I was wrong... the health of the mother is not valid for an abortion.

It is not a semantic game. Words have e meanings. You want arbitrarily change them.

Infant: very young child or baby. Prior to bith [sic] it is a fetus, embryo, zygote....

Regardless of which stage in its life it's at, and regardless of what words we use to describe what stages of life, a human being is a human being.
It is a potential life until birth. Per ssd's finally imo....why is it of any more value than an elephant, or a dolphin, or a crow?
 
Behold the vulgar, foul-mouthed, indeed, the depraved, faux-female, feminazi skanks of infanticide:

 
Oh just stop with your lying bullshit, faux outrage. Where is your outrage over the 45,000 living Americans who die every single year due to lack of access to timely health care? Where is your outrage over the 35,000 living Americans who die every single year due to gun violence? Where is your outrage over the 75,000 Americans who are dying because of the opiod [sic] epidemic?

All tragic, to be sure, but nothing compared to over a million cold-blooded murders if innocent children, which you support.

Abortion is the single greatest cause of premature death, and as long as you defend it, you're in no position to point accusing fingers at anyone else over any other cause of death.

Why is it that so many are only willing to address one tragic situation?
 
It is a potential life until birth. Per ssd's [sic] finally imo [sic]....why is it of any more value than an elephant, or a dolphin, or a crow?

Repeating a lie over and over and over again does not imbue it with any truth.

What makes you of any more value than an elephant, a dolphin, or a crow?
 
It is a potential life until birth. Per ssd's [sic] finally imo [sic]....why is it of any more value than an elephant, or a dolphin, or a crow?

Repeating a lie over and over and over again does not imbue it with any truth.

What makes you of any more value than an elephant, a dolphin, or a crow?
Absolutely nothing.
 
Abortion is the single greatest cause of premature death
Sorry, no. We begin aging and therefore possibly dying "prematurely" at birth.

As a matter of established science, that is completely and absolutely false. Depletion of the telomeres, the process which leads to senescence and eventually to old age and death, begins with the very first mitotic cell division following conception. When the first single-celled zygote divides into two cells, those two cells have shorter telomeres than the single cell that divided to produce them had. Telomeres get rebuilt during the process of meiosis, which is the process by which haploid gametes (sperm and egg cells) are produced from diploid cells, and are depleted with every mitotic cell division that takes place after that.
 
It is a potential life until birth. Per ssd's [sic] finally imo [sic]....why is it of any more value than an elephant, or a dolphin, or a crow?

Repeating a lie over and over and over again does not imbue it with any truth.

What makes you of any more value than an elephant, a dolphin, or a crow?
Value comes from one sole source, humans. What we assign value has it to the extent we decide. If we assign no value, there is none.
When we assign value to individual liberty and responsibility, they are valuable.
When we value having others believe as we do, that has value.
When values conflict, we have dispute.
 
If you are a Democrat, this is what you are voting for:
abortedbaby05.jpg
 
Value comes from one sole source, humans. What we assign value has it to the extent we decide. If we assign no value, there is none.
When we assign value to individual liberty and responsibility, they are valuable.
When we value having others believe as we do, that has value.
When values conflict, we have dispute.

So, early in our own nation's history, black people really did have no value beyond their usefulness as glorified farm animals?

And in Nazi Germany, Jews and other untermenschen were of so little value that it was reasonable and justified in going to such extreme means to simply exterminate them?
 
Value comes from one sole source, humans. What we assign value has it to the extent we decide. If we assign no value, there is none.
When we assign value to individual liberty and responsibility, they are valuable.
When we value having others believe as we do, that has value.
When values conflict, we have dispute.

So, early in our own nation's history, black people really did have no value beyond their usefulness as glorified farm animals?

And in Nazi Germany, Jews and other untermenschen were of so little value that it was reasonable and justified in going to such extreme means to simply exterminate them?

Just like brown people in the middle east today.
 
Value comes from one sole source, humans. What we assign value has it to the extent we decide. If we assign no value, there is none.
When we assign value to individual liberty and responsibility, they are valuable.
When we value having others believe as we do, that has value.
When values conflict, we have dispute.

So, early in our own nation's history, black people really did have no value beyond their usefulness as glorified farm animals?

And in Nazi Germany, Jews and other untermenschen were of so little value that it was reasonable and justified in going to such extreme means to simply exterminate them?
Not at all. Pay attention to what was said.
Black mothers' babies probably had absolute value to black mothers, just very little to so-called masters, those who labored under the delusion that people can own people.
The Nazi movement was a virtual religious cult, believing in hogwash philosophies and false 'science'. Their value system was not shared by others, and conflict resolved the situation.
 
Not at all. Pay attention to what was said.
Black mothers' babies probably had absolute value to black mothers, just very little to so-called masters, those who labored under the delusion that people can own people.
The Nazi movement was a virtual religious cult, believing in hogwash philosophies and false 'science'. Their value system was not shared by others, and conflict resolved the situation.

No different from the mindset of those, today, who think that children have no value before birth, and that it's perfectly fine to kill them in cold blood.

What makes you think that you are any better than a Nazi or a slave owner, when you advocate the exact same mindset that leads to human rights abuses against those that you seek to dehumanize?
 
If you are a Democrat, this is what you are voting for:
View attachment 311753

If you are a blind supporter of either party this is what you support also.

Civilians Killed & Wounded | Costs of War

Are you suggesting that (mostly unavoidable) war atrocities are somehow justification for an acceptance abortions?
It would seem, rather, that what is suggested is that protesting against abortion obligates protesting slaughter of civilians.
 
It is not a semantic game. Words have e meanings. You want arbitrarily change them.

Infant: very young child or baby. Prior to bith [sic] it is a fetus, embryo, zygote....

Regardless of which stage in its life it's at, and regardless of what words we use to describe what stages of life, a human being is a human being.
It is a potential life until birth. Per ssd's finally imo....why is it of any more value than an elephant, or a dolphin, or a crow?

Your ignorance is actually sad.

Especially, coming from a mod.
 
If you are a Democrat, this is what you are voting for:
View attachment 311753

If you are a blind supporter of either party this is what you support also.

Civilians Killed & Wounded | Costs of War

Are you suggesting that (mostly unavoidable) war atrocities are somehow justification for an acceptance abortions?

Nope, I'm saying that life is life is life. Killing one is most certainly no more justifiable than the other but I find most who consider themselves "pro-life" will defend the slaughter of born children.
 

Forum List

Back
Top