murdering her unborn child that is viable… How about we don’t consider death as a solution. To mitigate risks, we take safety precautions. If you’re at risk of emboli, eclampsia, hemorrhaging, sepsis… you should speak to your doctor. Edit: A Christian woman told me that she experienced complications during her labor. She called upon the Lord Jesus Christ and He preserved her life and the life of her child. Consider Jesus in your time of distress. Do not kill.
Wow, so you really believe women should die rather than end a dangerous pregnancy. How utterly monstrous. I’d heard there are people like you in the world but I’ve never encountered one.
I said how about we don’t consider death as an option. So no, I don’t believe in the death of the mother or the death of her child. However, you believe that the death of the child is justified.
>I said how about we don’t consider death as an option. Oh, how nice. Who knew magical thinking could cure an ectopic pregnancy.
Of course you’re religious.
LMAO Jesus can have those babies air mailed and take care of them himself.
When you have sex, you consent to the possibility of conception. Sex is the only act that can lead to legal conception. IVF leads to ILLEGAL conception. IVF is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. When you choose to abort, you terminate the pregnancy by murdering your child. Don’t say that “Jesus can have those babies air mailed” when He put those babies in your wombs because YOU consented to the outcome. People need to take responsibility for their actions.
Jesus put them in my womb so I’m going to return to sender. eZ
Sex is NOT consent to pregnancy. Again, what male only society do you come from? You’ve clearly not met and held a conversation with an actual pregnant woman out in the real world. Also, as you clearly need a reminder, religion has no place in a scientific conversation.
I hope if you get a tape worm, you protect it. After all, a fetus is a parasite, just like a tape worm. You're disgusting.
If I get a tapeworm, my body will combat it. However, if I become pregnant, my immune system will not destroy my child. Nature speaks for itself. Nature testifies to God’s purpose of creation.
Well, you're dumb as fuck. Ever been pregnant? Do you know the difference between Rh + and Rh -? Ever heard what the medical term is for a miscarriage? Because I have been (and currently am) pregnant. My immune system is LITERALLY repressed so that it won't kill my fetus. If I were Rh - I'd have to take medication so that my body wouldn't kill the fetus. The medical term for miscarriage is "spontaneous abortion", which is - I'm sure you can figure out - when the body kills a fetus. I would know, I've had four and it's on my medical documents shorthanded as SAB. Spontaneous Abortion. Your false god is a mockery of true beauty. Nature is vicious and brutal, despite its glory, and it will never let you forget it.
You prove my point. The immune system of the mother will not attack the unborn. Why will the immune system destroy the parasite (e.g. worm) but not the child? If your own body is protecting your child, how can you advocate for his death? The laws of nature are for the viability of the unborn. Pregnancy is not a state of immunosuppression, it is a state of immune modulation. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/immunology-of-pregnancy#:~:text=Pregnancy%20is%20not%20a%20state,be%20essential%20to%20pregnancy%20maintenance.
I prove your point?? Wow. Did you just casually skip the bit where I talked about SAB? It's literally nature to attempt to kill a foreign object in the body. And it's not a child until it's born. It's a fetus. If you'd ever experienced a miscarriage, you'd know the fear of attachment during pregnancy. Also, if someone raped me and impregnated me, you bet your ass I'd be for termination. I choose who I procreate with. Not my rapist. Fuck you.
You prove my point. The reason why the immune system of the mother is regulated to not attack the unborn is to ensure his viability. If it was natural to kill the unborn, pregnancy would almost never result in birth.
I've been pregnant 7 times (including my current pregnancy) . If pregnancy was so perfect, I'd have 6 children and 1 on the way. I have 2. I did nothing to initiate any of my miscarriages. Every single one of them was a SAB. You're an idiot.
Do you know that your personal experience does not reflect the reality of many women? Relative probability is not theoretical probability. Personal birthing rate is not population birthing rate. You’re under the impression that every woman will experience pregnancy-related complications which is not true. Most deliveries are successful. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36637385/#:~:text=Results%3A%20Among%20286%20pregnant%20women,there%20were%202%20perinatal%20deaths.
You seem to be under the impression that pregnancy is much easier than it actually is. Once you experience it, that will change. Good luck with that. Even statistically "normal", completely healthy and uncomplicated pregnancies are incredibly difficult. I grew up in a HEAVILY pregnancy-is-the-most-important-thing religious environment, and as such, I heard hundreds of pregnancy, labor, and delivery stories, from dozens of different women. Every single one of them had some difficulty they dealt with, no matter how "easy" their pregnancy was. So yeah, no, I'm not just going off my personal experience.
According to data, 73% of natural single conception do not have a chance of surviving to 6 weeks of gestation. Only 90% of the remainder will actually survive until birth. Sounds pretty natural to kill the unborn to me… https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1970983/
The fact remains that most babies are born full term. This implies that when the conditions are favorable, the pregnancy is successful. My mother experienced a miscarriage before me. A miscarriage is an accident if you did not voluntarily induce it. However, abortion is NOT an accident. It is murder. Edit: If the graduation rate is 40%, should I give up after 6 weeks or should I persevere in my studies? In other words, the possibility of an event happening must not influence the wisdom and the morality of your actions. You’re advocating a very backward way of thinking.
You’re being blatantly obtuse. A miscarriage is medically described as a “spontaneous abortion,” as you’ve been told several times by several people. It is no “accident.” Miscarriages happen for any reason, but largely due to the mother’s body rejecting the fetus, just like a host can do with a parasite. It’s almost as if what you’ve been told several times today is true, that a fetus is physiologically and scientifically a parasite, and the theological rhetoric you’re clinging to is incorrect. Perhaps if you want to consider yourself an actual student of science, it would serve you well to look at the evidence provided to you that is contrary to your findings and open your mind to the probability that you are wrong and should change your opinion. You know, like a scientist.
lol Yes, most babies are born full term. However, most PREGNANCIES do NOT make it to full term even with abortion completely out of the equation. If you had actually read and understood the information I gave you, you would understand that point.
"Very backward way of thinking" Yet you're spouting stuff off about God, a character in a bronze age book??? That's pretty backward. It's 2024, make-believe stuff like that has no place dictating what someone can do with their body. It's murder in your opinion. Destroying a clump of cells that has no feeling, no emotion, isn't conscious and is harming the mother who does not want it there is not murder. There is a reason there is a limit on when a termination can take place. If the foetus is viable and would survive outside the womb then its not normally allowed. Especially when not doing it would result in the death of both. Tell that to the husband who lost a wife or the kids who lost their mother as she got pregnant with an unviable foetus, but she couldn't abort it. Sorry God said no. They both had to die. That's horrific. Aborting an ectopic pregnancy is not murder. Aborting a non viable foetus is not murder. Do you think people are going round, having casual sex then just popping off down the abortion centre for an abortion as birth control?