You might do well yourself to pick up a basic medical text book.
When a sperm fertilizes an ovum it usually takes place in the fallopian tube. It is not until around 7 to up to 16 days later, around the same time that implantation occurs, that the father’s genetic code is fully passed to the blastocyst. If implantation never takes place the fertilized egg is passed through the woman’s body completely unnoticed by the woman as the pregnancy hormone hCG is not produced unless there is implantation.
I don’t know off hand what the exact numbers are but many ovums are fertilized and begin cell division but never implant and never fully receive the father’s genetic code.
While cell division occurs shortly after fertilization, one could say the egg is now “alive” (some also make the case that every egg and every sperm is alive too – “every sperm is sacred” to borrow from Monty Python).
And heck, I had a pre-cancerous mole removed and that was “alive” in the sense that it there was rapid cell division, although I do recognize that it would ever have become a baby. But one can also make a reasonable scientific argument that since the father’s genetic code isn’t full passed and integrated until around 7 to 16 days later and around the time that successful implantation occurs, that this is the point at which the blastocyst becomes a zygote or embryo and a fully individual person in its own right and a viable pregnancy.
Stem cells are present and can be taken from the blastocyst but not until around the 7th to 10th day after fertilization; stem cells are not present at the exact moment of fertilization. So the stem cell argument from day one is rather mute.
Why does this matter?
First of all, I am pro-life and I oppose all abortions except in extreme cases where the life of the mother is at stake with very little or no chance of the baby being brought to term, i.e. ectopic pregnancies. I am torn over the very rare cases of pregnancy due to rape or incest but even then, I think any abortion after 1st trimester should be considered only in the most dire of cases, again something like an ectopic pregnancy. But to me an abortion is the termination of a pregnancy and until the blastocyst implants and receives the father’s genetic code, there isn’t a pregnancy or an individual “person”. Dance on the heads of pin all you want but that is biology pure and simple.
Secondly therefore, I am not opposed to birth control when it doesn’t end the life of the embryo after successful implantation. So yes, I do not consider the pill, (even the morning after pill), condoms, IUD’s, etc. to be “abortions”. If your religion deems all forms of birth control to be immoral, then simply don’t use birth control. But don’t by means of legislation based on your religious beliefs, outlaw all forms of birth control including tubal ligation and vasectomy, for which there are many legitimate medical reasons for having. If you want to practice the rhythm method or believe that sex is only for procreation or want to have 20+ kids like the Duggers, be free to do that – no one is stopping you from adhering to your beliefs – although don’t expect me to pay to support your children.
Lastly, while Newt may seem to be inconsistent to some, I don’t find his position troubling at all. Claiming that “life” begins at the exact moment that sperm meets egg is troubling because it does open to some very difficult questions.
As someone in favor of a small and limited government I don’t think the “State” and certainly the POTUS is qualified to decide matters of birth control; abortion; especially non-life threatening or late term abortions being an entirely different matter.
Does anyone here really want to put doctors and pharmacists in jail for dispensing the pill or drug stores for selling condoms? Does anyone here really want to jail a woman for having a tubal ligation or a man for having a vasectomy? Does anyone here think that it is really the job of the POTUS to decide these matters?
I don’t think the “State” and certainly the POTUS is qualified to decide matters of birth control; abortion
Birth control, or contraception, prevents conception, by definition. Methods that destroy the already-created human person are not contraception, they are chemical weapons of warfare against the weakest and most helpless among us.
The President of the United States, and every officer of government in this country, at every level, in every branch, as per the requirement of Article Six, Section Three, have sworn before God and their fellow citizens to support the Constitution, which explicitly and imperatively requires the equal protection of every person within their jurisdictions.
It is not until around 7 to up to 16 days later, around the same time that implantation occurs, that the father’s genetic code is fully passed to the blastocyst.
Life is a continuum. It reproduces after its kind. Always has, and always will, while this creation lasts. From fertilization, or biological inception, or creation, the genetic code is there, permanently joined with the DNA of the mother into a new, unique individual. This is self-evident, regardless of any intellectual excuses you desire to find to obtain a license to kill. If it wasn't, it could never manifest itself.
There are other deceptions in your post, which I may address later in the day as I have the opportunity or the inclination.
Well, thank you for the additional information, but I don’t see how it contradicts what I said about the blastocyst being human life.