there is that, there is also those sound based ones too

I agree with Tim that it will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Historically I would have said we'd never open fire on migrants at the border because of the backlash we'd get internationally, but honestly I don't think that would stop Mr Trump. It's possible the President could feel the pulse of the American people and determine it would be acceptable to enough of the electorate to maintain Republican power in 2020. I can't say. I'm also not sure how the military would respond to order to fire on rock throwers. The legal jeopardy for solders could be serious. Constitutionally, though, the President likely does have the power to order it. The question is do other laws contravene soldier's authority to carry the order out. We're not in Kansas anymore, Toto...

Now back to when does life start. Heartbeat and complex neural tissue. Can we call it "human life" if there is no heartbeat and the neural tissue is undifferentiated or poorly differentiated? This gets us to six weeks.

Depends upon the circumstances and the equipment at the disposal of the military. In the US the legal and moral responsibility tends to stop with the officers and those below them are supposed to follow their lead.

@DrYuriMom depends, i would say Codes brought up a somewhat decent point for it starting at conception. Namely it has to be human DNA, contains genetic material that is not 100% from the person carrying the child, with whole chromosomes (number of chromosomes may vary). That does mean it includes people with no brain function or no heart beat, so long as the tissue is not dead.

But we consider someone with no brain function and no heart beat to be dead. We remove life support which I'd say a placenta resembles, and they pass on.

Its unlikely that trump will directly order them to gun down all migrants. He will probably authorize self defense.

i would agree, but codes seems to believe there is a chance they could come back, or that they could be saved

How does removing a fetus from a placenta differ from removing life support for a brain dead individual?

it doesn't, and codes argues you shouldn't pull life support

There is absolutely zero chance a fetus with no functioning heart or brain stem could be "saved"

So you keep giving tube feedings?

that seems to be the answer

We take people off life-support all the time when there is no chance of them surviving

that they should be kept on life support, although the argument for whos responsible for that is unclear but somewhat irrelevant.

now, i'm not codes, i'm only rehashing roughly what i understood from his position

There is also the rather remarkable fact that only about 1/5 of pregnancies survive to term. Most fail early on and the mother never knows.

if @Cody would like to clarify he can

Pregnancy as defined by a fertilized egg

shit, is it really that low?

Yup

damn

Most fertilized eggs are flushed out

Some because the DNA combination is toxic

Some because the mother's body doesn't recognize it's there and initiates a period

Lots of things happen in the embryonic stage

toxic as in failed pairing?

Toxic as in the combinations of genes are have toxic flaws

Could be failed transcription

what is a toxic flaw? sorry, i hear toxic i think chemicals

Nope. In this case it's that the gametes in question do not contain compatible DNA to support life and the system is designed to self-destruct in that case

fascinating

The embryonic stage is a crap shoot

It's why I have no problem prescribing "morning after" therapy that may well flush out a fertilized egg that has not yet implanted

For my own personal ethics I draw a line at implantation, again except in cases where life of mother is at stake.

But insofar as the right of the woman to decide to terminate, I personally tend toward effective differentiation into various cell lines and the initiation of a heartbeat

I can't call something with no basic brain or independent circulatory system an "organism", rather it's a "colony"

A multicellular colony no doubt, but more like algae

It has *potential*, but it's not there yet

that said, i'm personally fine with the 6 weeks. as i would agree. and i also would not care if abortion after 3 months was illegal if not already, maybe even 2. Mostly because they could not know for at least 4 of those 6 weeks, and give them some wiggle room to decide. but you are getting an abortion, you are getting it right after you know. You wait, well fuck you too late. That said, i oppose the government having a choice here so i would still fight addition laws about it.

i would go for culture norms