We all have different feelings about this, but I thought we ought to consider what the Texas law is trying to protect.

Here's an embryo at around seven weeks of gestational age - (BTW, doctors count "gestational age" as weeks since the beginning of the last menstrual period, so when the sperm actually fertilizes the egg, that occurs around 2 weeks of gestational age. So this embryo is around 5 weeks from conception, or 7 weeks of gestational age, actually a week after the Texas law kicks in.)



So, you can see the blood vessels coming in through the umbilical cord; the heart is the dark blob just below the head. And you can see fingers starting to form - four of them. Precious!

Wait - four? Sorry. Umm...that's a dog. Not precious. Texas doesn't care about that, heart or not.

Here. This one's a few days earlier, nicely showing the vessels and heart a little better, limb buds starting to form and...



Oops. My bad. That's a cow.

Okay. Here's one, 6 to 7 weeks, and it's definitely human. (Right? Ummm...checking...yes!)



The beginnings of a heart and eye, even the space where a brain will eventually develop and start working and feeling, many months later. And a little tail, which will go away later. All of these images are highly magnified, BTW. The actual size of this embryo is about...umm... this ---> C (depending on your monitor, etc. - around a fifth of an inch long).

Just for fun, let's have a quiz. Which of these is a human embryo at around 6 weeks? (Don't worry, I'll make it easy):

A:



B:



C:



Perhaps not quite fair, since at 6 weeks of gestation, none of us looked particularly human - but we had a heart! (No brain, and no nerves or...anyway, we did have a heart, or what would become one, like all of these embryos).

Here's one from later, and another one even a little later, with better view of what will become the eye, and even proto-fingers in a limb bud!



...and Ohhhh, damn. Those are bats.

...and here's a cat:



...and a mouse:



...and another human:



And then there's this:



A dragon? An alien? Nope! It's a scanning electron microscope image of a a baby! A human baby at six weeks of gestational age, with all the rights and privileges of a newborn. More, really, since in the State of Texas, its rights take precedence over the rights of the other human it normally inhabits. (But, umm...definitely not the rights of the still-other human who helped make it. Let's not go crazy here - the rights of that other guy? Sacrosanct.)

So, I hope this clears things up for everyone.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2021 04:06PM by pdq.

Clearly and succinctly.
If anything was ever clear and succinct, that was it.
==

[www.livescience.com]

Quote

But what exactly do we mean when we talk about a "fetal heartbeat" at six weeks of pregnancy? Although some people might picture a heart-shaped organ beating inside a fetus, this is not the case.

Rather, at six weeks of pregnancy, an ultrasound can detect "a little flutter in the area that will become the future heart of the baby," said Dr. Saima Aftab, medical director of the Fetal Care Center at Nicklaus Children's Hospital in Miami. This flutter happens because the group of cells that will become the future "pacemaker" of the heart gain the capacity to fire electrical signals, she said.

But the heart is far from fully formed at this stage, and the "beat" isn't audible; if doctors put a stethoscope up to a woman's belly this early on in her pregnancy, they would not hear a heartbeat, Aftab told Live Science. (What's more, it isn't until the eighth week of pregnancy that the baby is called a fetus; prior to that, it's still considered an embryo, according to the Cleveland Clinic.)

It's been only in the last few decades that doctors have even been able to detect this flutter at six weeks, thanks to the use of more-sophisticated ultrasound technologies, Aftab said. Previously, the technology wasn't advanced enough to detect the flutter that early on in pregnancy.

Although a lot of weight seems to be put on the detection of this flutter, "by no means does it translate to viability of the heart" or viability of the pregnancy, Aftab said.

The heart still has a lot of development to undergo before it is fully formed. Indeed, the entire first trimester of pregnancy is a time of "organogenesis," or the formation of organs, Aftab said.

After the detection of the flutter at six weeks, the heart muscle continues to develop over the next four to six weeks, undergoing the folding and bending that needs to happen for the heart to take its final shape, Aftab said.

"A lot of the heart development is still ongoing" during the first trimester, she said.

---

e pluribus unum

Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?

Quote
p8712

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?

Another topic, but one has to ask: Are sperm and eggs dead? I would say clearly not. You can watch each sperm cell wriggle around and swim toward the egg…and if the egg were dead, I don’t think it would be able to make a baby.

Which is to say, I don’t buy the sharp delineation of sperm and egg —-> person! It’s a continuous process which goes on for 9 months …well, since the beginning of life on earth. And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

I didn't mean to undermine the point you were making about how undifferentiated human embryos are from many other land vertebrate animals as a way to say that the embryo heartbeat standard is quite arbitrary. I only meant to amplify your point by pointing out that the notion of embryo heartbeat in the law is very arbitrary as well.

Agree about the emotional appeal. "Oh my, you can hear a heartbeat just like my heartbeat and if you have a heartbeat you are alive!" That's part of the reason I posted the article I did, to hopefully somewhat demystify and de-emotionalize the notion of "fetal (embryo) heartbeat" - especially at 6 weeks like the law arbitrarily invokes.

---

e pluribus unum



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2021 05:50PM by Ted King.

…and I appreciated it. Thanks.

Quote
pdq

Quote
p8712

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?

Another topic, but one has to ask: Are sperm and eggs dead? I would say clearly not. You can watch each sperm cell wriggle around and swim toward the egg…and if the egg were dead, I don’t think it would be able to make a baby.

Which is to say, I don’t buy the sharp delineation of sperm and egg —-> person! It’s a continuous process which goes on for 9 months …well, since the beginning of life on earth. And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

[www.youtube.com]

... I think we ALL know what this whole thing is really about. It's about enforcing "morality" on those nasty, sinful women who can't keep their legs together, and controlling their uteri from a distance. After all, even if they were raped or the victim of incest, we still want to control their reproductive tracts. And of course, the men concerned had nothing to do with it, nothing at all, so forget about them.

Very Handmaid's Tale, indeed. Also very Orwellian in its implementation, turning people into secret police and encouraging them to report on each other.

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2021 06:58PM by PeterB.

Quote
pdq
And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

don't think that the end game of a sizable number of pro-lifers isn't to outlaw many forms of birth control.

---

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

Pro-birthers realize embryos don’t resemble people. But they consider human life the ideal life form. An octopus might disagree but they don’t vote.

The bigger issue is that humans will have sex for reasons other than procreation. Republicans understand this yet reliably deny it, essentially. They need therapy, not votes.

Quote
Ombligo

Quote
pdq
And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

don't think that the end game of a sizable number of pro-lifers isn't to outlaw many forms of birth control.

ALL forms

Quote
Ombligo

Quote
pdq
And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

don't think that the end game of a sizable number of pro-lifers isn't to outlaw many forms of birth control.

That's been the Catholic Church's position from the onset.

Quote
PeterB

Quote
pdq

Quote
p8712

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?

Another topic, but one has to ask: Are sperm and eggs dead? I would say clearly not. You can watch each sperm cell wriggle around and swim toward the egg…and if the egg were dead, I don’t think it would be able to make a baby.

Which is to say, I don’t buy the sharp delineation of sperm and egg —-> person! It’s a continuous process which goes on for 9 months …well, since the beginning of life on earth. And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

[www.youtube.com]

... I think we ALL know what this whole thing is really about. It's about enforcing "morality" on those nasty, sinful women who can't keep their legs together, and controlling their uteri from a distance. After all, even if they were raped or the victim of incest, we still want to control their reproductive tracts. And of course, the men concerned had nothing to do with it, nothing at all, so forget about them.

Very Handmaid's Tale, indeed. Also very Orwellian in its implementation, turning people into secret police and encouraging them to report on each other.

Let’s not forget, Peter, that those sinful women who were raped or the victim of incest, who can’t keep their legs together, had to have enticed the man and thus their predicament is their own fault. /s

Actions speak loudly, in fact louder than their words.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?


Possibly, in a civil reasoned objective discussion by both sides.

This TX law was passed with out the presence of any of those considerations.

Outside of the church, I wonder and occasionally question whether or not these politicians put their idea of the sanctity of life before all else when making anti-abortion laws, especially this one so carefully crafted to avoid federal intervention.

I tend to believe it's about control, total control of women's rights.

And the mention of outlawing other forms of birth control bear merit.

I don't see it too far fetched to think it could become illegal to posses many forms of birth control in TX.

Somebody posted that the women of TX need to wake up to what's happening to them.

I say maybe they should put some short zip-ties on the nightstand and say 'I got your birth control right here!'.

Men need to stand along side women in this; it's not a 'female problem'.


Let’s not forget, Peter, that those sinful women who were raped or the victim of incest, who can’t keep their legs together, had to have enticed the man and thus their predicament is their own fault. /s

Actions speak loudly, in fact louder than their words.


This ^, all this.

I say there is still a very large, disproportionate number (anything larger than 0) of men who believe sexual assaults don't happen to women who don't ask for it.

---

I am that Masked Man.

Your boos mean nothing to me, I've seen what you cheer for.

Insisting on your rights without acknowledging your responsibilities isn’t freedom, it’s adolescence.

I've been to the edge of the map, and there be monsters.

We are a government of laws, not men.

Everybody counts or nobody counts.

When a good man is hurt,
all who would be called good
must suffer with him.

You and I have memories longer than the road that stretches out ahead.

There is no safety for honest men except
by believing all possible evil of evil men.

We don’t do focus groups. They just ensure that you don’t offend anyone, and produce bland inoffensive products. —Sir Jonathan Ive

An armed society is a polite society.
And hope is a lousy defense.

You make me pull, I'll put you down.

I *love* SIGs. It's Glocks I hate.

Well who is easier to defend than the unborn?

They don't ask anything of you. They're pretty quiet. Don't need your time or money like all those annoying people Jesus said you're supposed to care about: the sick, hungry, poor, incarcerated, unsheltered, addicted, persecuted, refugees... too much trouble.

Once they're born, they're dead to us.

Quote
Diana

Quote
PeterB

Quote
pdq

Quote
p8712

Quote
pdq
Very true, Ted.

I guess one of my points is that this “heartbeat” marker is, like many things in the pro-life movement, an over-simplification chosen for emotional appeal.

Doesn’t this undermine the whole life begins at conception argument, anyway?

Another topic, but one has to ask: Are sperm and eggs dead? I would say clearly not. You can watch each sperm cell wriggle around and swim toward the egg…and if the egg were dead, I don’t think it would be able to make a baby.

Which is to say, I don’t buy the sharp delineation of sperm and egg —-> person! It’s a continuous process which goes on for 9 months …well, since the beginning of life on earth. And if you consider any intervention which prevents that cycle as murder, you really need to consider any and all forms of contraception as such too, don’t you?

[www.youtube.com]

... I think we ALL know what this whole thing is really about. It's about enforcing "morality" on those nasty, sinful women who can't keep their legs together, and controlling their uteri from a distance. After all, even if they were raped or the victim of incest, we still want to control their reproductive tracts. And of course, the men concerned had nothing to do with it, nothing at all, so forget about them.

Very Handmaid's Tale, indeed. Also very Orwellian in its implementation, turning people into secret police and encouraging them to report on each other.

Let’s not forget, Peter, that those sinful women who were raped or the victim of incest, who can’t keep their legs together, had to have enticed the man and thus their predicament is their own fault. /s

Actions speak loudly, in fact louder than their words.

Yes, of course (about the sinful women enticing men) ... that's why I said the men concerned had nothing to do with it.

I wonder how many of those who sponsored this law were women (if any). How many of them might have daughters, who will then have to explain to their daughter if raped or the victim of incest that, sorry dear, you'll either have to give birth or go to another state to take care of your "problem".

I wonder if we're now going to see lawsuits against pharmacies providing Plan B medication, since these folks seem to believe that Plan B is an abortifacient rather than what it is, emergency contraception.

---

Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)

The wife got this in her Facebook feed:



I think the stats may be cherry-picked a little, but there seems to be general agreement that Texas is in the bottom ten states for child well-being:

Texas is one of the worst states in the U.S. for child welfare, report says

Annie E Casey Foundation Kids Count Data Book

Quote
RAMd®d
I say there is still a very large, disproportionate number (anything larger than 0) of men who believe sexual assaults don't happen to women who don't ask for it.

I would not bet against the idea there are still a scary large number of people running around with the wisdom of former US Representative Tod Akin still ringing in their ears.

“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Mr. Akin said of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

---

National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
As of July 16, 2022, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is now available by simply dialing 988. The previous number, 1-800-273-8255, will remain active.

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

Well technically he’s right, if you’re going to outlaw abortion, why make exceptions if your argument is abortion is murder? Of course we know that’s just a cover argument for their perverse desire to control women. If they were sincere, then they would have quickly outlawed capital punishment, as that is a low hanging fruit. To this day I have managed to shut up every pseudo ’pro-lifer’ with that argument.

one by one, some states prefer the 1500's to the 21st century.
Texas Taliban.

Which will be the next in line?

---

!#$@@$#!

Quote
Carnos Jax
Well technically he’s right, if you’re going to outlaw abortion, why make exceptions if your argument is abortion is murder? Of course we know that’s just a cover argument for their perverse desire to control women. If they were sincere, then they would have quickly outlawed capital punishment, as that is a low hanging fruit. To this day I have managed to shut up every pseudo ’pro-lifer’ with that argument.

I'm anti-abortion, and I don't have a perverse (or any, really) desire to control women. I am anti-capital punishment, but there is a huge difference between a serial murderer and an unborn human. I don't think that's a super great argument.

I'm actually appalled at the assumptions you guys are making about people. I tend to think what they are doing in Texas is bad for the anti-abortion cause, but I also have a hard time joining in the criticism of Texas when so many awful things are assumed about me and others I know who are anti-abortion.

Quote
kj

I'm actually appalled at the assumptions you guys are making about people. I tend to think what they are doing in Texas is bad for the anti-abortion cause, but I also have a hard time joining in the criticism of Texas when so many awful things are assumed about me and others I know who are anti-abortion.

I realize more and more that how we judge people depends on context. I think it's fair to judge someone within a particular context but there is an understandable inclination when you really feel strongly about that particular thing to judge others beyond the particular context. Sometimes there are constellations of behavior that some identifiable groups generally have that cross particular contexts so we are even more tempted to generalize if a particular behavior is closely associated with other judged behaviors. I think that goes for both things judged to be good and things judged to be bad - although judgments of bad seem to be easier to come to.

I think there's a lot of that on "both sides" with respect to abortion. Is there "room" to contextualize judgement to this particular issue or must we generalize judgments of whole character based on this one context?

---

e pluribus unum



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/07/2021 06:05PM by Ted King.

Quote
kj
I'm anti-abortion, and I don't have a perverse (or any, really) desire to control women. I am anti-capital punishment...

Then you appear to be in the minority. If the majority of anti-abortion folks were agains't capital punishment, it would end in this country, and bring credibility/sincerity to the cause. Since they aren't, what kind of assumption are we to make about the groups motives?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/07/2021 07:42PM by Carnos Jax.

I'm anti-abortion, and I don't have a perverse (or any, really) desire to control women.

You can be anti-abortion without being pro-coercive legislation that controls what women can do with their own bodies, is that what you meant?

And most people who are pro-choice would prefer to see a reduction in unwanted pregnancies as a result of improvements in sex education and availability of contraceptives. That's why we bristle at the label "pro-abortion."

We all suffer when nuance is not recognized.

Quote
Janit
And most people who are pro-choice would prefer to see a reduction in unwanted pregnancies as a result of improvements in sex education and availability of contraceptives. That's why we bristle at the label "pro-abortion."

We all suffer when nuance is not recognized.

Hoping for a day when there's no cause to perform abortion (have I phrased that correctly?)

Quote
DeusxMac

Quote
Janit
And most people who are pro-choice would prefer to see a reduction in unwanted pregnancies as a result of improvements in sex education and availability of contraceptives. That's why we bristle at the label "pro-abortion."

We all suffer when nuance is not recognized.

Ditto

Quote
DeusxMac

Hoping for a day when there's no cause to perform abortion (have I phrased that correctly?)

Well, we’ve been heading that way for a long time, which clearly predates the latest legislative madness:



Some additional notes: it’s continued to decline after this chart. The percentage of all pregnancies that end in abortion has also continued to decline. And it doesn’t seem to be much related to anti-abortion laws.

[www.youtube.com]

Sam Bee weighs in

---

!#$@@$#!