Why Can't the Pro-Choice Crowd Be Honest?

[Zoom-boing]

Zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, baby, toddler, child, teen, adult.

ALL are stages of human development. One stage isn't more human or less human than another stage. The stage of development isn't what makes them human; the FACT that humans beget humans does. How fucking hard is this to understand?

The pro-choice side goes to great lengths to insist that "it's not really a human just yet". Give it a rest. If you're going to claim 'choice' as your argument at least have the balls to admit that your 'choice' (which includes abortion and yeah, that makes you pro-abortion no matter how much you cry that it doesn't) ends the life of another human being. It doesn't end a blob of tissue or some other nonsense, it stops a beating human heart, it ends an individual human life. Stop dancing around that fact. Too bad you don't like it, too bad you find it distasteful. Coming up with bullshit arguments (acorns and fetuses? really??) are nothing more than your way of rationalizing/justifying the killing of a human being. For crying out loud at least own up to what abortion does.

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

What part of "different stages of human development" did you miss?

Where did 'penalty' come into this?

Yes, abortion destroys/kills/ends an individual human being just as shooting a grown person does.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Now, now, we all know that in the beginning stages of pregnancy women aren't pregnant with HUMAN babies. They just have little tumors growing in them until at some point they decide they want to turn it into a baby! Then and only then does that little mass of tissue magically become a human! It's a miracle! The miracle of carefully engineered and suitably unimportant life!

Oh, thought they were lima beans or some other plant . . . you know, since they always like to bring up the whole acorn thing.

My mom did tell me once when I was a kid that if you swallowed watermelon seeds, a watermelon would grow in your stomach, but I thought she was joking.

Chuckie on Rugrats thought the same thing. lol

 

[JBeukema]

I remember that show


I liked that show

 

[Zoom-boing]

An embryo is a human being in the very earliest stages of development.

Wouldn't that actually be a zygote?

ALL are stages of a human being in development.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, baby, toddler, child, teen, adult.

ALL are stages of human development. One stage isn't more human or less human than another stage. The stage of development isn't what makes them human; the FACT that humans beget humans does. How fucking hard is this to understand?

The pro-choice side goes to great lengths to insist that "it's not really a human just yet". Give it a rest. If you're going to claim 'choice' as your argument at least have the balls to admit that your 'choice' (which includes abortion and yeah, that makes you pro-abortion no matter how much you cry that it doesn't) ends the life of another human being. It doesn't end a blob of tissue or some other nonsense, it stops a beating human heart, it ends an individual human life. Stop dancing around that fact. Too bad you don't like it, too bad you find it distasteful. Coming up with bullshit arguments (acorns and fetuses? really??) are nothing more than your way of rationalizing/justifying the killing of a human being. For crying out loud at least own up to what abortion does.

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

How old were you when killing you went from being an okay thing to a not-okay thing and why did it suddenly become wrong to kill you?

I don't remember what the abortion laws were in my state when I was born, or thereabouts.

How can you be pro-choice if you personally believe it's murder?

 

[Cecilie1200]

My understanding is that JB is pro-choice, but doesn't feel the need to lie and pretend basic biology is something that it isn't in order to facilitate being pro-choice. I'm not entirely sure how he DOES justify abortion under those circumstances, though.

Beukema is equating an embryo to a person with the fallacious argument that they are both named 'human' therefore they must be equivalent in every aspect of humanness.

It's a common mistake.

'Humanness'? You mean the condition of being human? Humans have human offspring. This is basic biology. The child is human from creation and remains human until death. there is no sliding scale of human-ness that you progress across as you age.

Since "humanness" isn't even a word, I think he might have been going for "humanity", and in fact, all humans ARE equivalent in every aspect of humanity.

If NY wants to say that he thinks some humans should be considered less important, less valuable, and therefore disposable, he should just have the cojones to say it, already.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, baby, toddler, child, teen, adult.

ALL are stages of human development. One stage isn't more human or less human than another stage. The stage of development isn't what makes them human; the FACT that humans beget humans does. How fucking hard is this to understand?

The pro-choice side goes to great lengths to insist that "it's not really a human just yet". Give it a rest. If you're going to claim 'choice' as your argument at least have the balls to admit that your 'choice' (which includes abortion and yeah, that makes you pro-abortion no matter how much you cry that it doesn't) ends the life of another human being. It doesn't end a blob of tissue or some other nonsense, it stops a beating human heart, it ends an individual human life. Stop dancing around that fact. Too bad you don't like it, too bad you find it distasteful. Coming up with bullshit arguments (acorns and fetuses? really??) are nothing more than your way of rationalizing/justifying the killing of a human being. For crying out loud at least own up to what abortion does.

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

What part of "different stages of human development" did you miss?

Where did 'penalty' come into this?

Yes, abortion destroys/kills/ends an individual human being just as shooting a grown person does.

So you're another extremist. Wow, someone must have sent up a bat signal.

 

[JBeukema]

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

How old were you when killing you went from being an okay thing to a not-okay thing and why did it suddenly become wrong to kill you?

I don't remember what the abortion laws were in my state when I was born, or thereabouts.

Did I ask what the law was? I don't give a damn what the law says. Slavery and spousal rape were always wrong, even when they were legal.

You have claimed time and again that somewhere during the human lifespan, killing another person in cold blood goes from being an okay thing to a not okay thing. You want to kill unborn babies but object to me shooting you in the face today. What is the magical transformation that made it no longer okay to kill you and when did it take place?

 

[JBeukema]

Beukema is equating an embryo to a person with the fallacious argument that they are both named 'human' therefore they must be equivalent in every aspect of humanness.

It's a common mistake.

'Humanness'? You mean the condition of being human? Humans have human offspring. This is basic biology. The child is human from creation and remains human until death. there is no sliding scale of human-ness that you progress across as you age.

Since "humanness" isn't even a word, I think he might have been going for "humanity", and in fact, all humans ARE equivalent in every aspect of humanity.

If NY wants to say that he thinks some humans should be considered less important, less valuable, and therefore disposable, he should just have the cojones to say it, already.

I wonder who founded Planned Parenthood and whether they might have thought something like that...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, baby, toddler, child, teen, adult.

ALL are stages of human development. One stage isn't more human or less human than another stage. The stage of development isn't what makes them human; the FACT that humans beget humans does. How fucking hard is this to understand?

The pro-choice side goes to great lengths to insist that "it's not really a human just yet". Give it a rest. If you're going to claim 'choice' as your argument at least have the balls to admit that your 'choice' (which includes abortion and yeah, that makes you pro-abortion no matter how much you cry that it doesn't) ends the life of another human being. It doesn't end a blob of tissue or some other nonsense, it stops a beating human heart, it ends an individual human life. Stop dancing around that fact. Too bad you don't like it, too bad you find it distasteful. Coming up with bullshit arguments (acorns and fetuses? really??) are nothing more than your way of rationalizing/justifying the killing of a human being. For crying out loud at least own up to what abortion does.

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

How old were you when killing you went from being an okay thing to a not-okay thing and why did it suddenly become wrong to kill you?

I don't recall you ever refusing to acknowledge the difference between an embryo and yourself, aka that you're an adult and he's not.

Again, if NY wants to say that some humans should be considered a disposable underclass, then he should just say it and stop all this pussified rationalization.

 

[Zoom-boing]

You refuse to acknowledge any difference between a fertilized human egg a few hours old, and yourself,

then do you also, in the interests of intellectual consistency,

believe that the penalty for killing you should be, all else being equal, essentially the same as the killing of that fertilized egg?

What part of "different stages of human development" did you miss?

Where did 'penalty' come into this?

Yes, abortion destroys/kills/ends an individual human being just as shooting a grown person does.

So you're another extremist. Wow, someone must have sent up a bat signal.

Wow another pro-choice coward who has to justify their pov by referring to an unborn human as 'not-quite-human-yet'.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What part of "different stages of human development" did you miss?

Where did 'penalty' come into this?

Yes, abortion destroys/kills/ends an individual human being just as shooting a grown person does.

So you're another extremist. Wow, someone must have sent up a bat signal.

Wow another pro-choice coward who has to justify their pov by referring to an unborn human as 'not-quite-human-yet'.

You didn't actually show the courage to answer my question. What penalty do we impose on women having 1st trimester abortions, including the use of something like RU486, once you have outlawed abortion according to your principles?

 

[Zoom-boing]

So you're another extremist. Wow, someone must have sent up a bat signal.

Wow another pro-choice coward who has to justify their pov by referring to an unborn human as 'not-quite-human-yet'.

You didn't actually show the courage to answer my question. What penalty do we impose on women having 1st trimester abortions, including the use of something like RU486, once you have outlawed abortion according to your principles?

Where did I ever say abortion will be outlawed? You're putting words in my mouth that I never spoke then expect me to answer a question based upon that? Please.

Why can't any of you pro-choice types admit that abortion ends/destroys/kills another human being? Why must you hide behind blobs of tissue, viability and the like?

Why haven't you answered JB's questions?

Here, try answering this:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/161946-one-question.html

or this:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/161947-simple-question.html

 

[Vast LWC]

If one's position is defensible, shouldn't you be able to defend it with logical, cogent, well-thought-out arguments? Shouldn't you be able to discuss the matter in an honest and intelligent manner?

A blastocyst/foetus/etc is an organism. It is alive and it is genetically human.* These are verifiable, objective, demonstrable scientific facts. It is all a matter of basic biology.

Therefore, the child is be definition a living human organism. We are, therefore, dealing with a human life. To 'abort' a pregnancy is to bring about the end of those physiological and biological processes that identify this human organism as alive- it is to bring about the child's death.

It is therefore a scientific fact that when we speak of abortion, we speak of ending human life. As we are also humans, we are therefore dealing with a case of homicide- homicide is defined as the killing of a human being by another human being.

If your position is defensible- if the ending of this life is a defensible ac- then you should be able to demonstrate why this is justifiable or acceptable without denying the facts of what it is you support. When pretend that we're not dealing with a living human being, you reveal that one or both of the following is true:
-You do not know what it is you advocate; you are guided purely by your emotion and your programming. You should shut your fucking mouth and not speak about things you do not understand

-You know your position is indefensible; you must lie about what it is you advocate because you cannot honestly defend your position

*Yes, I know a foetus can die in utero without the woman's body expelling it [see: stone foetus] and that humans aren't the only species to experience pregnancy. Given the context, such things should go unsaid. Let us exercise a little critical thinking here.

ROFL, the title of the thread calls out for "honesty", the first paragraph contains the following sentence: "Shouldn't you be able to discuss the matter in an honest and intelligent manner?"...

...and then you go on to accuse anyone who has an abortion of murder, and say that anyone who disagrees with your point should "Shut their fucking mouth".

Well done sir, well done.

 

[JBeukema]

...and then you go on to accuse anyone who has an abortion of murder,

Do cite. I've never called anyone here a murderer for having an abortion. Some of them do seem to believe themselves to be murderers, though, judging by their inability to admit what they've done and defend what it is they advocate.

If it's not murder, if their positions can be justified, why can't they face what they've done?

 

[NYcarbineer]

...and then you go on to accuse anyone who has an abortion of murder,

Do cite. I've never called anyone here a murderer for having an abortion. Some of them do seem to believe themselves to be murderers, though, judging by their inability to admit what they've done and defend what it is they advocate.

If it's not murder, if their positions can be justified, why can't they face what they've done?

You wouldn't call someone who killed their 2 year old child a murderer?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Beukema is equating an embryo to a person with the fallacious argument that they are both named 'human' therefore they must be equivalent in every aspect of humanness.

It's a common mistake.

'Humanness'? You mean the condition of being human? Humans have human offspring. This is basic biology. The child is human from creation and remains human until death. there is no sliding scale of human-ness that you progress across as you age.

Since "humanness" isn't even a word, I think he might have been going for "humanity", and in fact, all humans ARE equivalent in every aspect of humanity.

If NY wants to say that he thinks some humans should be considered less important, less valuable, and therefore disposable, he should just have the cojones to say it, already.

Humanness - Definition of Humanness by Webster's Online Dictionary

At least your ignorance of the English language is consistent with the rest of your idiocy, you sorry cow.

Now fuck off.

 

[JBeukema]

...and then you go on to accuse anyone who has an abortion of murder,

Do cite. I've never called anyone here a murderer for having an abortion. Some of them do seem to believe themselves to be murderers, though, judging by their inability to admit what they've done and defend what it is they advocate.

If it's not murder, if their positions can be justified, why can't they face what they've done?

You wouldn't call someone who killed their 2 year old child a murderer?

You tell me. Is it murder?

Or is that not old enough for it to be wrong?

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, that's a question of biology that was settled a long time ago. Why can't you people ever be honest?


There is not room for opinion. You can't just decide that the earth is flat- it's round whether you like it or not.

You need to understand what is deemed as living tissue in terms of biology.

Blood cells are human, and they are living tissue, they do not have "life"
Skin cells are human, they are living tissue, they do not have "life"
Muscle cells are human, they are living tissue, they do not have "life"

The same applies to zygotes and embryos. They are living tissue and they do not have "life"

No, YOU need to understand the difference between "tissue" and "organisms". Blood, skin, and muscle cells are not organisms. They're JUST cells, parts of an organism. A zygote/embryo, on the other hand, IS an organism. I can't decide if you've just been avoiding reading the multiple, myriad explanations of this very simple biological concept, or if you're just pretending you haven't out of dishonesty.

What do you believe the penalty for illegal abortion should be? What should the woman suffer as a penalty?

I'm assuming you desire all abortion to be illegal.

 

[Vast LWC]

...and then you go on to accuse anyone who has an abortion of murder,

Do cite. I've never called anyone here a murderer for having an abortion. Some of them do seem to believe themselves to be murderers, though, judging by their inability to admit what they've done and defend what it is they advocate.

If it's not murder, if their positions can be justified, why can't they face what they've done?

How about this:

To 'abort' a pregnancy is to bring about the end of those physiological and biological processes that identify this human organism as alive- it is to bring about the child's death.

Sound familiar?

A Rose by any other name...