95% of biologists agree life begins at conception

>In a metastudy conducted by the University of Chicago and Northwestern Prizker School of Law; over 5000 biologists across the political spectrum were asked when life begin, 95% said at conception.

Leftybros.... are we the science denying chuds??

Attached: lesciencesays.png (746x809, 212.76K)

Other urls found in this thread:

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>let's talk about cummies
who cares

Link?

Based

Can you go to a vet and ask them ro abort puppiea from your pregnant dog. No.

Uhh, you guys don't trust the science. You can't just trust the science now when it's convenient for you politically. You deny the science when it comes to vaccines, climate change, space travel, evolution, satellites, and many other topics.

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3211703

It always has been like that btw. It is the reason abortions became illegal in the first place. It wasnt the church or religion. Science said its a human. Church said killing humans is bad.

no

Whew lad! It's always people like you the prove beyond any doubt that science should always prevail. See, it's people like you who can't tell fact from fiction, or reason from opinion. This paper is telling what the opinions of biologists are without any context. Because those same biologists - when asked if a sperm is 'living' or an egg is 'living' will tell you that fertilization is a continuation of living processes. But it's guys like you that fuck it all up for the rights-grabbing anti-choicers with your vapid shitwittery.

Thank you for your service.

life does not begin, the egg and sperm are already alive.

95% of physicists agree life begins at missed periods

It has it's own DNA and is self replicating. That's pretty much the bare bones definition of life.

It's also the definition of cancer

Retard

The honest debate isn't about whether it's technically a life or not (it's widely accepted it is), it's about the ethics of ending a life prior to that life being able to feel pain or survive outside the womb. Is it ethically wrong if the fetus has no awareness of itself or the world? Its the same debate regarding pulling the plug on someone who is brain dead and on life support.

Attached: FTsmopEWYAEUHHe.jpg (682x615, 169.32K)

Wrong

biologists aren't philosophers. no one knows when consciousness begins or if there is a soul and if so when does the soul enter the body or does the soul develop slowly or what. we don't understand shit and we won't for a while

>when consciousness begins or if there is a soul
That's not what's being discussed, it's about when "life" begins, which is a scientific term, not a philosophical one.

>moving the goalposts
Noone mentioned consciousness or a soul

Biological life begins at conception. End of rine

real life doesn't begin until you lose your virginity unfortunately.

Yes... but what is life? What does it mean to be alive?

Life DOES begin at conception. Why the fuck are people so stupid. Life/fetus/baby/person/human being are all different things