Pedro de San Patricio
Gold Member
- Feb 14, 2015
- 2,061
- 272
Please answer the questions without changing the subject. They were:And why are they okay with increasing risk to the mother to facilitate *donating* fetal tissue?Okay, so we've established that a fetal human is, in fact, a human. That's the hard part out of the way. We've established that what's occurring is the harvesting of humans from their mother's wombs, and that you support this. Let's momentarily ignore the left's track record when it comes to human rights violations in the name of medical progress. Would you support the doctors harvesting her organs once she's born? If not, then what's the difference besides age/her stage in the human life cycle? Or how about aborting puppies for tissue to research canine medical problems? If so, then how about using born puppies? If not, then why are you not okay with doing to a dog what you'd do with a human?What are you a Bene Gesserit? "Young Human" Ask a researcher why they need human tissue for testing.
It's a scam to gin up outrage in hopes to do to PP what was done to Acorn. But like the "Boy Who Cried Wolf", they've gone to the well one time too often.
You're defending the harvesting of organs for money from an unborn human. Would you equally support harvesting the organs of the same human immediately after birth? If not, then why is it different?
Would you support harvesting the organs of an unborn puppy? If so, then how about that same puppy immediately after birth? If not, then why are you okay with doing this to a human but not a dog?
Please take your time and answer as honestly as possible.