Poll on where Board Members stand for or against Abortion (yup, it's a well chosen title)

[Bonzi]

.
Meaningless poll.

Cut to the chase. When does a human being's life begin? It could be as early as conception or as late as death.

.

My opinion, at conception. One the sperm and egg join, the beginning of human life.
It is a human life, you were once at that stage and everyone else on here.

At one point its also a fish. This doesnt look quite human to me.

Yes still, is a human indeed

 

[Bonzi]

... trying my patience...

 

[Derideo_Te]

.
Meaningless poll.

Cut to the chase. When does a human being's life begin? It could be as early as conception or as late as death.

.

My opinion, at conception. One the sperm and egg join, the beginning of human life.
It is a human life, you were once at that stage and everyone else on here.

At one point its also a fish. This doesnt look quite human to me.

Yes still, is a human indeed

At that point it has more in common with a reptile.

And that is not at all surprising since we evolved from fish and reptiles.

The fetal stages are evolution in action right there in the uterus.

 

[Derideo_Te]

... trying my patience...

Was it found guilty or innocent by a jury of your peers.

 

[percysunshine]

.
Meaningless poll.

Cut to the chase. When does a human being's life begin? It could be as early as conception or as late as death.

.

When a pregnant women decides that she wants to have a baby.

Define 'have'.

.

Which part of the term pregnant do you need your mommy to explain to you?

You find it difficult to answer?

Deflection and name calling is an avoidance response. Totally human.

That is understandable.

.

 

[Asclepias]

.
Meaningless poll.

Cut to the chase. When does a human being's life begin? It could be as early as conception or as late as death.

.

My opinion, at conception. One the sperm and egg join, the beginning of human life.
It is a human life, you were once at that stage and everyone else on here.

At one point its also a fish. This doesnt look quite human to me.

Yes still, is a human indeed

How can you tell?

Which embryo is human?

 

[Bonzi]

Human life isn't determined by what it looks like.....

 

[Asclepias]

Human life isn't determined by what it looks like.....

How is it determined? I ID a frog by sight. If I saw an human embryo running around I would probably catch it in a jar. I know some people that would probably stomp on it.

 

[martybegan]

Reproduction is the woman's issue. We guys have very little to do with the process other than a short and rather pleasurable experience.

So we need to butt the fuck out and let the gals decide.

So only firefighters should be able to decide which fires they fight?

In a free society you have the right to have an opinion and a voice on things that don't impact you, or only impact you in an indirect way.

False logic. You werent even close in equivalency. Babies are not fires.

False equivalence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."

He said since I have nothing to do with it I should just shut up. My counter is perfectly valid. Or I can go with this.

That clerk in Kentucky is getting comments and grief from the entire country. If a person is 1) not Gay, or 2) not ever going to set foot in that Kentucky county, why don't THEY just "shut up" about the issue?

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

 

[Asclepias]

Reproduction is the woman's issue. We guys have very little to do with the process other than a short and rather pleasurable experience.

So we need to butt the fuck out and let the gals decide.

So only firefighters should be able to decide which fires they fight?

In a free society you have the right to have an opinion and a voice on things that don't impact you, or only impact you in an indirect way.

False logic. You werent even close in equivalency. Babies are not fires.

False equivalence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."

He said since I have nothing to do with it I should just shut up. My counter is perfectly valid. Or I can go with this.

That clerk in Kentucky is getting comments and grief from the entire country. If a person is 1) not Gay, or 2) not ever going to set foot in that Kentucky county, why don't THEY just "shut up" about the issue?

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

 

[martybegan]

Come on, people, where do you stand on this issue?

Pharmaceutical development is making this a fairly clear choice before 12 weeks. Most of us will have no idea who is and isn't taking the pill that replaces the 'wise or elderly woman of the woods' in story or actual life. Go to Dante, VA, if you want meet one.

Where do you stand on the issue?

I poll first: No abortion after 12 weeks for any reason except for birth defects, life/health of mom 1 vote(s) 100.0%

The rest of the pollees' votes are protected from view.

You should have said...no abortion after the point of viability except for life of mom.

Considering you are a lesbian, why should you care about abortion being available as long as you can get it in case of rape? After all, the other scenarios "don't affect you"

 

[martybegan]

So only firefighters should be able to decide which fires they fight?

In a free society you have the right to have an opinion and a voice on things that don't impact you, or only impact you in an indirect way.

False logic. You werent even close in equivalency. Babies are not fires.

False equivalence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."

He said since I have nothing to do with it I should just shut up. My counter is perfectly valid. Or I can go with this.

That clerk in Kentucky is getting comments and grief from the entire country. If a person is 1) not Gay, or 2) not ever going to set foot in that Kentucky county, why don't THEY just "shut up" about the issue?

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

 

[Asclepias]

False logic. You werent even close in equivalency. Babies are not fires.

False equivalence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"A common way for this fallacy to be perpetuated is one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."

He said since I have nothing to do with it I should just shut up. My counter is perfectly valid. Or I can go with this.

That clerk in Kentucky is getting comments and grief from the entire country. If a person is 1) not Gay, or 2) not ever going to set foot in that Kentucky county, why don't THEY just "shut up" about the issue?

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

 

[martybegan]

He said since I have nothing to do with it I should just shut up. My counter is perfectly valid. Or I can go with this.

That clerk in Kentucky is getting comments and grief from the entire country. If a person is 1) not Gay, or 2) not ever going to set foot in that Kentucky county, why don't THEY just "shut up" about the issue?

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

The person who I actually responded to said that, and you stated my response was a logical fallacy, and then continued to parrot his statement.

You are not arguing on the merits, and you know you can't.

 

[Asclepias]

Another false logic argument. You left out a myriad of various other reasons and again you are guilty of the false equivalency faux pas. Its pretty simple. You find something that relates to carrying a living person in your body and being responsible for that person during and afterwards. Can you do that?

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

The person who I actually responded to said that, and you stated my response was a logical fallacy, and then continued to parrot his statement.

You are not arguing on the merits, and you know you can't.

I didnt parrot his statement. I called your argument bullshit. I even recommended you make your point with an argument that was not a logical fallacy.

 

[Bonzi]

Human life isn't determined by what it looks like.....

How is it determined? I ID a frog by sight. If I saw an human embryo running around I would probably catch it in a jar. I know some people that would probably stomp on it.

Genetics. Human life begins at conception, everyone knows it, people just like to rationalize and wordsmith to make themselves feel better..... or (this is what really annoys me) to mislead others.......

 

[martybegan]

If a free society allows you an opinion on one topic that is not related or not directly related to your own experience, than it allows it on all. Don't me mad that I am not taking your "shut up" bullshit. It's a topic of public policy and I can have my opinion on it, and If enough of us have the same opinion on it we can force it no matter how much you whine about it, even if it takes getting a constitutional amendment.

"Just shut up" is intellectually dishonest, lazy, and shows that the current crop of progessive morons such as yourself cannot argue anything on merits, just argue that the other opinion shouldn't exist "just because"

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

The person who I actually responded to said that, and you stated my response was a logical fallacy, and then continued to parrot his statement.

You are not arguing on the merits, and you know you can't.

I didnt parrot his statement. I called your argument bullshit. I even recommended you make your point with an argument that was not a logical fallacy.

My point is I have the right to an opinion on a topic, and my logic was just fine, you just either 1) don't want to admit it, or 2) are an idiot.

 

[Asclepias]

I didnt tell you to shut up. I just pointed out your argument was bullshit as usual.

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

The person who I actually responded to said that, and you stated my response was a logical fallacy, and then continued to parrot his statement.

You are not arguing on the merits, and you know you can't.

I didnt parrot his statement. I called your argument bullshit. I even recommended you make your point with an argument that was not a logical fallacy.

My point is I have the right to an opinion on a topic, and my logic was just fine, you just either 1) don't want to admit it, or 2) are an idiot.

Your point is valid. Your argument was bullshit. You would have been better off just stating your point.

 

[martybegan]

The line of logic saying a person cannot have a say or impact on something because they are not part of the discussion is the same as "Just shut up"

It isn't arguing on the merits, it is arguing that one side has no right to have ANY opinion on the topic (or usually it's about that side having the "wrong" opinion.

Who said that? I know I didnt. Youre just mad because I pointed out your bullshit argument as....well bullshit.

The person who I actually responded to said that, and you stated my response was a logical fallacy, and then continued to parrot his statement.

You are not arguing on the merits, and you know you can't.

I didnt parrot his statement. I called your argument bullshit. I even recommended you make your point with an argument that was not a logical fallacy.

My point is I have the right to an opinion on a topic, and my logic was just fine, you just either 1) don't want to admit it, or 2) are an idiot.

Your point is valid. Your argument was bullshit. You would have been better off just stating your point.

The argument is just fine.

 

[Asclepias]

Human life isn't determined by what it looks like.....

How is it determined? I ID a frog by sight. If I saw an human embryo running around I would probably catch it in a jar. I know some people that would probably stomp on it.

Genetics. Human life begins at conception, everyone knows it, people just like to rationalize and wordsmith to make themselves feel better..... or (this is what really annoys me) to mislead others.......

Thats a mutually agreed upon assumption by some determined by their politics not science. Some think life starts when it can function outside the womb.

When Does a Human Life Begin? 17 Timepoints - DNA Science Blog