What should abortion laws be?

[Bern80]

Below is is post 410 in it's entirety with your requested answers.

Do you or don't you want women to be criminalized for obtaining (illegal) abortions outside of your subjective field of acceptance? Answer the question.

Yes I think ANYONE that takes another innocent human life should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The real question is why don't you believe that?

If a woman decided to abort a pregnancy, during the time when the fetus is deemed to be potentially conscious, and was therefore illegal, what should her punishment be? Can you ANSWER that?

She should or could be charged from anything from manslaughter to murder, the punishment for which will very depending on the circumstances.

Because really, we have been discussing the rest for weeks, and no matter what response I have given you, your ultimate retort will be that it is *I* who is being illogical, even despite the fact that the only "evidence" you have given on fetal sentience has been inconclusive. Clearly, neither of us can prove that any event, either scientific or divine, happens at the moment of birth and breathing.

If that were the case that would force you to admit that the possibility exists you are taking another human life. Curious that you are okay with that risk In truth though you can't keep waffling between terms. You have stated before that sentience really doesn't matter to you from a legal perspective. So YOU answer a direct question: At what point should a woman be prosecuted for killing her child?

I will admit that my belief that the baby is sentient at birth is PARTIALLY religious in nature, but that makes no difference in the discussion whatsoever, being that your belief that killing is wrong, is also religious in nature as well.

I haven't brought up my religious beliefs once in this thread that I am aware of. AGAIN it is you doing the bulk of the baseless presuming dear. My beliefs about killing an innocent human life does not come from what any religion tells me about the matter. Personally I find people who's morality is guided by religion to be rather weak minded. The rest of your bull shit argument about my position being religious wether I recognize it or not is just that, bull shit. To contend that is to contend that without religion humans can not distinguish between right and wrong.

The question of abortion *being illegal* is ABSOLUTELY a question of how you think the woman should be punished. Answer the question.

Done

No! I just SAID that this was a PERSONAL view. Women should not be criminalized for.......

I haven't posted any sources in this thread at all. You're thinking of prolet, I believe.

How would she be punished if this sort of thing was TRULY considered "murder", in your opinion? How do you think the woman should be punished for making this decision? Answer.

The same way any person is punished for murder. I suppose in the court system it could actually range from anything from manslaughter to pre-meditated murder depending on the circumstances. The punishment of which would be whatever the legal statutes are for that charge. That is all dependent of course on the a child being given legal status that would warrant those charges, but assuming it was, why would the punishment be any different for killing an unborn human being than killing a born one?

And no study or source you have found has shown that this type of activity exists pre-birth, but in SEVERAL of your sources, you have shown that pre term infants DO show better reactions than their fetal counterparts. YOU showed this. YOU are the only one who is solidifying MY arguments, through your own half assed, despondent attempts at belittling them, all because you cannot deal with this EMOTIONALLY.

I realize that a 9 month gestated fetus looks like and is the same size as a 3 week old preemie that was born three weeks early. The three week OLD baby shows MORE response than the fetus does. YOUR SOURCES SAY SO.
My opinion is that there is a higher power that neither one of us might ever understand or fully grasp, at work here. There is NO explanation of logic as to why and how this phenomenon occurs. That does not make it impossible. And YOUR sources PROVE that.

yeah....not me again. I'm not sure I care what the sources say. I only maintain that your extreme stance isn't logical to me. You see your argument renders what the sources say irrelevent. I don't have to prove they're right. All I have to do is make a decent argument that you are not. The only problem is I'm not sure you even know what your position is considering how much back and forth you've done on it. So I again ask at what point if any, should a woman be prosecuted for killing her children?

Social dependence does not equal physical dependence. You cannot get past the fact that physical dependence for a fetus is a reliance on the mother being alive, period. Socially, the person caring for a baby can die, and the baby will still live for an indefinite period of time. Truly, you need to get PAST this.

From the perspective of the child no I don't believe there is a difference. No child before the age of about 3 (before including just post conception) will survive long without SOMEONE caring for it. YOU made the assertion that a justification for abortion is that the fetus is this 'thing' that is wholly dependent on you for survival and thus has no rights of it's own. All I am trying to get across is that relatively speaking their is little difference in the level of dependence a child has on SOMEONE to insure its survival pre-birth or post-birth

Ah a sociological conundrum. Actually, because there are so many people in society who do not want to have more biological children, or cannot have biological children, then surrogate parents are often used, and even more than this, mothers (and fathers) who are carrying a fetus will sign papers voluntarily giving their child, once born alive, the parental rights to that child. Society DOES make the choice. OFTEN. I have a "long lost Aunt" who we found out lives in Scotland. The story goes like this: My grandfather used to beat my grandma. My grandma, at one point, needed some friendly good touch, and love.. She went off and fell in love with another guy, while she was married to the shitstain we DONT really call "gramps". (I refer to him as Harry). This was in the 1940s. She already had three kids, and knew that she could not go home to Harry with a bulging belly, so she asked a friend to take care of one of her existing three girls. (My Aunt). So the friends adopted her. My grandma moved somewhere (I have no idea where). My Aunt was never really happy with the situation, but seems to be a happy, well adjusted adult, with a full family who loves her, now. She wants nothing to do with our family, of course. The feelings involved with being "given up" are very much akin to "unwantedness", even though the family that cared for her and loved her, definitely did WANT her. The choice was not pushed on them. It was voluntary.
Society does not take kids based on involuntary servitude.
Furthermore, to claim that a woman who is 8 or 9 months pregnant should not abort, along with these statements above, is much akin to saying that she should not put the child up for adoption, also. What is WRONG with this picture? Talk about lacking logic. Good Grief!!!

That long winded BS doesn't mean adoption is off the table. This is real simple JD. Again presuming you believe a child is a human being at some point pre-birth, all that is being argued is that you don't have the right to murder that child without being prosecuted.

And having consensual sex, and being a person who does not have a period but every few months, one might not ever notice that they even missed one to begin with. Women are not, and should not be prosecuted for being sexually active, just because YOU think that they should be taking a weekly fucking pregnancy test.. My word. The only arguments for negative actions you are even discussing here is the sole fact that MOST women do not sit there and test themselves for pregnancy every freaking week. Get through it!! That is PREPOSTEROUS AND OUTRAGEOUS!!!

Why is it preposterous or outrageous for a woman to find out if an outcome she KNOWS is possible, a life changing outcome at that, has actually happened? What fucking sense does it make to go through everything you went through, when it could have been prevented so much sooner by simply taking a pregnancy test? Forget our disagreement for a moment on what you and I consider irresponsible behavior, doesn't it just plain make the most sense to find out as soon as possible?

Ok so how should women who abort in the 4th month be punished then?? Go ahead, and answer the question.

Depends on whether the child could be considered a human life at that point. The science isn't quite there yet on that issue. As I said above. I don't find it relevant to your position because in your position the justification for abortion doesn't stop at that point in time. I have gathered it stops after the baby is born and it may not even matter whether it is human life before that to you as a legal issue.

Oh really- please DO TELL us what kinds of knowledge and such a fetusperson can share with the rest of us? YOU ARE DODGING THE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO LOGICAL ANSWER.

Oh for the love of Pete. Last time. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT ALL SPOKESPERSONS, SALESPERSONS, CHAIRPERSONS, ETC. ARE ALL PERSONS, IS A TRUE STATEMENT? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU SAID, THAT ALL PERSONS ARE SALESPERSONS, CHAIRPERSONS, ETC., IS NOT A TRUE STATEMENT?

 

[eots]

Yeah, maybe you should try to pass some law that says that anyone who is sexually active must keep images of aborted fetuses above the bed, as a reminder that YOU subjectively think that they are "people"..

now you are thinking...how much guilt you must carry from your abortion..its OK..there is redemption ...God still loves you

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Plan B: 45 dollars, if you get it cheap. Otherwise, it can cost in upwards of 65 dollars.

Cost of not fucking: Free

Cost of Plan B in case of assault: free at a growing number of hospitals and clinics.

Spermicidal foam: About 10 dollars for a pack of about 6

Cost of not fucking: Free.

Spermicidal "lube" (jelly): Another 10 dollars, for a pack of about 6

Cost of not fucknig: Free

Condoms: Free if you live near a health center that distributes free condoms, and for 85% of the rest of the country, about 7 dollars for 12.

Or 10 for a dollar.

Cost of not fucking: Free

Cost of engaging in other forms of sexual contact than penile-vaginal intercourse: Free

Plan B, taken twice a week

If you're that much of a whore and too stupid to use other methods, then I have no pity on you.

In any event, she may have some other expenses that take priority, so there is no guarantee that she will be capable of spending 40-70 dollars extra

Then she should have guys cumming in her if she's not responsible enough to take precautionary measures or care for a child.


Two words:
Personal responsibility

Which, again, could be saved and used for such things as furry handcuffs, tasty body paints, and lingerie

Again,

Personal responsibility

 

[Father Time]

Or there's always adoption if worse comes to worse.

Or the dreaded option D

Have enough kids to get your own reality TV show.

 

[JenT]

NOT a literal verse.You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in My book…

Specifically, 120, as was told to Moses when the flood was in the planing stages. Again, this is not a verse to mean that even one person was being spoken directly about. This is God saying that MAN is not a mistake, in general.

Which any doctor, or mother can do, also, so no relevance here, either.

This is another thing that any mother and father could say to their children.

How could this be a literal verse, unless you can visualize God with knitting needles, and those needles being thrust into a woman's body?
However, I do not discount that God has a plan and that he knows which pregnancies will come to term, and which will not.​

All of the above that you're parsing over are from "Father's Love Letter"
Father's Love Letter Instrumental Version
They are not exact quotes but are what the prophets are writing about as God sees us.

Quote:
And brought you forth on the day you were born…
Psalm 71:6

Now THIS is better.. because even though a woman can say this also, this is alluding to God doing something beyond birthing the child- He give us life, by blowing air into us, for us to have the "breath of life", and causing us to become alive.

NO WHERE does God say the life of the infant begins with his first breath. God breathed life into Adam because Adam was not born from a womb. Those are not dead babies in our wombs waiting for their first breath to come alive.

Quote:
As far as the past goes, God has always known what would happen, did that stop Him from creating that little one? no.

Yes. He often caused women to have "miscarrying wombs", in fact. Why would he cause a woman to miscarry something he created and treasures?

Where does it say God caused a miscarriage? I don't remember ever reading that. God opens and shuts wombs, as in Sarah and conception, but I believe miscarriages are a result of the fall.

Not really. Miscarried fetuses "never had knowledge" and "never saw light", from God's own inspired word of the bible.

Job 3:16 "Or like a miscarriage which is discarded, I would not be, As infants that never saw light.Ecclesiastes 4:2,3 And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living,who are still alive. 2 But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun.Isaiah 14:20 "You will not be united with them in burial, Because you have ruined your country, You have slain your people. May the offspring of evildoers not be mentioned forever.

You are quoting Job cursing the day he was born. If you back up to the beginning you will see he begins by cursing the day he was conceived. You support what I'm saying with this:

1 After this Job opened his mouth and cursed the day of his birth. And Job spoke, and said:
“May the day perish on which I was born,
And the night in which it was said,
‘A male child is conceived.’
May that day be darkness;
May God above not seek it,
Nor the light shine upon it.​

New International Version (©1984)
Ecclesiastes 3:19
Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. (in vanity)

You're quoting Ecclesiastes, who is having a meltdown about EVERYTHING through the whole book because he has absolutely everything he could possibly want, treasures and riches and women beyond wildest dreams, and he's BORED. The whole book is about his dissatisfaction.

But I think you quoted out of context what he said about animals and men.

18 I said in my heart, “Concerning the condition of the sons of men, God tests them, that they may see that they themselves are like animals.” For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other. Surely, they all have one breath; man has no advantage over animals, for all is vanity. All go to one place: all are from the dust, and all return to dust. Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth? ​

Solomon is just saying he has all this wisdom and it's still not enough. Then later he says:

"God's ways are as hard to discern as the pathways of the wind, and as mysterious as a tiny baby being formed in a mother's womb."​

Then his final conclusion after a whole book about not knowing enough and how everything is so boring, he writes:

"13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil. "​

BULLSHIT. You have been deceived by Satan, it appears. DEATH is the ENEMY. Satan wants you to believe that death can have some positive connotation to it, so that he can lure you towards it.

54 “Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“ O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?”
The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Cor 15​

and there are all kinds of verses about trading our bodies in to be like Him.

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans)

21 For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor; yet what I shall choose I cannot tell. 23 For I am hard-pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better. (Phil 1)​

Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one ... Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through
sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned ...
[SIZE=-1]//bible.cc/romans/5-12.htm[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] - 16k[/SIZE]

But read on! Death and sin came into the world through Adam at the fall, but Christ bought us back again for those who receive Him. That's the message of the Gospel, the Good News.

(and if you are unaware, sin was caused because Satan lured the good people towards his evil way.. And they already knew that the punishment would be death, so, like you, Adam and Eve chose Death (Satan's way) over God.)

nooooooo, Eve was deceived with Satan's line that she would be like God. It was a half truth, that's why we need to know what God says, so we don't fall for this stuff. Adam didn't, Adam knew, he wasn't deceived but he disobeyed because (according to him) Eve gave it to him and he did eat.

This is why women aren't supposed to be the leaders. We get deceived a lot and it's true. We trust in emotion more than men do. Strong men in Christ know to always check things out in the Bible first.

Jen: This life is a vapor, it's a one inch dash on a tombstone between born and died. But it's our chance to get to know our Creator. That's all it is. And I believe all aborted children will have another chance. I believe they're in a far better place right now than where we are today...or where Obama is leading us (shudder)

I am so sorry that you have been deceived to think this. I beg of you to please study ALL parts of your bible, not JUST the ones that the baptist preacher or the anti abortion propaganda machine tells you about.

JD, that WAS from the Bible.

"James 4:14
whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away."​

In fact, that was Solomon's whole point in Ecclesiastes. You can have everything you could possibly want in the world and still be bored, it's all vanity. But to know God...that's everything.

God does NOT want any of us living in guilt. It's why He sent the Savior.

That doesn't mean that we are entitled to sin, either. Boy oh boy..

I'm sorry, is that what you got out of what I was saying?

You're right, it doesn't entitle us to sin. But that's why Christ came, to break us free from the sins of the past and to do our best to follow Him out of love and gratitude for what He did for us.

23 Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me. (John 14)​

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let me just say that JD trying to lecture on morality - particularly Biblical morality - is just about as obscene (not to mention laughable) as JD trying to lecture on biology. I am better equipped to address the subject of particle physics than she is to address any of those topics.

 

[JenT]

Or there's always adoption if worse comes to worse.

Or the dreaded option D

Have enough kids to get your own reality TV show.

nah, there's one before that, get your tubes tied right after the last one's birth.

Then you can get divorced and have all kinds of men offering to pay $10,000 to get them untied

Look, there's no easy answers to birth control, but abortion is NOT IT EVER.

It's murder. If it wasn't alive you wouldn't have to kill it. So it's ALIVE, right?

And it's HUMAN, right?

It's a LIVING HUMAN even at cell one ala sperm. It's conceived. Everything is all designed, mapped out, ready to go and a little kick of electricity sounds like a soul to me.

 

[JD_2B]

NOT a literal verse.You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in My book…

Specifically, 120, as was told to Moses when the flood was in the planing stages. Again, this is not a verse to mean that even one person was being spoken directly about. This is God saying that MAN is not a mistake, in general.

Which any doctor, or mother can do, also, so no relevance here, either.

This is another thing that any mother and father could say to their children.

How could this be a literal verse, unless you can visualize God with knitting needles, and those needles being thrust into a woman's body?
However, I do not discount that God has a plan and that he knows which pregnancies will come to term, and which will not.​

All of the above that you're parsing over are from "Father's Love Letter"
Father's Love Letter Instrumental Version
They are not exact quotes but are what the prophets are writing about as God sees us.​

Never even heard of it until today, but it appears to be a poem, a lovely one, but one based on a variation of scriptural order, which puts the context of the meaning of verses in a different light than they were intended.
Also, the only quotes in that poem that apply to the unborn, were verses being told to people of significant stature to God.

Now THIS is better.. because even though a woman can say this also, this is alluding to God doing something beyond birthing the child- He give us life, by blowing air into us, for us to have the "breath of life", and causing us to become alive.

NO WHERE does God say the life of the infant begins with his first breath. God breathed life into Adam because Adam was not born from a womb. Those are not dead babies in our wombs waiting for their first breath to come alive.

Baloney.
Life is actually depicted in different contexts within the bible, actually. There is the "now" life- the life of the flesh, and the "later" life, which is the life some have after we are all resurrected, together, as a whole.

In fact, the breath of life, in the context of flesh is literal:
Genesis 2:7
the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Genesis 7:22
Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died.
Job 12:10
In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind.
Job 19:17
My breath is offensive to my wife; I am loathsome to my own brothers.
Job 32:8
But it is the spirit in a man, the breath of the Almighty, that gives him understanding.
Psalm 104:29
When you hide your face, they are terrified; when you take away their breath, they die and return to the dust.
Psalm 150:6
Let everything that has breath praise the LORD. Praise the LORD.
Isaiah 42:5
This is what God the LORD says— he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it, who gives breath to its people, and life to those who walk on it:
Isaiah 57:16
I will not accuse forever, nor will I always be angry, for then the spirit of man would grow faint before me— the breath of man that I have created.
Jeremiah 10:14
Everyone is senseless and without knowledge; every goldsmith is shamed by his idols. His images are a fraud; they have no breath in them.
Jeremiah 38:16
But King Zedekiah swore this oath secretly to Jeremiah: "As surely as the LORD lives, who has given us breath, I will neither kill you nor hand you over to those who are seeking your life."
Lamentations 4:20
The LORD's anointed, our very life breath, was caught in their traps. We thought that under his shadow we would live among the nations.
Ezekiel 37:6
I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the LORD.' "

Need I go on?? I can, if you wish me to.

Where does it say God caused a miscarriage? I don't remember ever reading that. God opens and shuts wombs, as in Sarah and conception, but I believe miscarriages are a result of the fall.

All over the place!!

Also- Several verses declaring that a stillbirth is better, for reasons not highlighted in red:
Ecclesiastes 6:3
A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he.

From The Message- which explains it in clearer terms:
Ecclesiastes 6:3
Say a couple have scores of children and live a long, long life but never enjoy themselves—even though they end up with a big funeral! I'd say that a stillborn baby gets the better deal. It gets its start in a mist and ends up in the dark—unnamed. It sees nothing and knows nothing, but is better off by far than anyone living.
Job 10:18
"So why did you have me born? I wish no one had ever laid eyes on me! I wish I'd never lived—a stillborn, buried without ever having breathed. Isn't it time to call it quits on my life? Can't you let up, and let me smile just once Before I die and am buried, before I'm nailed into my coffin, sealed in the ground, And banished for good to the land of the dead, blind in the final dark?"
Jeremiah 20:14
Curse the day I was born! The day my mother bore me— a curse on it, I say! And curse the man who delivered the news to my father: "You've got a new baby—a boy baby!" (How happy it made him.) Let that birth notice be blacked out, deleted from the records, And the man who brought it haunted to his death with the bad news he brought. He should have killed me before I was born, with that womb as my tomb, My mother pregnant for the rest of her life with a baby dead in her womb. Why, oh why, did I ever leave that womb? Life's been nothing but trouble and tears, and what's coming is more of the same.
Luke 1:15
"He'll drink neither wine nor beer. He'll be filled with the Holy Spirit from the moment he leaves his mother's womb. He will turn many sons and daughters of Israel back to their God. He will herald God's arrival in the style and strength of Elijah, soften the hearts of parents to children, and kindle devout understanding among hardened skeptics—he'll get the people ready for God."
John 3:3Jesus said, "You're absolutely right. Take it from me: Unless a person is born from above, it's not possible to see what I'm pointing to—to God's kingdom." 4"How can anyone," said Nicodemus, "be born who has already been born and grown up? You can't re-enter your mother's womb and be born again. What are you saying with this 'born-from-above' talk?"
5-6Jesus said, "You're not listening. Let me say it again. Unless a person submits to this original creation—the 'wind-hovering-over-the-water' creation, the invisible moving the visible, a baptism into a new life—it's not possible to enter God's kingdom. When you look at a baby, it's just that: a body you can look at and touch. But the person who takes shape within is formed by something you can't see and touch—the Spirit—and becomes a living spirit.
Psalm 22:9
And to think you were midwife at my birth, setting me at my mother's breasts! When I left the womb you cradled me; since the moment of birth you've been my God. Then you moved far away and trouble moved in next door. I need a neighbor.
Psalm 139:13
Oh yes, you shaped me first inside, then out; you formed me in my mother's womb. I thank you, High God—you're breathtaking! Body and soul, I am marvelously made! I worship in adoration—what a creation! You know me inside and out, you know every bone in my body; You know exactly how I was made, bit by bit, how I was sculpted from nothing into something. Like an open book, you watched me grow from conception to birth; all the stages of my life were spread out before you, The days of my life all prepared before I'd even lived one day.

And the piece de resistance:
Hosea 9

14 O Lord, what should I request for your people?
I will ask for wombs that don’t give birth
and breasts that give no milk. 15 The Lord says, “All their wickedness began at Gilgal;
there I began to hate them.
I will drive them from my land
because of their evil actions.
I will love them no more
because all their leaders are rebels.
16 The people of Israel are struck down.
Their roots are dried up,
and they will bear no more fruit.
And if they give birth,
I will slaughter their beloved children.”

NIV:
Hosea 9
14 Give them, O LORD—
what will you give them?
Give them wombs that miscarry
and breasts that are dry. 15 "Because of all their wickedness in Gilgal,
I hated them there.
Because of their sinful deeds,
I will drive them out of my house.
I will no longer love them;
all their leaders are rebellious.
16 Ephraim is blighted,
their root is withered,
they yield no fruit.
Even if they bear children,
I will slay their cherished offspring."

You are quoting Job cursing the day he was born. If you back up to the beginning you will see he begins by cursing the day he was conceived. You support what I'm saying with this:

1 After this Job opened his mouth and cursed the day of his birth. And Job spoke, and said:
“May the day perish on which I was born,
And the night in which it was said,
‘A male child is conceived.’
May that day be darkness;
May God above not seek it,
Nor the light shine upon it.​

No shit, but that doesn't mean that he is not accurate about when life begins.. I believe I have illustrated that adequately enough.

You're quoting Ecclesiastes, who is having a meltdown about EVERYTHING through the whole book because he has absolutely everything he could possibly want, treasures and riches and women beyond wildest dreams, and he's BORED. The whole book is about his dissatisfaction.

No, see- You are not seeing the big picture here. The Bible is the inspired word of God, and everything in it is approved by God, and everything that is NOT written in it does not belong, due to God's disapproval.

But I think you quoted out of context what he said about animals and men.

18 I said in my heart, “Concerning the condition of the sons of men, God tests them, that they may see that they themselves are like animals.” For what happens to the sons of men also happens to animals; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other. Surely, they all have one breath; man has no advantage over animals, for all is vanity. All go to one place: all are from the dust, and all return to dust. Who knows the spirit of the sons of men, which goes upward, and the spirit of the animal, which goes down to the earth?​

How is is out of context? The point of the verse is that we are all living by the grace of God, and that life would not exist without God's breath (which is the same in all of us- it is the atmosphere, we all breathe, together, as one) The only thing else it is saying is that although we all go back to dust in our fleshy forms, humans have an added gift, the Holy Spirit within us, which goes upwards.

Solomon is just saying he has all this wisdom and it's still not enough. Then later he says:

"God's ways are as hard to discern as the pathways of the wind, and as mysterious as a tiny baby being formed in a mother's womb."​

There are loads of verses that refer to the fetus as a baby, but they are not relevant to when life begins, as I have already illustrated.

Then his final conclusion after a whole book about not knowing enough and how everything is so boring, he writes:

"13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil. "​

That has nothing to do with being bored. That was simply an enlightened moment for him, an understanding of the meaning of life..

54 “Death is swallowed up in victory.”
“ O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?”
The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
1 Cor 15

That again says nothing about when life begins.
​

and there are all kinds of verses about trading our bodies in to be like Him.

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (Romans)

21 For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain. 22 But if I live on in the flesh, this will mean fruit from my labor; yet what I shall choose I cannot tell. 23 For I am hard-pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better. (Phil 1)​

Yes this is about the transitioning between the life of the flesh and the life of the spirit. Believe it or not, on judgment day, everyone can decide for themselves, whether they want to choose God or Death. This is not saying that people "trade in" their bodies. It is saying that they give their flesh to God, with trust and faith, that "Jesus takes the wheel", so to speak, and whatever happens to the body becomes irrelevant, when the time of the final death and resurrection arrives.

But read on! Death and sin came into the world through Adam at the fall, but Christ bought us back again for those who receive Him. That's the message of the Gospel, the Good News.

Not explicitly. Christ's life was given so that everyone else did not have to die, and remain dead for an eternity. The good news is still in the future tense, but it will be caused by the past tense of the Crucifixion.

nooooooo, Eve was deceived with Satan's line that she would be like God. It was a half truth, that's why we need to know what God says, so we don't fall for this stuff. Adam didn't, Adam knew, he wasn't deceived but he disobeyed because (according to him) Eve gave it to him and he did eat.

What EVER, and HOW ever you want to explain the story to yourself, those two KNEW that the punishment for sin was death, even before they CHOSE death over God. They had no reason to trust anyone but God, who made them. They CHOSE, and they KNEW what the RESULTS would be, WHEN they chose. And stop DEFENDING Satan in that. They knew what they were doing. Satan needed only to say a few words, and Adam and Eve just went along with it, in a defiant act against God's ONLY command to them.

This is why women aren't supposed to be the leaders. We get deceived a lot and it's true. We trust in emotion more than men do. Strong men in Christ know to always check things out in the Bible first.

Then maybe you should stop posting biblical bullshit on a public forum, missy.

JD, that WAS from the Bible.

"James 4:14
whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away."​

In fact, that was Solomon's whole point in Ecclesiastes. You can have everything you could possibly want in the world and still be bored, it's all vanity. But to know God...that's everything.

And to have too many children, children that you do not want, is the same as vanity, as Ecclesiastes says, also.

God does NOT want any of us living in guilt. It's why He sent the Savior.

That doesn't mean that we are entitled to sin, either. Boy oh boy..

I'm sorry, is that what you got out of what I was saying?

You're right, it doesn't entitle us to sin. But that's why Christ came, to break us free from the sins of the past and to do our best to follow Him out of love and gratitude for what He did for us.

Our past includes our whole lives.. but he came not only to break us free from our sins, but also to rescue us from eternal death.

23 Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me. (John 14)

Right. He does say "not mine, but the Father's who sent me", and yet I bet you call Jesus God, too, lol..
​

 

[Bern80]

NOT a literal verse.You were not a mistake, for all your days are written in My book…

Specifically, 120, as was told to Moses when the flood was in the planing stages. Again, this is not a verse to mean that even one person was being spoken directly about. This is God saying that MAN is not a mistake, in general.

Which any doctor, or mother can do, also, so no relevance here.................​

Frankly you should stick with me dear. There isn't any head way to be made arguing over religion. Beliefs are generally emotional in nature and hard to negate whether you're 'right' or not. Especially when you're trying to interpret a book that everyone says was essentially written by god but was really written by fallable men who cherry picked what went in to it.​

 

[JD_2B]

If you use condoms + spermicidal lube + spermicidal foam + Plan b and still get pregnant, you either abort in the early stages as I and others have said or you accept that your deity of choice really wants you to have a child.

There is one means of prevention that's 100% effective, if you absolutely positively want to make sure you don't get pregnant.

Cost of pro's assertion that women should have to use all of that stuff:

Plan B: 45 dollars, if you get it cheap. Otherwise, it can cost in upwards of 65 dollars.

Spermicidal foam: About 10 dollars for a pack of about 6
Spermicidal "lube" (jelly): Another 10 dollars, for a pack of about 6
Condoms: Free if you live near a health center that distributes free condoms, and for 85% of the rest of the country, about 7 dollars for 12.

Soooo.. $2.50 just to have sex..
Plan B, taken twice a week (it can be taken within 92 hours of sex, so this would be all a person would "need" to take it to avoid pregnancy)- $90- $130 a week, considering the person has sex even twice a week, every few days.

Let's now put this all together.. Someone who ONLY has sex two times a week would be spending no less than $92.50 a week to APPEASE PRO, and people like him..
Which amounts to $4,810.00 a year...

Considering that a new car can be purchased for, oh let's even make it something better than a $10,000 buy one get one free Kia deal, and say it costs 14K for a new compact car-

14,000/12= 1,166 a month for ONE year... OR 291.66 on a four year payment plan.

$291.66 a month for a CAR PAYMENT is CHEAPER than the best enjoyed, most looked forward to activity in any couple's life, by Pro's terms, and that would be HAVING "RESPONSIBLE" SEX, which would cost that same couple a whopping $400.88 a month, BY PRO's TERMS.

Sorry, but you actually just sold me on stopping using protection altogether. Honestly, I could still disregard Plan B, and go on birth control, which, combined with all the other expectations of using a few back ups, like the foam, the jelly, and the condom, would still bring my grand total of monthly "sexpenses" to be over $66 a month, and THAT is because it is with a cheap birth control option from Planned Parenthood, where I would also be paying a "meager" $65 dollar visit fee, therefore adding an additional six dollars to my monthly The average person who does not have planned parenthood nearby, would spend upwards of 150-200 dollars on the doctor's visit (if they do not have insurance, which many many people do not have insurance, or do not want to go through their parent's insurance, to keep things private) in addition to a monthly expense of up to 60 dollars per month, and that is assuming that their original prescription was of the right strength, and that she does not have an adverse reaction to it, and have to go to the Doctor's office or ER, as a result.

In any event, she may have some other expenses that take priority, so there is no guarantee that she will be capable of spending 40-70 dollars extra a month to appease your evil little plan.
In fact, even at the lowest end possible, of 40 dollars, just at the retail store a month, SORRY but in 10 months, that cost could easily pay for a first trimester abortion, which you apparently support anyways.
And depending on the situation, if the woman has to spend an hour in the car to GET to that store, even once a month, then you are looking at another 15-20 dollars per month in fuel costs... Which, again, could be saved and used for such things as furry handcuffs, tasty body paints, and lingerie, and other such things that people who actually have sex are far more prone to buying ANYWAYS.


LMFAO!!!

but then there is the cost of your herpes , syphilis and aids treatments..better re-think that one

Tell me.. how does one get syphilis, herpes, or HIV from someone who has none of the above???

Again, LMFAO!!!! Nice try, though.

 

[JD_2B]

Frankly you should stick with me dear. There isn't any head way to be made arguing over religion. Beliefs are generally emotional in nature and hard to negate whether you're 'right' or not. Especially when you're trying to interpret a book that everyone says was essentially written by god but was really written by fallable men who cherry picked what went in to it.

My darling, I was not the one who started quoting bible verses.. But since Jen did set the status quo that the bible was acceptable to quote, it made my own interpretations fair game. Furthermore, I know all about cherry picking, because I used to make all of the same <yawn> arguments y'all have given me, before I knew about and understood the verses and ideologies I have quoted here.

However, I do agree that the debate with you might go farther than the one with Jen. =)

 

[JD_2B]

Really? Please show us the study indicating that a large number of women get pregnant while abstaining from sex. So far as I was aware, there has only been one, and it was under rather special circumstances.

Sure!! Not a problem..
http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Sc..._Prevention_Programs__A_Systematic_Review.pdf
It means that once someone has had sex, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to remove such a memory or unquenchable desire from that person.

I wish I could say that it's a shock to me that you don't write or understand plain English, but it really isn't.

You said nothing about "abstinence programs", and neither did I. You said "abstinence is ineffective", and thereby made yourself sound like a damned fool. Again. If you're talking about people who are told to abstain and don't, then it's not ABSTINENCE that isn't working as birth control because THEY AREN'T USING ABSTINENCE. Duhh.

OK then let me spell it out to you- once someone has HAD sex, it is very very difficult to abstain from having more of it, as these abstinence studies have proven.
That is because ABSTINENCE- The TEACHING of it, does not WORK. Abstinence only lasts for SO long.

You are trying to claim that ABSTINENCE is a surefire way to avoid getting pregnant. I beg to fucking differ. You have the studies that prove that preaching abstinence does NOT cure people from having sex, and thus, does not cure them from getting pregnant. Can I spell it out any more clearly to you?

Also, people who are married are not going to forego sex just because YOU have a problem with abortion.

Yes, how silly to expect people to be responsible and care about the sanctity of life when they're horny and want to fuck.

Yeah, maybe you should try to pass some law that says that anyone who is sexually active must keep images of aborted fetuses above the bed, as a reminder that YOU subjectively think that they are "people".. [/quote]

I don't subjectively think they're people. I objectively think they are because science says so. YOU subjectively think they aren't because you desperately need to pretend you're a good person instead of a selfish sack of dung.

When in doubt, look at the motive.[/quote]

Not wanting to be pregnant anymore does not, even in the LOOSEST WAY, make fetuses people.

Also, Telling me I am a selfish sack of dung does not further your position, sweetie pie. Just because YOUR decision was different from MINE, does not automatically give you a permanent position on some kind of ethical high horse.

PS- Science has NEVER called fetuses people. Show me some medical journal where fetuses are actually called people, fucking liar.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sure!! Not a problem..
http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Sc..._Prevention_Programs__A_Systematic_Review.pdf
It means that once someone has had sex, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to remove such a memory or unquenchable desire from that person.

I wish I could say that it's a shock to me that you don't write or understand plain English, but it really isn't.

You said nothing about "abstinence programs", and neither did I. You said "abstinence is ineffective", and thereby made yourself sound like a damned fool. Again. If you're talking about people who are told to abstain and don't, then it's not ABSTINENCE that isn't working as birth control because THEY AREN'T USING ABSTINENCE. Duhh.

OK then let me spell it out to you- once someone has HAD sex, it is very very difficult to abstain from having more of it, as these abstinence studies have proven.
That is because ABSTINENCE- The TEACHING of it, does not WORK. Abstinence only lasts for SO long.

You are trying to claim that ABSTINENCE is a surefire way to avoid getting pregnant. I beg to fucking differ. You have the studies that prove that preaching abstinence does NOT cure people from having sex, and thus, does not cure them from getting pregnant. Can I spell it out any more clearly to you?

Also, people who are married are not going to forego sex just because YOU have a problem with abortion.

Yes, how silly to expect people to be responsible and care about the sanctity of life when they're horny and want to fuck.

Yeah, maybe you should try to pass some law that says that anyone who is sexually active must keep images of aborted fetuses above the bed, as a reminder that YOU subjectively think that they are "people"..

I don't subjectively think they're people. I objectively think they are because science says so. YOU subjectively think they aren't because you desperately need to pretend you're a good person instead of a selfish sack of dung.

When in doubt, look at the motive.[/quote]

Not wanting to be pregnant anymore does not, even in the LOOSEST WAY, make fetuses people.

Also, Telling me I am a selfish sack of dung does not further your position, sweetie pie. Just because YOUR decision was different from MINE, does not automatically give you a permanent position on some kind of ethical high horse.

PS- Science has NEVER called fetuses people. Show me some medical journal where fetuses are actually called people, fucking liar.[/QUOTE]

You are getting less sane with every post. See someone about that.

 

[Bern80]

Frankly you should stick with me dear. There isn't any head way to be made arguing over religion. Beliefs are generally emotional in nature and hard to negate whether you're 'right' or not. Especially when you're trying to interpret a book that everyone says was essentially written by god but was really written by fallable men who cherry picked what went in to it.

My darling, I was not the one who started quoting bible verses.. But since Jen did set the status quo that the bible was acceptable to quote, it made my own interpretations fair game. Furthermore, I know all about cherry picking, because I used to make all of the same <yawn> arguments y'all have given me, before I knew about and understood the verses and ideologies I have quoted here.

However, I do agree that the debate with you might go farther than the one with Jen. =)

Then get crackin'. I have obliged your every request. I find it odd that you demanded answers of me multiple times and when i do you have nothing to say about it. And I find it just plain rude to demand of others what you seemingly won't do in return

 

[JD_2B]

Below is is post 410 in it's entirety with your requested answers.

Do you or don't you want women to be criminalized for obtaining (illegal) abortions outside of your subjective field of acceptance? Answer the question.

Yes I think ANYONE that takes another innocent human life should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The real question is why don't you believe that?

Stop dodging the question. HOW far should the "fullest extent of the law" travel? 10 years? 20 years? Life? Death penalty?? What is your position on how long women who illegally abort should fucking be punished????

I dont think that saying "Oh it is okay to abort for any reason at allis up to 3 months- and as late as is needed for the woman's life, but at any other time , it is murder, because I subjectively declare that the fetus has magically turned into a fetus-person, and in ANY other case besides the ones I deem worthy, it is MURDER, so that woman should ROT in PRISON for those ones!!!" is AT ALL logical. Can you SEE why?? It's fucking STUPID, that is WHY.

If a woman decided to abort a pregnancy, during the time when the fetus is deemed to be potentially conscious, and was therefore illegal, what should her punishment be? Can you ANSWER that?

She should or could be charged from anything from manslaughter to murder, the punishment for which will very depending on the circumstances.

What fucking circumstances??? She, in your own words, and the words of your ilk, committed "murder", not manslaughter- and what fucking circumstances anyways??? Jesus Christ! What the FUCK. Can you BE more elusive about punishment, and defining her punishment? You are CLEARLY adamant that late term abortion is MURDER, and then when asked what the punishment should be, you start saying "manslaughter", a lesser charge, and "oh it depends on the circumstances". Whose circumstances??? The fetus-person's or the woman's??? Holy mother of God, this is, by FAR, the most irrational load of horseshit I have ever laid eyes on.

If that were the case that would force you to admit that the possibility exists you are taking another human life. Curious that you are okay with that risk In truth though you can't keep waffling between terms. You have stated before that sentience really doesn't matter to you from a legal perspective. So YOU answer a direct question: At what point should a woman be prosecuted for killing her child?

After it BREATHES its FIRST breath, if it dies as a result of negligence by ANYONE, then it is MURDER. Fucking lather, rinse, and repeat for only the five hundredth time in this thread alone.

Christ.

A person can be simply TAKEN OFF of life support, and ZEALOTS LIKE YOU will sit there and admonish the family, the courts- whomever is available to make that decision- and call it fucking murder as well, so I really don't know why I am SOOOOOO surprised about this.

I haven't brought up my religious beliefs once in this thread that I am aware of. AGAIN it is you doing the bulk of the baseless presuming dear. My beliefs about killing an innocent human life does not come from what any religion tells me about the matter. Personally I find people who's morality is guided by religion to be rather weak minded. The rest of your bull shit argument about my position being religious wether I recognize it or not is just that, bull shit. To contend that is to contend that without religion humans can not distinguish between right and wrong.

Well, I have heard that bullshit story before, and would have to correct you on many points:
Yes you are capable of independent thinking
No religion has not gone past you, unnoticed..
Yes, religious people, or people whose moral compass was affected in some way, by religion, HAVE had a part of your life, and a big role in teaching you, from a young age, that murder and death are bad things.
The media also has had a hand in your belief system, like it or not, because they have drilled into your head as well, that killers are bad, wanted by the police, and therefore killING is bad too.

NOT ONE person on this planet can try to pretend that religion and their belonging to a group (Earth, being 85% religious) has played ZERO role in the development of their personal moral compass. That is total bullshit.

Also, what PART of the Earth you live in can play a MAJOR role in one's personal values. In Japan, men are more likely to look down on women. The men enter a room first, all the way down to the youngest man in the family (the male baby, who enters in FRONT of the mother carrying him), through to the Oldest woman (after the youngest man) and down to the youngest female entering last. If you were raised in Japan, women would never be addressed first in a room, and would be the least likely person you chose when seeking a new employee.
In Islamic society, one's life is put second to everything else. Life is not counted as "sacred". In fact, Islamic people would rather be KILLED than RAPED. Rape is the ultimate disgrace that can be done to the human body, in that culture. If you grew up in that culture, you would think FAR differently about RAPE and death than you do here. (We all would!)

That is called CULTURAL AGREEMENT. If you are within a group, or a culture of that group, then TO BELONG, one IS subjected to developing specific beliefs, based on whatever the GROUP believes.

I do agree that you are a free thinker- just don't try to kid yourself that you came up with the whole "death is bad news" and "killing is wrong" mindset.

The same way any person is punished for murder. I suppose in the court system it could actually range from anything from manslaughter to pre-meditated murder depending on the circumstances. The punishment of which would be whatever the legal statutes are for that charge. That is all dependent of course on the a child being given legal status that would warrant those charges, but assuming it was, why would the punishment be any different for killing an unborn human being than killing a born one?

To answer your hypothetical question: The difference would be a matter of Privacy....
And the fact that your "circumstances" and "premeditated murder versus manslaughter" crap is only following a certain point. So, if she has twins, it is your opinion that having an abortion is her RIGHT up to a certain point, and under certain circumstances, especially if it meant to save her own life, but the week following that point of "legal obtainment", as long as she aint on some kinda death bed, anyways, she is suddenly a fucking murderer, who would get the death penalty, for aborting it by choice... is that fucking right???

And if she belly flops off of a high dive, and claims that she did not know that the amniotic sac was not strong enough to maintain the fetus' status of growth... ?? Then what..

Oh and the man that beats on the woman, causing her to have a miscarriage- is he a murderer too? How about the 16 year old who is an inexperienced and unlicensed driver, who T-bones her car, causing her to miscarry when she is late term??? She lives, but her fetus-person is miscarried/ stillborn. Does that 16 year old get the death sentence also???

THINK about the possible reprocussions for what you are implying.. and the lack of logic that goes with it. It absolutely does NOT make sense.

yeah....not me again. I'm not sure I care what the sources say. I only maintain that your extreme stance isn't logical to me. You see your argument renders what the sources say irrelevent. I don't have to prove they're right. All I have to do is make a decent argument that you are not. The only problem is I'm not sure you even know what your position is considering how much back and forth you've done on it. So I again ask at what point if any, should a woman be prosecuted for killing her children?

I have answered that question enough times already. After her born child takes a breath of air.
And you have not brought up a single argument that has AT ALL conferred to me that fetuses can possibly be sentient, because those studies are all inconclusive. It is only, then, an OPINION, or a leap of faith, at best, that fetuses have any kind of sentience whatsoever. Sorry, bubs, but a leap of faith that contradicts ALL evidence is 100% subjective.

From the perspective of the child no I don't believe there is a difference. No child before the age of about 3 (before including just post conception) will survive long without SOMEONE caring for it. YOU made the assertion that a justification for abortion is that the fetus is this 'thing' that is wholly dependent on you for survival and thus has no rights of it's own. All I am trying to get across is that relatively speaking their is little difference in the level of dependence a child has on SOMEONE to insure its survival pre-birth or post-birth

You are, at some point, going to HAVE to admit, that if the woman carrying a fetus dies, or loses oxygen, or has an accident, then that fetus is prone and subjected to her injuries, and therefore may not be taken care of by anyone or "rescued" from the plight that the woman is experiencing. In any BORN child, this is a very different story, and YOU have to admit that to YOURSELF. This is THE hardest thing for pro lifers who want fetuses to have rights and entitlements to admit, that the "right to life" in no way promises some "entitlement" to live. The comparison of responsibility that ANYONE (out of 6.5 billion) can take for a born child is just not applicable to a SINGLE someone having to maintain optimal health, and remain alive as some responsibility to a fetus, for the fetus to survive, even considering any problems the fetus is causing her, and try to say that the fetus is the equivalent to a born child. You KNOW this, you just cant admit it.

That long winded BS doesn't mean adoption is off the table. This is real simple JD. Again presuming you believe a child is a human being at some point pre-birth, all that is being argued is that you don't have the right to murder that child without being prosecuted.

Who fucking said that adoption was off the table??? I simply do not women to be made into societal birthing slaves, the way YOU want.

Why is it preposterous or outrageous for a woman to find out if an outcome she KNOWS is possible, a life changing outcome at that, has actually happened? What fucking sense does it make to go through everything you went through, when it could have been prevented so much sooner by simply taking a pregnancy test? Forget our disagreement for a moment on what you and I consider irresponsible behavior, doesn't it just plain make the most sense to find out as soon as possible?

Christ! This again!! Do you know that there are actually couples out there who do not EXPECT to get pregnant, because they are on birth control, do not EXPECT to get a period, because of the type of birth control they are on, and YET, they (apparently SELFISHLY) have SEX every day, or every other day, or many times a day, because they have this BELIEF that their birth control is actually fucking WORKING???? Golly Gee! What a concept!!!
Women, and their families, should not have to spend five dollars a week on a fucking pregnancy test, year round, just because YOU want women in PRISON or in some GODDAMNED GAS CHAMBER for having a fucking ABORTION!!!! Get the FUCK over it already.

Ok so how should women who abort in the 4th month be punished then?? Go ahead, and answer the question.

Depends on whether the child could be considered a human life at that point. The science isn't quite there yet on that issue.

Allelujah!!!! Sooooooooooo... Now an embryo is not a "human life", and neither is an early term FETUS, and all of this is based on SCIENCE!! Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!

Looks like you just made a breakthrough in the direction of reality. Congrats!!! =)

As I said above. I don't find it relevant to your position because in your position the justification for abortion doesn't stop at that point in time. I have gathered it stops after the baby is born and it may not even matter whether it is human life before that to you as a legal issue.

Oh my god. You brought yourself SOOO CLOSE.. and yet, with this statement, you fell off the wagon of truth YET again.

When does a fetus become a human life.. and what happens so magically in the week before you declare it to be sentient, even though neither the study of science nor any medical journal known to mankind agrees with this assertion, to cause it to suddenly become a human life???

Oh really- please DO TELL us what kinds of knowledge and such a fetusperson can share with the rest of us? YOU ARE DODGING THE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO LOGICAL ANSWER.

Oh for the love of Pete. Last time. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT ALL SPOKESPERSONS, SALESPERSONS, CHAIRPERSONS, ETC. ARE ALL PERSONS, IS A TRUE STATEMENT? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU SAID, THAT ALL PERSONS ARE SALESPERSONS, CHAIRPERSONS, ETC., IS NOT A TRUE STATEMENT?

How so???

Point to ONE salesperson/ chairperson/ spokesperson who is not a fucking PERSON.

And I did NOT say that All persons are SUCH THINGS, I was responding to your, or at least one of your ilk's dictionary definition of "person", with references to "Salesperson", "chairperson" and "spokesperson".

And stop dodging that question too- Name ONE fetus who is a spokesperson/ chairperson or salesperson, as per your dictionary definition.

No fucking way are you going to turn this shit around on ME.

Fuck ME. Jesus Fucking Christ.

 

[JD_2B]

My darling, I was not the one who started quoting bible verses.. But since Jen did set the status quo that the bible was acceptable to quote, it made my own interpretations fair game. Furthermore, I know all about cherry picking, because I used to make all of the same <yawn> arguments y'all have given me, before I knew about and understood the verses and ideologies I have quoted here.

However, I do agree that the debate with you might go farther than the one with Jen. =)

Then get crackin'. I have obliged your every request. I find it odd that you demanded answers of me multiple times and when i do you have nothing to say about it. And I find it just plain rude to demand of others what you seemingly won't do in return

Oh lay off the crackpipe, dude, I JUST ANSWERED IT. I didn't even SEE that this has extended for two pages until a half hour ago, you fucking ninny!!! Do recall that I have MULTIPLE extremists to contend with here, so JUST try to remain calm!!

 

[JD_2B]

My medical dictionary says that the term "conception" is actually used to indicate both. I suspect that if doctors/scientists want to be more specific, they use the terms "fertilization" and "implantation". Otherwise, they're kinda referring to that whole period of time between.

Conception= the beginning of when the "life", as you call it, begins. It is the beginning of the life of the ZEF.

However, Conception =/= the beginning of a pregnancy. Pregnancy begins when the product of conception, the fertilized egg, now a zygote, attaches to the WOMAN's uterus.

Many extremists tend to say that the period between conception and implantation is also the woman's responsibility to uphold, in their own private consideration towards the "sanctity" of the "life" of the (yes, in fact growing and increasing in size) zygote. This is why many extremists are against so called "Abortifacients" such as the Plan B pill, and hormonal birth control, which is not only capable of destroying an unfertilized egg, but also creates an even more than usually unfriendly environment in the uterus, with will generally disallow implantation to take effect.

I can assure you that in most cases, a doctor of obstetrics is surely not going to refer to conception as the moment it implants, as that is not the moment the egg is fertilized.

conception definition - medical
con·cep·tion (k&#601;n-s&#277;p&#712;sh&#601;n)
noun

1. The act of forming a general idea or notion.
2. The formation of a viable zygote by the union of a spermatozoon and an ovum; fertilization.
3. See concept.

Hmmm. Shall I listen to the medical dictionary, or shall I listen to the woman who thinks humans and dogs can interbreed? Oh, the difficult decisions!

Conception definition - Medical Dictionary definitions of popular medical terms easily defined on MedTerms

Conception: 1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization.
2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium.

And in that medical dictionary, they are saying that conception is the ONSET of another condition called a pregnancy, and in the definition (to avoid confusion between nitwits like you) have pregnancy LINKED and simply continue to define PREGNANCY, AS a SEPARATE TERM, EVEN in THAT DICTIONARY.

If you had copied and pasted it, this is what it would look like:
Definition of Conception

Conception Slideshow​

Conception: 1. The union of the sperm and the ovum. Synonymous with fertilization.
2. The onset of pregnancy, marked by implantation of the blastocyst into the endometrium.
3. A basic understanding of a situation or a principle.
From the Latin conceptio, conceptionis meaning conception, becoming pregnant; drawing up of legal formulae; and from the Latin conceptus meaning conceiving, pregnancy; collecting, or a collection.


Furthermore, if conception meant the SAME thing as pregnancy, then how do you explain In vitro fertilization of embryos? Oh I'm sorry- Are ALL of those Embryos a part of the pregnancy, and the "losers" are just waste byproducts????
Exactly.. Because she WILL NOT get pregnant with all 5 blastocysts, they are just the precursor to pregnancy, and in this case, the vast majority of them will not succeed in implanting into her uterus.


The first week of gestation happens PRIOR to the implantation process, and a third of these non-implanting zygotes are unknown to the woman and gent who formed them, even when they have a miscarriage. Some people don't know that they have had a miscarriage, but most women have had them, whether they realize it or not. In fact somewhere in the range of between 2/3 to 3/4 of all miscarriages happen EARLY in the first trimester of pregnancy..

^ a b Rosenthal, M. Sara (1999). "The Second Trimester". The Gynecological Sourcebook. WebMD. Baby's Growth and Development in the Second Trimester of Pregnancy. Retrieved 18 December 2006.

Most clinically apparent miscarriages (two thirds to three-quarters in various studies) occur during the first trimester.

^ Francis O (1959). "An analysis of 1150 cases of abortions from the Government R.S.R.M. Lying-in Hospital, Madras". J Obstet Gynaecol India 10 (1): 62–70. PMID 12336441.

Sooo. Let's review:

Gestation =/= pregnancy.
Pregnancy =/= Entitlement to remain pregnant, much less for the fetus/ embryo to remain in the uterus

SCIENCE and NATURE have proven this over and over and over again. How many times do you need these facts to be repeated to you?

 

[&#9773;proletarian&#9773;]

Surprise, surprise... someone using the bible as justification for killing someone...


Six thousand years of this shit...

 

[&#9773;proletarian&#9773;]

You are trying to claim that ABSTINENCE is a surefire way to avoid getting pregnant. I beg to fucking differ. You have the studies that prove that preaching abstinence does NOT cure people from having sex, and thus, does not cure them from getting pregnant. Can I spell it out any more clearly to you?

abstinence =/= sex

abstinence =/= 'abstinence only education'

not pregnant =/= not getting nailed by the football team

JD =/= Intelligent person


I'm trying to make this as simple as possible for you,JD.

Let's back up. Do you understand what cells, tissues, and organisms are and why Fido can't get you pregnant?

 

[&#9773;proletarian&#9773;]

Sooo. Let's review:

Gestation =/= pregnancy.

Gestation occurs during pregnancy, as well.

S: (n) gestation, gestation period (the period during which an embryo develops (about 266 days in humans))

S: (n) pregnancy, gestation, maternity (the state of being pregnant; the period from conception to birth when a woman carries a developing fetus in her uterus)