Quote:Mitosis, not meosis. Meosis I the process by which the gametes (sperm and egg) are formed. Mitosis is the functional reproduction of a fully functioning cell of an independent organism.


In this case the basic function of hormonal contraception is to disrupt the natural cycle that results in the release of an Egg (Ovulation). In the process, that also cuts out the natural thickening and preparation of the uterine lining. So again, the target is the prevention of ovulation not the intentional destruction of an independently identified organism as in abortion.


Also, you talk about combined BC methods, women only have an option of progesterone (affects the lining) or full on combination (still affects the lining) so its not like you have women walking up to a counter and making a conscious decision to deny an egg that isn't supposed to drop into the uterus the bed it needs to be implanted.


That doesn't change the fact that human life begins at conception (scientific fact). That doesn't mean that all human life isn't worthy of protection, especially when it is at its most innocent and most vulnerable. It's a basic acknowledgement of the inefficiency of the current systems of hormonal birth control and not blaming women for something that they have no control over.

It's been a while since my biology classes, so thanks for the correction. I was thinking of mitosis strictly in a non child development way. But you're right once the cell is fertilized, the egg and sperm chromosomes begin to line up and then cell division in the form of mitosis begins. I think you are correct about the meosis definition.


Either way, I understand your point. What I think you are missing the point on, as far as I understand it from the research I did, is that most pills have two types of hormones in them. I believe they are progesterone and estrogen. Either way, as you mention, they do two distinct things, as you agree. Stop ovulation and harden/thicken the uterine wall.


But here's the key point, the pill does not stop ovulation entirely, some eggs are released no matter. That's why the second hormone is so important to the success of the pill. There are certain pills that only have one of the hormone, but, as logic would imply, it's not as successful. The point is that the development and success of the pill is in the fact that it is understood that side eggs will be released and therefore be fertilized.


Whether or not a woman understands she's making a conscious choice regarding the fact that the most popular and must effective pill results in a fertilized egg that will be flushed away, is a fact. And that fact, for a true pro life anti abortion advocate must be reconciled. In my book it's a reconciliation that leads to absurdity.


With all that said, my point is this: you, and all those that believe in the conception point of human life, are totally in the right to have that belief.


But, that's not the only belief out there when it comes to human life. And those who believe that humanity begins at some point after conception are not evil, or ruthless killers. Matter of fact, those who believe humanity begins at some point beyond conception are also right to have their beliefs.


A doctor that provides birth control pills isn't a murderer in his or her eyes.


I get your point that there's a difference between the pill and an abortion. But I find your distinction as arbitrary as my 8-10 week point where human life begins.


You are also now circling back to the value of life and how it must be protected. Pro-choice people agree. But, the distinction we have differs, and then it gets blown out of proportion and then it gets personal and then both sides dig in to their original positions.


I honestly believe there is a compromise that can be had in this situation.


Maybe we should start taking about viability as the cut off? Perhaps a compromise can be had if we remove the life aspect of it and consider the viability aspect of the zygote/embryo during pregnancy?

---