OPEN YOUR EYES DAM ASS.

"Maybe it is the "soul"? The spiritual essence that God bestows on His creations?

You do know we have religious freedom in the United States? That means we do not need to practice Christianity under pain of death or execution."

What is Christian about believing in a soul?

"If you believe that sperm and eggs are not people, not even part of a person; then what makes the conception of a fertilized egg human?"

Well, what doesn't make it human? And why should humanity come post conception? And if so, at what age can you define humanity? 1 month...? 1 years...? Point is the only reason you need to define it, is to be able to know when it is acceptable to kill it because of (in most cases) its inconvenience. That is why you devalue it as less than human. To conform to personal desire. And if you believe that is acceptable, then anything else can be a step away.

"Convenience has little if anything to do with it."

It has EVERYTHING to do with it. If it were convenient to give birth and go through the effort of raising a child there would be virtually no abortions.

"So miscarriages would mean prison for women who had them (manslaughter of a human life)?"

No. And labeling me as implying that is... typical. My point is that people need to take responsibility and stop making excuses (redefining what is valued life) to condone deplorable actions. Don't you think the rate of 1 in 4 pregnancies in the U.S. being aborted is outright shocking? And shouldn't it be reduced?

"helping our troops right now, not when we someday have useful lasers."

Theopolitical, Isn't that being a little hypocritical when the left/Dems in the senate were blocking the FUNDING for our troops who are in active combat? (you know, food, supplies, helmets... basic stuff)

And you are using the same argument that the left has been using in opposition to drilling for oil, or building a new nuclear power plants.. "Oh it's too far down the road, lets not do it" Planning for the future is key to success, in any situation, and committing to futility is idiotic.

But I can see the sole point of arguing this is to defend your messiah's comments.

If you believe that sperm and eggs are not people, not even part of a person; then what makes the conception of a fertilized egg human? Our brain function does not even begin for many weeks, the embryo doesn't even resemble a human form, it does not react and cannot move for many weeks... and you don't want to apply any other laws (other than anti-abortion), so what is it?

Maybe it is the "soul"? The spiritual essence that God bestows on His creations?

You do know we have religious freedom in the United States? That means we do not need to practice Christianity under pain of death or execution.

"Is it ethical in your view to kill someone who has fainted because it is too "inconvenient" to revive them? Or a person in a deep sleep? How about people who suffer from Downs syndrome? All possibilities in the gray area you're creating."

Convenience has little if anything to do with it.

Are you saying that once a girl turns 10-12 years old that she must be married off to another 10-12 year old male because that is when they are capable of having children? Because if you are not, then you are throwing away around a dozen eggs a year and millions (often billions) of sperm just because it is convenient to let children go through puberty without being married off and becoming pregnant?

"It is a developing human, and is life at that point, and you're trying to devalue it into something much less in order to justify killing it."

So miscarriages would mean prison for women who had them (manslaughter of a human life)?

Having sex while pregnant is pedophilia (a three-some)? Smoking cigarettes while pregnant means the mother should be imprisoned (no smoking under 18)? Drinking while pregnant should be illegal (exposing alcohol to an extreme minor)?

"so we can "weaponize space" and spend billions on theoretical futuristic weapons" Absolutely, DARPA is working on many new and advanced programs to ensure we have a tactical advantage where it is most needed"

So our current soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are not good enough for armored vests or vehicles? We need to spend money on theoretical futuristic weapons instead of current weapons?

There is a time for research, and it is not at the detriment to our soldier's lives. Trading our soldier's blood now for research funds on technology that has been proven again and again ineffective for the past few decades of research is immoral. We need to put off the ineffective programs and focus on helping our troops right now, not when we someday have useful lasers.

Once the war is over, or our troops are adequately armed and armored then we can refocus our work on space and lasers.