Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!
"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.
Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?
There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
Oh, bullshit. Fetus and embryo have exact scientific meanings. You use terms such babies, humans, and human beings to convey the idea that they are lovable babies when the fact is they are just developing organisms.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.No one is disputing the fetus is alive.A fetus is not a baby until birth and it takes its first beath? Science debunks that. The unborn baby is taking in life-sustaining oxygen and nutrient early in development and is a LIVING BEING. After 5-6 weeks of pregnancy, the umbilical cord develops to deliver oxygen directly to the developing fetus's body.
For the first 11 weeks of pregnancy, before the mother’s nutrient-rich blood supply is plumbed in, all the materials and energy for building a baby are supplied by secretions from glands in the uterus lining. Life begins at conception. The embryo protection law in force as of January 1, 1991, defines the beginning of life in a medical sense, to wit, the embryo is the fertilized egg cell capable of development already from the time of fertilization. ... No other law explicitly provides a similar definition of the appearance of early human life.
The fifth-grade textbook stated "Human life begins when the sperm cells of the father and the egg cells of the mother unite. This union is referred to as fertilization. For fertilization to take place and a baby to begin growing, the sperm cell must come in direct contact with the egg cell."
An entity that is technically living and has human DNA is not equivalent to an entity that we should consider a person with all the rights, values and protections therein. In short, there is a difference between a living human entity at the cellular level and a person.
LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!
"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.
Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?
There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
Actually, you've just put your finger on the point: "personhood" is the subject of debate because pro-aborts lost the debate on science, and they had to move the goalposts and make it about feelings and opinions.
Fetus and embryo are the correct MEDICAL terms, depending on the stage of development; but "human" is also a scientific term, and equally as appropriate, however much the ignorant unwashed masses want to project their "feelz" onto it. They project those same "feelz" onto the words fetus and embryo, by trying to insist that they mean something other than a living human being. It's a bad idea to let the language be redefined by the lowest rank of the intelligence scale.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!
"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.
Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?
There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.And race has what to with it?Neat.
Now how about we factor race into your stats, shall we?
View attachment 262039
View attachment 262040
View attachment 262042
Just to name a few. Source: STDs in Racial and Ethnic Minorities - 2016 STD Surveillance Report
Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?
For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".
I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.
The problem with that is Planned Parenthoods are rare in rural red states. Usually located in inner city areas...why is that I wonder?
The same as any business: you go where there's the best chance of making money.
It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.And race has what to with it?
Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?
For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".
I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.
The problem with that is Planned Parenthoods are rare in rural red states. Usually located in inner city areas...why is that I wonder?
The same as any business: you go where there's the best chance of making money.
For the same reason that rural services in anything suck. Insufficient population to make the capital investment profitable.
That includes high speed WIFI, ethnic cuisine, and electricity and cell phone coverage on many areas.
It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.And race has what to with it?
Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?
For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".
I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.
The problem with that is Planned Parenthoods are rare in rural red states. Usually located in inner city areas...why is that I wonder?
The same as any business: you go where there's the best chance of making money.
For the same reason that rural services in anything suck. Insufficient population to make the capital investment profitable.
That includes high speed WIFI, ethnic cuisine, and electricity and cell phone coverage on many areas.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
We're making it our business. What's your plan other than trying to lecture us? Lol....
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
When you decide to kill innocents I make it my fucking business. I will speak out against you, I will donate to causes that oppose you, and I will vote for politicians who seek to obstruct you. And there is NOTHING you can do about it.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.LOTS of people are disputing that the fetus is alive. What message board are YOU reading?! Do you want a damned list?!
"An entity"? Really? You can admit that the fetus is alive, but you just can't bring yourself to call him "a human" or "a person" or "a baby"? 'Cause that IS what "an entity which [I fixed your grammar] is 'technically living' (sorry, but that's just a pathetic attempt at face-saving for your beliefs) and has human DNA" would be called . . . if one wasn't twisting oneself into a pretzel to acknowledge reality while still holding evil positions.
Personhood - to the extent I even believe that's a real thing - is not conveyed by laws. Recognized, perhaps, but not conveyed. Yes, there is a difference between a person who is protected by the law and whose rights are recognized by the law, and one who is not: the same difference between a slave and a free man. Once again, do you think a slave is less of a person?
There is a difference between a human at the beginning of his existence and an adult, as well; that difference is NOT "person" and "non-person", though. It is merely the difference between young and old.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
It is easy to show a correlation and causal effect as a result of politics and subsequent policy. And increased teen pregnancy and STD rates. Not so easy to with race.And race has what to with it?
Other than the fact that the states you want to wave around like a flag because "they're red states, so that means POLITICS are responsible!" often also have higher percentages of racial and ethnic minorities in their populations?
For example the effects of shutting down Planned Parenthood Clinics in poor rural red states means a loss of available services that provided STD screening and treatment and education in areas where evidence based sexual education is frowned upon. Red state politicians still spout the old canards about how abortion causes cancer and a woman who is raped can't get pregnant because "the juices aren't flowing".
I suspect it makes you feel better to blame it on race though.
The problem with that is Planned Parenthoods are rare in rural red states. Usually located in inner city areas...why is that I wonder?
The same as any business: you go where there's the best chance of making money.
For the same reason that rural services in anything suck. Insufficient population to make the capital investment profitable.
That includes high speed WIFI, ethnic cuisine, and electricity and cell phone coverage on many areas.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.Anyone that disputes that the unborn are not alive is wrong. The fetus or embryo is certainly alive because it is composed of living cells and it's a developing organism. It lacks self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control but it will acquire these characteristics as it slowly develops into a person. At what point the organism is a person is of course the subject of debate.
I don't refer to a fetus or embryo as a human because the word has a number of different definitions and connotations. Fetus or embryo is the correct biological term for the the unborn.
By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
What the fuck do trees have to do with anything? Have you noticed at all that humans are not trees? That we aren't even PLANTS?
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
We're making it our business. What's your plan other than trying to lecture us? Lol....
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
".... a zygote is not a human being."
I know it's gilding the lily, but let's continue to prove what an imbecile you are.
Watch this:
Does the zygote have DNA?
Where did the DNA come from?
When?
Does DNA prove species?
If you'd simply rather cop to being an imbecile.....don't wait.
You are not only stupid but rude. DNA is not an indicator of life. DNA is the building blocks of life. They reveal human potential, not life.
And you keep ignoring the most basic of human rights:
THE MOTHER’S RIGHT TO PRIVACY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE A BABY IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
We're making it our business. What's your plan other than trying to lecture us? Lol....
Apparently, to keep whining that we should treat her like a decent, intelligent, respectable person even though she behaves like an amoral imbecile.
The term human being has multiple definitions, one being a man, woman or child. A fetus is certainly not a child.By the fact that it is alive, it is a human being.
There are four references to ‘Divine’ in the Declaration of Independence:
1) in first paragraph ‘Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God,’
2) next paragraph ‘endowed by their Creator,”
3) Supreme Judge of the world, and
4) ‘divine’ Providence, last paragraph.
This is important because our historic documents memorialize a government based on individuals born with inalienable rights, by, in various references, by the Divine, or Nature’s God, or their Creator, or the Supreme Judge, or divine Providence.
Those rights include life.
Hussein Obama's science adviser, Peter Singer claims that "lacking self-awareness, self-determination, and self-control" are reasons to slaughter the unborn, and the born, and the ill and the elderly with Alzheimer.
Have an opinion?
But we've agreed that it is both a human being, and alive.
How can an unelected, non-judicial, 'mother' decide to kill it?
. So, according to [Democrat] Gov. Northam, whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.” Precious moments slip by as the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table, but the mother and doctor are discussing whether or not she should live? At this point we are no longer talking about abortion or a woman’s body. We are talking about a child who has clearly become the patient.” What Happens to a Child Born-alive? The Media Won’t Tell Us.
This is the position of the Democrat Party:
"...whether a newborn gets the chance to live or not is a matter for “discussion.”
"...the infant is fighting for her life on the delivery table,..."
It's called infanticide. That's the reality.
We’ve agreed to nothing of the kind. An acorn is NOT an oak tree, and a zygote is not a human being.
What the fuck do trees have to do with anything? Have you noticed at all that humans are not trees? That we aren't even PLANTS?
It appears that she is....intellectually.
