Lawsuit seeks to overturn abortion regulations including Michigan’s 24-hour waiting period (michiganadvance.com)

submitted 9 months ago by lengau@midwest.social to c/michigan@midwest.social

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] IdiosyncraticIdiot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Human life starting at fertilization is a biological fact.

Biologists overwhelmingly agree that human life starts with fertilization (5337/5577 surveyed, or 96%).

Biologists from 1,058 academic institutions around the world assessed survey items on when a human's life begins and, overall, 96% (5337 out of 5577) affirmed the fertilization view. The founding principles of the field Science Communication suggest that scientists have an ethical and professional obligation to inform Americans, as well as people around the world, about scientific developments so members of the public can be empowered to make life decisions that are consistent with the best information available.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36629778/

edit: downvote all you want, it wont change the facts

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That assertion has nothing to do with the legal standing of a waiting period for abortion.
that article is not from a reliable source. "Issues in Law and Medicine" is a biased journal that does not represent scientific consensus. They have close connections with anti choice organizations and also publish antivax propaganda. I would be extremely skeptical of any information found in association with them.

https://rewirenewsgroup.com/2017/03/23/issues-law-medicine-one-stop-journal-anti-vaccine-anti-abortion-pseudoscience/

https://drjengunter.com/2015/12/30/should-the-national-library-of-medicine-index-anti-choice-journals/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Issues%20Law%20Med%22%5Bjour%5D

Note the articles about "abortion causing breast cancer" (it doesn't), "how to run a pro choice private practice", and why pharmacists should be able to refuse to dispense medication.

[-] Granite@kbin.social 9 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Forrest Valkai, a biologist on YT, has a fantastic response to this. He can argue about when/how life starts, but the argument isn’t about this, this is about bodily autonomy instead.

[-] IdiosyncraticIdiot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

Over the mothers body, or the babies body?

[-] lengau@midwest.social 5 points 9 months ago

If it were a baby it would be able to survive outside of a womb.

[-] IdiosyncraticIdiot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

You are correct, I guess it depends on the age, but there are US states that allow abortion "at any stage" (Colorado for example).

To ensure we are operating off of common definitions:

Embryo: An embryo is an initial stage of development of a multicellular organism.

Fetus: A fetus or foetus is the unborn offspring that develops from an animal embryo.

Regardless the "development stage", I would argue it is still a human.

It's not somehow a dolphin embryo that all the sudden turns into a human at birth.

I would argue at any stage, it is still a human organism, therefore human.

[-] kwking13@lemm.ee 5 points 9 months ago

So now you're making your own arguments away from your original position? Got any scientists to back up your preconceived ideas? Find me some peer-reviewed articles that suggest (not prove cause that's very rarely how science works) that the cells developed are not dolphin embryos first. Since we're just jumping to whatever conclusion fits our narrative now...

[-] Algaroth@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Does Colorado allow abortion at any stage for a healthy fetus or does there need to be medical reasons beyond a certain point? Be honest.

[-] lengau@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Can you define what makes it a human?

[-] IdiosyncraticIdiot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I'm actually really interested in watching whatever video you are referencing, are you by chance able to provide a link? I'm not closed minded, but I do generally try to listen to what the majority of scientist [in whatever relevant area of the topic of discussion] are saying.

edit: I'm unsure why this comment is being down voted but I'm genuinely interested in watching whatever video you are referencing, as simply by looking at their channel I was unable to find a video that is seemingly relevant to the topic at hand

[-] kwking13@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

If it's a fact then why did 240 scientists disagree? What were their findings? Science doesn't create facts, it supports or rejects hypothesizes based on the original question. Calling science fact was your first mistake. Missing the entire point of the argument by cherry-picking data sets that fulfill your narrative was the second.

this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024

87 points (100.0% liked)

Michigan

843 readers

1 users here now

Si quaeris peninsulam amoenam in braccas mea vide

🫴

✋

Banner photos credits

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

seahorse@midwest.social