- Joined
- Apr 1, 2018
- Messages
- 1,329
- Reaction score
- 1,692
- Trophies
- 3
- Location
- Pacific Ocean
- XP
- 3,871
- Country

Most of this is either highly opinionated or subjective, neither of which I'm interested in debating. You are entitled to your own opinion about what an embryo, a fetus, and a fertilized egg is defined as.are you serious?
So what science says in your opinion about fertilized egg. As far I know It is a new life form with unique genom, which is not anymore part of mother body. It Is an depended seperated human life, enitity not existing on their own due to biological-chemical reactions, but what causes them.
Unfortunately, science at this stage of causality does not deal with it, but ethics, moral law, natural law, philosophy and finally religion does. You're wrong, your political view is that not scientific but supported by established narration. Comfy ground of modern "science" feels like postmodernism to me. It's like do what you want, find any excuse to deny most obvious things, even if even if it
Another good chunk of it simply doesn't make grammatical or contextual sense.
Another highly subjective and interpretated stance. It's not up to any one person to decide for all of humanity (or even for a single person that isn't themselves) what the purpose of romance, human connection, or other social interaction is. Some people don't want or can't have children. My girlfriend and I don't want children; if she gets pregnant at some point, I will help her get an abortion. We are both in agreement of this, and that's our right to decide. Not anyone else's.It is also not about taking away rights of opressed group, but above all about giving people the will and support to ensure that every human contact is with the intention of planning children, or even if is result of other accidents.
Favored university authorities unfortunately have a say in what should be scientific with no moral resposibility.
I have no clue what you mean by "favored university studies". Studies regarding conception, human life, and fertilization have been conducted and peer-reviewed by many credited and reliable institutions, including but certainly not limited to universities. If a study is favored in the scientific community, then that means it's more likely to be reliable or credible.
Your language here implies that you see science as some sort of "big bad" group of immoral scientists making immoral declarations and declaring them facts. This is a hilarious interpretation, and obviously completely false. Science, by definition, must be provable and conform to the most objective perspective of how we understand the things around us. If a false declaration is made, then it's discredited or disproven over time. Studies that persist are that much more likely to be scientifically sound.










