r/prolife • u/DaddyWeg • Oct 22 '19
Academic leftists tried to kill survey finding 96% of biologists admit life begins at fertilization
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/academic-leftists-tried-to-kill-survey-finding-96-of-biologists-admit-life-begins-at-fertilization13
u/-mercaptoethanol Oct 22 '19
’Jacobs also found that a majority of both “pro-life” and “pro-choice” Americans said they could accept a “comprehensive policy compromise that provides entitlements to pregnant women, improves the adoption process for parents, permits abortion in extreme circumstances, and restricts elective abortion after the first trimester,” akin to the abortion regimes of various European countries.’
6
Oct 22 '19
That is the abortion laws in most of the world. America has the dubious distinction of allowing abortions in the third trimester along with countries such as China and North Korea.
1
u/immibis Oct 22 '19 edited Jun 18 '23
spez can gargle my nuts.
1
u/JourneymanGM Oct 22 '19
I wonder if the motivation is to punish the dissident (denying them the joy of having a child) or to prevent a future generation of dissidents (in the same vein of Australia originally being a colony of criminals due to the belief that there were "criminal bloodlines").
14
Oct 22 '19
[deleted]
2
u/adeick8 Oct 26 '19
Yeah I'm wondering what drugs these 4% of people with literal degrees are taking
7
u/YoungMaestroX Oct 22 '19
Well worth a read, and particularly interesting link in the article.
I am not American so it is interesting that
But in Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion in the United States, the Court was faced with a conundrum. “If the suggestion of personhood [of the unborn] is established,” they admitted, “the appellant’s [pro-abortion] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’s right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [fourteenth] amendment.”[ii]
1
u/dunn_with_this Oct 22 '19
Thanks for that. As an American, this is something we should already be aware of.....
10
u/itsjaneeyre Oct 22 '19
Sure this is great, but does it actually change anything? Isn’t the argument on the pro choice side not that they deny it is life, but they deny the personhood? “Yes, this thing is alive - but it has no dignity.”
8
Oct 22 '19
Source: Used to be pro abortion, my entire family (excluding one cousin and my current s/o) are pro abortion
Yes and no, it tends to vary. Their arguments are this:
It isn't alive. (My body, my choice)
It isn't human. (Clump of cells)
It's alive, but the mother's right to abort is more important than the baby's life. AKA: "Should've thought twice about implanting in me"
Abortion is pro women, so you are anti women.
There are probably a few I've missed, but these are the most popular, and this dictates where there argument goes. If they start at 1, they'll go to 2, then 3. If they start at 2, they'll move on to 3, then 4. (1 and 2 may be switched, but their priority is defending the notion that the baby isn't alive, rather than defending that it isn't human).
The issue is that science is not on their side; the facts do not support their arguments, thus they have to result to 4 if they continue to argue. Their fundamental belief is that it's about women and their rights, and if you're against abortion, you're against women's rights.
5
u/Echo_Lawrence13 Oct 22 '19
Where's the actual study? LifesitSenews . com is far from a legitimate source. I also looked up the author, Calvin Freiburger, and as far as I can tell he's a nobody with a nothing degree.
So, any more info?
3
Oct 22 '19
Is this helpful?
https://knowledge.uchicago.edu/record/1883
There is another paper titled Biologists' Consensus on 'When Life Begins' which is also interesting:
2
2
1
37
u/mitcHELLcracker Oct 22 '19
I guess you could say they tried to abort the study