A question for the anti-choice crowd.

[Boss]

Well, the law, the courts, and your Conservative representatives all disagree with you. Hence the "Personhood" amendments they keep trying to pass. They aren't trying to pass amendments to have fetuses recognised as "humans", but as "persons". So, it would seem that the person who's opinion fails is yours.

Well... no... MOST Conservatives are pro-life. I don't know or care about "personhood amendments" they have nothing to do with the biological definition of a human life. You can't legislate science into fact.... that's not how science works. Nothing in the scientific method relies on court rulings or legislation.

A human being is a human being from the moment of conception. That's a fact of nature. Any other distinctions are merely superficial philosophies regarding the development of the living human organism. Using that method, we can very easily render you NOT a human being. I had rather stick with science over philosophy on this.... although, ridding humanity of scum like you is appealing.

 

[Boss]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

 

[Jack4jill]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

Or destroy the world. It also doesn't change the fact that is still a potential person.

 

[Czernobog]

Well, the law, the courts, and your Conservative representatives all disagree with you. Hence the "Personhood" amendments they keep trying to pass. They aren't trying to pass amendments to have fetuses recognised as "humans", but as "persons". So, it would seem that the person who's opinion fails is yours.

Well... no... MOST Conservatives are pro-life. I don't know or care about "personhood amendments" they have nothing to do with the biological definition of a human life. You can't legislate science into fact.... that's not how science works. Nothing in the scientific method relies on court rulings or legislation.[\quote]
YOU may not care about the "personhood amendment", but your Conservative representatives certainly do, and a clear majority of your conservative voters do. So, maybe you should, first, try to convince your fellow conservatives that "personhood" is stupid, and irrelevant, instead of trying to convince me that something conservatives want is a liberal deflection.

A human being is a human being from the moment of conception. That's a fact of nature. Any other distinctions are merely superficial philosophies regarding the development of the living human organism. Using that method, we can very easily render you NOT a human being. I had rather stick with science over philosophy on this.... although, ridding humanity of scum like you is appealing.

That is your opinion, and i would never try to disabuse you of that opinion, I just will never agree to codifying one person's, or groups opinion.

 

[Boss]

Simply being genetically human does not make it a human being.

No.. it has to carry on the process of homeostasis, reproduce and independently carry on the process of life. A fingernail is genetically human, it's not a living organism. A fetus is.

 

[Czernobog]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

You're right - which. Is. A. FETUS. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Boss]

Or destroy the world. It also doesn't change the fact that is still a potential person.

YOU are a potential person... too bad you don't meet the criteria of actually being one.

 

[Boss]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

You're right - which. Is. A. FETUS. Nothing more, nothing less.

FETUS is a development stage of a human being. It's no different than an infant, toddler, adolescent, adult or geriatric. ALL are developmental stages of the same thing... a human being.

 

[Czernobog]

Simply being genetically human does not make it a human being.

No.. it has to carry on the process of homeostasis, reproduce and independently carry on the process of life. A fingernail is genetically human, it's not a living organism. A fetus is.

Actually, until about the 25th week, it's not. It does not reproduce. It does not achieve homeostasis - in fact, it relies solely on its host to perform that function - there is no evidence that it reacts to stimuli (wellll...not until about the 13th week), and it is solely dependent on its host for its metabolism. In short, a non-viable fetus meets none of the criteria of an independent life.

 

[Jack4jill]

Or destroy the world. It also doesn't change the fact that is still a potential person.

YOU are a potential person... too bad you don't meet the criteria of actually being one.

I made it out, in good shape and one piece. It's why we saying "having" a baby, not "have" a baby. Time and luck are involved.

Let's say we launch a mission to Mars. When the rocket is headed to Mars do we say we landed a man on Mars, or do we have to wait? The man on Mars is still a potential man on Mars until we actually do.

 

[Czernobog]

Or destroy the world. It also doesn't change the fact that is still a potential person.

YOU are a potential person... too bad you don't meet the criteria of actually being one.

Aw...you're adorable...

 

[Jack4jill]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

You're right - which. Is. A. FETUS. Nothing more, nothing less.

FETUS is a development stage of a human being. It's no different than an infant, toddler, adolescent, adult or geriatric. ALL are developmental stages of the same thing... a human being.

This is a bit different. This starts as a single cell that must divide and develop within the body of another. The rest might need help, but they don't need a host. That is a damn big difference.

 

[Czernobog]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

You're right - which. Is. A. FETUS. Nothing more, nothing less.

FETUS is a development stage of a human being. It's no different than an infant, toddler, adolescent, adult or geriatric. ALL are developmental stages of the same thing... a human being.

This is a bit different. This starts as a single of cell that must divide and develop within the body of another. The rest might need help, but they don't need a host. That is a damn big difference.

It's a big damn difference to them too. So long as it needs a host, it absolutely needs the government to protect it, and preserve its health and well-being. After that though? Fuck it! It's on its own, and it better not think it's going to freeload off of us!!!!!

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[Boss]

Actually, until about the 25th week, it's not. It does not reproduce. It does not achieve homeostasis - in fact, it relies solely on its host to perform that function - there is no evidence that it reacts to stimuli (wellll...not until about the 13th week), and it is solely dependent on its host for its metabolism. In short, a non-viable fetus meets none of the criteria of an independent life.

Well you're wrong. The egg and sperm cells fuse and begin to reproduce. It already has homeostasis (meaning it's system is regulated and controlled by physiological processes). It does not rely solely on it's host.... it depends on it's host for nutrition but the host doesn't carry on the processes of life for the organism itself. It does that for cancer cells and fingernails... not for fetuses.

The moment the fused egg/sperm cell reproduces another cell, it meets the threshold for a living organism. That's science and biology and you've not refuted that.

 

[Fang]

You should rename this thread to:

A question for the anti-murder crowd.

 

[Jack4jill]

It's a human fetus, with the potential to become a human child. Really not too bright there, are you?

Also has the potential to be President of the United States or win a gold medal in the Olympics. Doesn't change what it is and what it always has been and will be.

You're right - which. Is. A. FETUS. Nothing more, nothing less.

FETUS is a development stage of a human being. It's no different than an infant, toddler, adolescent, adult or geriatric. ALL are developmental stages of the same thing... a human being.

This is a bit different. This starts as a single of cell that must divide and develop within the body of another. The rest might need help, but they don't need a host. That is a damn big difference.

It's a big damn difference to them too. So long as it needs a host, it absolutely needs the government to protect it, and preserve its health and well-being. After that though? Fuck it! It's on its own, and it better not think it's going to freeload off of us!!!!!

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Pro-fetus, not Pro-life. That costs money.

 

[Boss]

This is a bit different. This starts as a single cell that must divide and develop within the body of another. The rest might need help, but they don't need a host. That is a damn big difference.

Nope... This DOES NOT start as a single cell. This starts as two cells... an egg cell (female) and a sperm cell (male) and when they fuse, conception takes place. The fused cells reproduce... thus a new organism comes into existence and state of being. We call this organism a human being.

 

[Jack4jill]

This is a bit different. This starts as a single cell that must divide and develop within the body of another. The rest might need help, but they don't need a host. That is a damn big difference.

Nope... This DOES NOT start as a single cell. This starts as two cells... an egg cell (female) and a sperm cell (male) and when they fuse, conception takes place. The fused cells reproduce... thus a new organism comes into existence and state of being. We call this organism a human being.

When they "fuse" they become one.

Shall I continue?

And is a unfertilized egg a 1/2 human, or a potential human, if you can find some sperm around?

 

[Czernobog]

Actually, until about the 25th week, it's not. It does not reproduce. It does not achieve homeostasis - in fact, it relies solely on its host to perform that function - there is no evidence that it reacts to stimuli (wellll...not until about the 13th week), and it is solely dependent on its host for its metabolism. In short, a non-viable fetus meets none of the criteria of an independent life.

Well you're wrong. The egg and sperm cells fuse and begin to reproduce. It already has homeostasis (meaning it's system is regulated and controlled by physiological processes). It does not rely solely on it's host.... it depends on it's host for nutrition but the host doesn't carry on the processes of life for the organism itself. It does that for cancer cells and fingernails... not for fetuses.

The moment the fused egg/sperm cell reproduces another cell, it meets the threshold for a living organism. That's science and biology and you've not refuted that.

Actually, you're wrong. It relies on its host for homeostasis. This is why a non-viable fetus cannot survive outside of the woman - it does not maintain its system, the host does.

 

[Jack4jill]

Sure looks like one to me.