If life starts truly starts at Conception, then God is, the world’s most prolific abortionist. Most fertilized eggs get washed away without ever implanting in the uterus. [3] [4] [5] [6] Many of the ova that do implant abort spontaneously very early in pregnancy. This scientific truth remained unknown to the public.
- Life begins at conception (Catholic Church , Vice President Joe Biden, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Wikipedia, [10])
Life begins at conception and God aborts most lifetru
- 50% to 90 % of all conceived ova never get implanted and born, due to natural causes [3] [4] [5] [6]. Women are unaware of this gigantic holocaust in their bellies.
- If life starts at conception, then more "babies" get killed then born
- Hence most residents of Heaven are souls of embryos that were never born, never developed brains, and never had thoughts, emotions, experiences, hopes, dreams, or desires. [9]
- Or, Unchristened Embryos, Destination: Hell?
- Why do bioconservatives like Robert George not advocate the rescue of naturally conceived unimplanted embryos? They are live human beings with a soul.
- "If the embryo loss that accompanies natural procreation were the moral equivalent of infant death, then pregnancy would have to be regarded as a public health crisis of epidemic proportions: Alleviating natural embryo loss would be a more urgent moral cause than abortion, in vitro fertilization, and stem-cell research combined," declared Michael Sandel, a Harvard University government professor, also a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics.
- “The policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother,” [1]. So rape or incest justify murder of an innocent child? Up to what age?
- If fire breaks out in a fertility clinic, would you save a 2 year old child, or save 10 lives in a petri dish with 10 fertilized blastocysts?
[2]
Human-Stupidity Analysis
Wikipedia shows many other options to define as the beginning of life. We are showing that the popular concept of "conception is the beginning of life" causes extreme logical problems: over half of all life never gets born, due to natural causes.
So other definitions need to be found (Wikipedia).
Late term abortions, of course, lead down a slippery slope until Peter Singer‘s philosophy that provides logical argument why "abortion" should be allowed into the first month after birth. We will not discuss this further, rather we will return to the absurdity of "conception at birth", defended by most US politicians of both parties. 
Why does god murder/abort so many babies?
Current estimates say that 60-80% of fertilized eggs probably fail to implant and then another 15-20% of the fertilized eggs that do implant spontaneously abort.
So… that gives us a 34%-16% survival rate for fertilized eggs or to flip it around God murders between 66% and 84% of all babies.
Why if God is opposed to abortions does he kill so many babies?
Is Heaven Populated Chiefly by the Souls of Embryos?
John Opitz, a professor of pediatrics, human genetics, and obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Utah, testified before the President’s Council on Bioethics that between 60 and 80 percent of all naturally conceived embryos are simply flushed out in women’s normal menstrual flows unnoticed. This is not miscarriage we’re talking about. The women and their husbands or partners never even know that conception has taken place; the embryos disappear from their wombs in their menstrual flows. In fact, according to Opitz, embryologists estimate that the rate of natural loss for embryos that have developed for seven days or more is 60 percent. The total rate of natural loss of human embryos increases to at least 80 percent if one counts from the moment of conception. About half of the embryos lost are abnormal, but half are not, and had they implanted they would probably have developed into healthy babies. […]
"If the embryo loss that accompanies natural procreation were the moral equivalent of infant death, then pregnancy would have to be regarded as a public health crisis of epidemic proportions: Alleviating natural embryo loss would be a more urgent moral cause than abortion, in vitro fertilization, and stem-cell research combined," declared Michael Sandel, a Harvard University government professor, also a member of the President’s Council on Bioethics.
As far as I know, bioconservatives like Robert George do not advocate the rescue of naturally conceived unimplanted embryos. But why not? In right-to-life terms, normal unimplanted embryos are the moral equivalents of a 30-year-old mother of three children. […]
perhaps 40 percent of all the residents of Heaven were never born, never developed brains, and never had thoughts, emotions, experiences, hopes, dreams, or desires.
(b) Natural Embryo Loss |Louisiana State University
Some authors point to the high rate of embryo loss under natural and unassisted conditions, and argue that directed embryo destruction for the purpose of research would not result in greater loss than this natural process, and would result in far greater benefits for humanity.100 The rate of natural embryo loss after conception in unassisted human reproduction is high, some suggest as high as 80 percent,101 and the fact of natural loss is fairly well known, so that persons who engage in or permit the pursuit of conception through unassisted reproduction are knowingly bringing about the conception of many embryos that will die. We generally do not regard this embryo loss as unacceptably tragic or engage in great efforts to avert it, or to find ways to diminish it. These commentators argue, therefore, that making use of artificially created embryos for research would not result in the destruction of a greater portion of those embryos than might have died in natural unassisted reproduction.102
Life begins at Conception | Catholic Education Resource Center
Biden, Ryan During Vice-Presidential Debate: ‘Life Begins at Conception
“I think about 10 1/2 years ago, my wife Janna and I went to Mercy Hospital in Janesville where I was born for our seven week ultrasound for our firstborn child, and we saw that heartbeat,” Ryan outlined. “A little baby was in the shape of a bean. And to this day, we have nicknamed our firstborn child Liza, ‘Bean.’ Now I believe that life begins at conception.”
“Life begins at conception in the Church’s judgment,” Biden concurred. “I accept it in my personal life.”
“The policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother,” he replied.
Abortion is murder. So when the fetus was conceived by rape, it can be murdered?
Fate of fertilized human oocytes
Establishing the proportion of fertilized oocytes and early human embryos that proceed to term may help policy makers in their evaluation of when the life of a new human individual begins and in determining the nature of protection to be accorded to it.
The rate of spontaneous abortions, although increasing with age, overall does not exceed 15%. However, abortion rates refer only to ‘clinical pregnancy’, whereas early embryonic loss is more common than generally believed. Evidence of such wastage comes from many sources. Human fecundity rarely exceeds 35% and may be decreasing due to deterioration in semen quality. Embryological studies show that 50% of randomly recovered preimplantation embryos have severe anomalies. The study of sensitive markers of pregnancy, such as human chorionic gonadotrophin, indicates early embryo wastage in the order of 50%. Pregnancy wastage may be a function of the time lapse between ovulation and implantation as the implantation window extends between menstrual cycle
days 20 and 24. Finally, data obtained with natural IVF cycles also indicate major losses, with an overall pregnancy rate of 7.2% per cycle and 15.8% per transfer. These data, however, are biased by a high cancellation rate and low oocyte retrieval in natural IVF cycles.
Having A Baby Kills More Unborn Babies Than Are Ever Born
If you wanted to have a baby but you knew that in doing so you would be causing the death of at least one embryo, what would you do?
Which Fertilized Eggs Will Become Healthy Human Fetuses? Researchers Predict With 93% Accuracy
The research also highlights the importance of studying human embryos, which currently cannot be supported by federal funds. (Every year since 1996, Congress has approved a provision known as the Dicky-Wicker amendment that prohibits the use of federal funds for research in which a human embryo is destroyed — even ones that would otherwise be discarded.)
"In mice, about 80 to 90 percent of embryos develop to the blastocyst stage. In humans, it’s about 30 percent," said Reijo Pera. "In addition, about one in 100 mouse embryos are chromosomally abnormal, versus about seven out of 10 human embryos. That’s why human studies like these are so important. Women, their families and their physicians want to increase the chances of having one healthy baby and avoid high-risk pregnancies, miscarriages or other adverse maternal and fetal outcomes. It’s truly a women’s health issue that affects the broader family."
Earlier, more accurate prediction of embryo survival enabled by research | Stanford School of Medicine
Two-thirds of all human embryos fail to develop successfully. Now, in a new study, researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine have shown that they can predict with 93 percent certainty which fertilized eggs will make it to a critical developmental milestone and which will stall and die.
During the period of embryonic development that begins with fertilization and ends with successful implantation of the blastocyst–known as "preimplantation development"–up to 50 percent of human conceptions fail to survive, says Lynn Wiley, professor of obstetrics and gynecology. One reason for this high failure rate is the inability of an embryo to implant. "Only certain cells within the embryo can implant and form a placenta. Without these cells, or if these cells are not healthy, implantation will fail," she says. UC Davis Magazine
Opinion: Human rights for embryos? Initiative at odds with science
It is true that for centuries science has shown that all human beings begin as fertilized eggs. But it is not true that all fertilized eggs can or do produce human beings. In fact, it is so utterly wrong to say that every fertilized egg is a person, that to even suggest that science provides support for enacting the initiative is utterly absurd.
What are the odds of a fertilized egg becoming a person?
This is what we know: During the period of embryonic development that begins with fertilization and ends with successful implantation, about 50 percent of human conceptions fail to survive. The main reason for this high failure rate is the inability of huge numbers of fertilized eggs to implant.
What science has found is that around half of all conceptions don’t make it to implantation. Calling a fertilized egg a person flies in the face of this cruel biological reality. Half of all fertilized eggs cannot even become an embryo, much less a person.
Indeed, given the grim odds that face fertilized eggs, no one in science or medicine refers to a fertilized egg as an embryo unless it manages to implant. By talking about embryos and fertilized eggs as equivalent, supporters of Initiative 26 are not even using the correct scientific definition of an embryo.
- First Read: Personhood measure divides conservative ranks
- Beginning of human personhood | Wikipedia‘
- Why Life Begins at Conception
Fact: God kills 100% of people who die. It’s the prerogative of the one who created life in the first place to be able to take it back. And who can say otherwise? No one can stop death, only postpone it (perhaps). So even if God only has 30% of the human species survive to birth, that’s not a problem for me. It only proves what people have known from the beginning. “The Lord gives, the Lord takes away.” Figure out why you are opposed to God taking life. I believe that will tell you a lot about why not so many humans are born.
According to your logic…
___________________
LOTS of people die in natural disasters, therefore we must assume that those were not real people.
Genocide in disaster prone areas would then not be genocide since we can see by nature those areas of the world don’t hold real people. They are only real people once they move out of their country of viable people into the land of real people. If the rest of the world, full of real people, think it is convenient to kill these viable people, that would okay.
___________________
Yep, human-stupidity.com, I think you’re on to a new level of stupid: gather as much scientific evidence as possible then totally miss the basic logical disconnect.
You’ve got some good points HS. If all potential humans came to fruition, then people would be as numerous as flies, and our lives would be as worthless.
Unless English is your second language, I find all the grammatical/spelling/syntax errors hilariously ironic.
Thanks for the research.
There was a study in Chicago that showed that when given access to birth control without restriction to price, then abortion rates fall and the women would choose the most effective birth control.
And yet people who are anti-abortion also end up being anti-contraception. Perhaps if they were less hard on birth control, then the problem would diminish.
Link to article: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/health/NATL-Free-Birth-Control-Lower-Abortions-Fewer-Study-172749821.html
Just to say you write “then are born”. Should be “THAN are born”.
Regarding the issue, note that most natural abortions are considered to be preventative of genetic malformations. I’m not opposed to abortion, in fact I would be in favour of aborting the whole human race, for the devastation it has wreaked upon the Earth. But attacking feminists on the issue of abortion is good tactics. Anything that can be thrown at feminism should be thrown at it.
with or without religion abortion is murder of the first degree, this is not about natural causes, stop falsifying truth to talk right what’s wrong!