A question for the pro-abortion aka pro-choice crowd

[koshergrl]

Of course, it isn't the argument that was originally made, but that means nothing to a dishonest little pseudo intellectual like him.

 

[logical4u]

I am not puting words in your mouth. I am showing you where your logic leads.

You are putting words in my mouth. My logic does NOT lead there -- only your deliberate, dishonest illogic.

Again: no brain, therefore no thoughts, no feelings, no personality. Nothing else. I don't care if you think, or rather dishonestly pretend to think, that there's an equivalency with something else. There isn't. You're full of shit. If it has a brain, thoughts, feelings, and a personality, it's a person. End of story.

As we speak, "scientists are growing "embryos" (undeveloped humans) for experimentation. I am assuming because you cannot hear their screams of pain, that those experiments are perfectly acceptable to you.

They have no "screams of pain." They cannot feel pain. They have no brains, and therefore no thoughts, feelings, or personality. They are not persons.



I know of no such experiments, but in the future we are sure to explore human recombinant genetics, and I believe we should do so.

I get that you claiming an undeveloped human is not "human" because of the stage of developement.

No, you don't. I am saying that a creature without a brain, and thus without thoughts, feelings, or a personality, is not a person -- even if it is human. "Human" is a biological term. "Person" is a moral and legal term. That which is human is not necessarily a person, and vice-versa. My blood cells are human; they are not persons. An extraterrestrial alien would be a person, but would not be human. For moral and legal questions such as murder, what matters is personhood. Humanity is unimportant.

And you are, again, taking my very precise language and turning it into something vague, so you can smear it over like a greasy rag and apply where it doesn't belong. I am not talking about "stages of development." I am talking about whether an organism has a brain, and therefore thoughts, feelings, and a personality. If it does, it's a person. If it doesn't, it isn't. This is not a variable like "stages of development." It's a hard and fast binary line, and something either is a person or isn't.

I just don't understand that you can be so blind to where this will lead.

It will lead nowhere. What YOU are talking about might lead there. But that is completely different from what I am talking about. And again, you are putting words in my mouth, in a completely dishonest and contemptible fashion.

"NOW" is not a "stage of developement"? If an "embryo" is alive, and allowed to have nourishment, will that embryo become anything other than a "baby" or "dead" (not including the wacko science experiments here) with time? Oh, you are a wiggagly wascal. You want to change the words around for your benefit, but then, you will not claim them.

Do you have children or are you planning on having children? How would you feel if you knew that scientists were experimenting on "embryos" from you and your significant other (PC)? Would you be okay for science to make a new animal for human consumption with "your" DNA? Would you be okay for science to make slave animals (human brains, but cannot communicate in the normal fashion, science left their vocal chords out)? Would you be okay for science to make "people" with animal DNA to be atheletes that were stronger and faster and more aggressive for entertainment (that had to be penned up after the event to keep them from hurting others)? And yes, with the "tolerance" for "embryo" experimentation and opinions like yours, it would be very possible for science to start a human "embryo" and after eight months of life (your definition, not a person, yet) "harvest" organs to use on other people. Why won't you look into your future world (the world that you are encouraging to happen)? Is it too dark, even for you with the Biblical name of "dragon"?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Great point! Does a child have the exact DNA as the mother? If not, wouldn't that make the developing baby an individual person?

At 6 weeks gestation, the fetus has unique DNA, a unique brainwave pattern measurable by EEG and a distinct heart beat measurable by EKG.

The AMA definition for life is the presence of either brainwave or heart activity, here we have both. Scientifically, this is a separate and distinct being who is undeniably alive.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, because personhood is not a function of DNA. When the developing fetus has its own independent thoughts and feelings, THEN it's a person.

So an accident victim in a coma wouldn't be a "person" and could be killed at a whim in your view?

You have a chilling perspective.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The personhood movement is scary. The movement threatens the legality of birth control.

You can't grasp the distinction between abortion and birth control?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Misinformed about what, Edith? If all you have are insults, you are little more than a foul-mouthed dingbat.

....

Talk about ad nauseum! You have yet to even present an argument, or even a counterargument.

......

Hold on there, Edith. You're still confused about what the issue actually is. The issue is NOT what defines a baby, but what defines--or at least, should define--personhood. More specifically, at what point does a ZEF become an individual in the truest sense of the term? It is my argument that the ZEF does not become a true individual until the umbilical cord is cut.

What an absolutely insane proposition.

What in the holy fuck would make you propose something so idiotic?

Why not use the first haircut as a measure?

Is this your idea of satire?

I base my argument on the fact that until that moment, the ZEF is quite literally an appendage of the mother.

Utter bullshit and completely stupid.

The fact that placenta tissue is comprised of both fetal and maternal tissue (and this is a scientific fact)

You shouldn't bring up scientific fact, sparky.

Scientific fact is that the baby has unique DNA, making it 100% separate and distinct from the mother. The baby has distinct and unique brain waves. The baby has separate and distinct heart patterns. The baby is a separate and distinct person, regardless of your desire to dehumanize your intended victim.

further supports the fact that even afterbirth, the newborn is still attached to its host's tissue until the umbilical cord is cut.

So?

If I kiss my wife, though we be joined, I remain a person.

Now, if you don't mind, BUBBLEHEAD, how about telling me what your argument is. Do you even have one?

Any argument is going to be more sensible than what you presented.

What a pile of idiotic crap you shoveled out.

Fat, obnoxious, and stupid is no way to go through life, dear.

You're in no position to call others "stupid" when you post bullshit like you do.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're f*cked."
- George Carlin

Nah, we won't let you jam scissors into the back of a born child's skull either...

Though it distresses you, you don't get to kill others because you find them inconvenient.

 

[Dragon]

"NOW" is not a "stage of developement"?

No. Over time, now is ALL stages of development, thus it is not any one of them.

If an "embryo" is alive, and allowed to have nourishment, will that embryo become anything other than a "baby"

Irrelevant. I'm not talking about what it will become, nor do I care what it will become, unless and until it has already become that.

Do you have children or are you planning on having children?

I have two daughters.

How would you feel if you knew that scientists were experimenting on "embryos" from you and your significant other (PC)?

I would have no problem with this. By the way, the word embryos doesn't require quotes.

Would you be okay for science to make a new animal for human consumption with "your" DNA?

Sigh. You're really getting absurd here.

I would have no moral problem with that, but medically it's an extremely bad idea, as it amounts to cannibalism.

I'm not going to bother answering the rest of your silliness. I've made my position clear, and any questions you ask about it are for purposes of twisting the truth, not understanding.

 

[koshergrl]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers) but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. They don't admit it or own it, and they will obfuscate and lie about what they defend..but Nazis always do.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, because personhood is not a function of DNA. When the developing fetus has its own independent thoughts and feelings, THEN it's a person.

So an accident victim in a coma wouldn't be a "person" and could be killed at a whim in your view?

You have a chilling perspective.

Can you say, "Terry Schiavo"? Their "disposable" point has been chilling and scary for a long time now.

 

[Cecilie1200]

"Boy, these conservatives are really something, aren't they? They're all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you're born, you're on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don't want to know about you. They don't want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you're preborn, you're fine; if you're preschool, you're f*cked."
- George Carlin

Nah, we won't let you jam scissors into the back of a born child's skull either...

Though it distresses you, you don't get to kill others because you find them inconvenient.

And considering how HE is viewed by others, he should actually find that attitude comforting.

 

[Father Time]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers)

It's funny that you think "we shouldn't kill this guy" is disdain for life.

but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

And pro-lifers don't have that belief?

Nazis and monsters, each and every one.

I love the irony

"They think they're morally superior to us *whine* they're such Nazis and monsters"

 

[Dragon]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers) but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. They don't admit it or own it, and they will obfuscate and lie about what they defend..but Nazis always do.

Koshergrl, you have just called me a Nazi. That means I put you on ignore, as there are some things that are flatly inexcusable, and that's one. I will not engage in a pretense of civilized discourse with someone who behaves like a dyspeptic baboon.

I will give you one chance to retract the statement.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers) but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. They don't admit it or own it, and they will obfuscate and lie about what they defend..but Nazis always do.

What always amuses me is the mistaken assumption they always have that THEY have some superior worthiness of life, when really, all they have is the "home-base" claim from a game of tag: I'm here, so I'm safe.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers) but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. They don't admit it or own it, and they will obfuscate and lie about what they defend..but Nazis always do.

Koshergrl, you have just called me a Nazi. That means I put you on ignore, as there are some things that are flatly inexcusable, and that's one. I will not engage in a pretense of civilized discourse with someone who behaves like a dyspeptic baboon.

I will give you one chance to retract the statement.

"Wah, wah, wah, my vagina has sand in it."

She didn't call you a Nazi, you pussyaching little weenie. She said your attitude toward human life was comparable to a Nazi. And you massively overestimate anyone's interest in communication with you. What are you expecting Kosher to do, wail, "Oh, noes!!! Dragon, that brilliant example of humanity, might not direct his bullshit comments my way!!! Whatever shall I do?! Oh, please! Forgive me!"?

Contemplate getting over yourself, ass clown. You're justifying killing unborn babies. You have no moral high ground to call anyone else "inexcusable". You're damned lucky DECENT human beings condescend to talk to you at all.

 

[Father Time]

Chilling is the correct adjective, and all pro-abortionists have the same disdain of life...not only disdain of life (usually they want to see those who kill people protected to the nth degree...whether terrorists or butchers) but even worse, their belief that they have some superior insight into who is worthy of life.

Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. They don't admit it or own it, and they will obfuscate and lie about what they defend..but Nazis always do.

Koshergrl, you have just called me a Nazi. That means I put you on ignore, as there are some things that are flatly inexcusable, and that's one. I will not engage in a pretense of civilized discourse with someone who behaves like a dyspeptic baboon.

I will give you one chance to retract the statement.

"Wah, wah, wah, my vagina has sand in it."

She didn't call you a Nazi, you pussyaching little weenie.

Are you trying to troll or do you just lack basic reading comprehension?

"Nazis and monsters, each and every one. I do mean every one. "

You're damned lucky DECENT human beings condescend to talk to you at all.

Yes they're all so very blessed to hear the same crap over and over.

 

[koshergrl]

He is a Nazi.

And he put me on ignore because I call him on his bs in this and other threads. The only troll here is Dragon. He is putting me on ignore because, as I pointed out, he can't address the issue honestly.

Pro-abortionists are Nazis and monsters, whether they admit it or not. He's no different than any of a dozen on this site. They provide dishonest "reasons" for abortion, but it comes down to this...they think the elimination of a certain group of children will provide their own group with a better chance of survival and advancement. It's that simple. They think that by eliminating the poor, the halt, the lame, the dysfunctional, their own little "acceptable" population will do better and be stronger.

That's nazism.

 

[Dr.Drock]

He is a Nazi.

And he put me on ignore because I call him on his bs in this and other threads. The only troll here is Dragon. He is putting me on ignore because, as I pointed out, he can't address the issue honestly.

Pro-abortionists are Nazis and monsters, whether they admit it or not. He's no different than any of a dozen on this site. They provide dishonest "reasons" for abortion, but it comes down to this...they think the elimination of a certain group of children will provide their own group with a better chance of survival and advancement. It's that simple. They think that by eliminating the poor, the halt, the lame, the dysfunctional, their own little "acceptable" population will do better and be stronger.

That's nazism.

You're a very confusing person. You have kosher in your name but you spit on the grave of every victim of the Holocaust by equating an anonymous message board poster to a nazi, knowing full well what kind of atrocities the nazis were guilty of.


Are you like the Uncle Tom of the jewish faith?

 

[Father Time]

they think the elimination of a certain group of children will provide their own group with a better chance of survival and advancement. It's that simple. They think that by eliminating the poor, the halt, the lame, the dysfunctional, their own little "acceptable" population will do better and be stronger.

That's nazism.

That's a straw man. Unless you can actually point to someone who argued that.

 

[koshergrl]

Every single pro-abortionist has argued it. When they discover that the old stand by (and untrue) "We have to have legal abortion to keep women from dying in childbirth and monster babies from taking over the earth" has already been tagged as unmitigated crap, they fall back on "We have to have abortion because otherwise those nasty poor people will keep beating their kids to death and having retarded babies".

Why do you believe we need legalized baby killing? And how do you feel about euthanasia?