Why Can't The So-Called Pro-Life Crowd Be Honest?

[Immanuel]

Those are all things his body is individually able to do or have his mind tell him he needs to do it.

Why aren't early miscarriages in obituaries?

Why don't we have funerals for early miscarriages?

How long are we going to have an enormous pocket of society who pretends early stage pregnancies are the same as a baby when in no other situation in life besides the abortion issue do they hold to that principle?

Is arguing over when life begins really that necessary? I disagree with both you and RDD, but quite truthfully, when life begins means squat. I don't care if the fetus is a human being or a potential human being. Snuffing out its life for convenience purposes is simply wrong... wrong... wrong!

The efforts on the left to dehumanize a fetus are nothing more than excuses for snuffing out a life. They want to justify their stance. Under no circumstances do I believe this attempt is valid on their behalf. There is absolutely no justification for snuffing out a life for convenience sake!

Earlier today I posted in a thread about the CEO of Go Daddy killing an elephant. I stated he should have the balls to admit that he did it for no other reason than sport. The left should have the balls to admit that their efforts to dehumanize the fetus is nothing more than an attempt to justify the snuffing out of a life for the sake of convenience.

Immie

I think I'm going to stop humoring people who can ONLY "debate" by using childish name-calling and grade-school insults. So I'll respond to immie and not to whoever the other ranting person is.

I thought the point of when life began was what the whole stance was about? One believes it happen starts like a few days or a week after conception, the other believes life begins when the fetus can sustain itself. Isn't that why the one side is called "pro-life"? Because they believe life begins earlier than the other side?

My view isn't about "snuffing out life", it's about giving women the choice to have an abortion or not.

I've never had anyone answer why society only views early pregnancies ending as a dying baby in terms of abortion, and no other time. I wish someone would humor me at some point and try answering them.

The way you started that, I thought you were saying I was being childish and name-calling.

No, I disagree with you about what "pro-life" means. To me, and I may be wrong, pro-life means defending the life of the unborn. In the same way as pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion, pro-life does not necessarily mean defending life in all cases such as the death penalty. The terms pro-life and pro-choice have been adopted by both sides to represent views on abortion.

I know those are not your views, but you have picked up that line from the pro-choice movement and that is exactly what they use the "when life begins" discussion for. They use it to justify their stance.

I am not going to humor you in that regards, because it does not matter to my point, but I will say that when my wife miscarried we grieved over it. We did not have a funeral for it, but neither was there a funeral for my father.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

I think I'm going to stop humoring people who can ONLY "debate" by using childish name-calling and grade-school insults. So I'll respond to immie and not to whoever the other ranting person is.

I'v often found that in a debate, Immie is the only wrong person still standing and presenting a reasonable argument.

 

[RDD_1210]

Defining life is what this is about though.

And that is a scientific question. The answer: Human life begins when a living human is created with the fertilization of the ovum.

So are you against masturbation and women having their periods?

Germ cells are not organisms. They are not humans. They are cells from an adult's body.

Biology 101

Your tongue cells are not people, either.

I've never said tongue cells are people. They're not, They are a living organism, nothing more. Just like sperm or a non-viable fetus. A cluster of cells that have yet to develop in to a self-sustaining human being.

We obviously are not going to change the others opinion. Not sure it makes sense to continue this back and forth. Thanks for keeping it relatively civil though.

 

[JBeukema]

Is arguing over when life begins really that necessary?

There is no more room for argument or opinion on when a human life begins than their is over whether Earth is flat and the sun revolves around it. They are simple scientific questions with well-established answers.

Yet more lies...there is no scientific answer to the question when does life begin.

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

 

[JBeukema]

If I shoot random democrats, can I claim in court that you're infringing my right to choose to kill another human being and you should stop trying to legislate you morality?

 

[kaz]

And unless you're me, my accountant or God you should stay the fuck out of my wallet...

Does that include increasing military spending, too?

Unless it's for direct defense of the United States or protection of the American people, then yes. The endless wars we're engaging in are a violation of my rights for many reasons, including forcing me to fund them.

 

[Ravi]

There is no more room for argument or opinion on when a human life begins than their is over whether Earth is flat and the sun revolves around it. They are simple scientific questions with well-established answers.

Yet more lies...there is no scientific answer to the question when does life begin.

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin. You willfully twist things to suit your agenda and just flat out lie.

 

[JBeukema]

Defining life is what this is about though.

And that is a scientific question. The answer: Human life begins when a living human is created with the fertilization of the ovum.

So are you against masturbation and women having their periods?

Germ cells are not organisms. They are not humans. They are cells from an adult's body.

Biology 101

Your tongue cells are not people, either.

I've never said tongue cells are people.

Yes, you did. By claiming germ-line cells are the same as an unborn child. Why would somatic cell lines be any different?

They're not, They are a living organism

No, they're not.

a non-viable fetus

The foetus is a human being. By definition. Biology 101. It is a distinct living organism that it genetically human. Ergo, it is a human.

We obviously are not going to change the others opinion.

There is no room for opinion when it comes to established scientific fact. There is no 'controversy' to be taught here.

 

[JBeukema]

Yet more lies...there is no scientific answer to the question when does life begin.

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin..

Science can tell us when a human organism is created. It can tell us whether it is alive.

'When life beings' = 'When a system first meets the conditions of being both alive and a human'

It is a simple question of biology

 

[Anguille]

Is arguing over when life begins really that necessary? I disagree with both you and RDD, but quite truthfully, when life begins means squat. I don't care if the fetus is a human being or a potential human being. Snuffing out its life for convenience purposes is simply wrong... wrong... wrong!

The efforts on the left to dehumanize a fetus are nothing more than excuses for snuffing out a life. They want to justify their stance. Under no circumstances do I believe this attempt is valid on their behalf. There is absolutely no justification for snuffing out a life for convenience sake!

Earlier today I posted in a thread about the CEO of Go Daddy killing an elephant. I stated he should have the balls to admit that he did it for no other reason than sport. The left should have the balls to admit that their efforts to dehumanize the fetus is nothing more than an attempt to justify the snuffing out of a life for the sake of convenience.

Immie

I think I'm going to stop humoring people who can ONLY "debate" by using childish name-calling and grade-school insults. So I'll respond to immie and not to whoever the other ranting person is.

I thought the point of when life began was what the whole stance was about? One believes it happen starts like a few days or a week after conception, the other believes life begins when the fetus can sustain itself. Isn't that why the one side is called "pro-life"? Because they believe life begins earlier than the other side?

My view isn't about "snuffing out life", it's about giving women the choice to have an abortion or not.

I've never had anyone answer why society only views early pregnancies ending as a dying baby in terms of abortion, and no other time. I wish someone would humor me at some point and try answering them.

The way you started that, I thought you were saying I was being childish and name-calling.

No, I disagree with you about what "pro-life" means. To me, and I may be wrong, pro-life means defending the life of the unborn. In the same way as pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion, pro-life does not necessarily mean defending life in all cases such as the death penalty. The terms pro-life and pro-choice have been adopted by both sides to represent views on abortion.

I know those are not your views, but you have picked up that line from the pro-choice movement and that is exactly what they use the "when life begins" discussion for. They use it to justify their stance.

I am not going to humor you in that regards, because it does not matter to my point, but I will say that when my wife miscarried we grieved over it. We did not have a funeral for it, but neither was there a funeral for my father.

Immie

With all due respect, I am unable to use the term "pro life" for anti abortionists. For the simple reason that I consider myself pro life and my pro choice stance is part of what makes me pro life. I also support the death penalty, I believe it is ethical but not always ethically applied or the best option. My support of life is based on that stance as well.

I think you can only call the choice not to have an abortion pro life when that choice is made freely by the pregnant woman in question. and by her alone. Privately. With out explanation required.

 

[Ravi]

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin..

Science can tell us when a human organism is created. It can tell us whether it is alive.

'When life beings' = 'When a system first meets the conditions of being both alive and a human'

It is a simple question of biology

Still wrong. It can tell us when it isn't alive but it can't tell us when it becomes a living human (noun).

 

[Anguille]

If I shoot random democrats, can I claim in court that you're infringing my right to choose to kill another human being and you should stop trying to legislate you morality?

Take a deep breath, Puke-enema.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Is arguing over when life begins really that necessary? I disagree with both you and RDD, but quite truthfully, when life begins means squat. I don't care if the fetus is a human being or a potential human being. Snuffing out its life for convenience purposes is simply wrong... wrong... wrong!

The efforts on the left to dehumanize a fetus are nothing more than excuses for snuffing out a life. They want to justify their stance. Under no circumstances do I believe this attempt is valid on their behalf. There is absolutely no justification for snuffing out a life for convenience sake!

Earlier today I posted in a thread about the CEO of Go Daddy killing an elephant. I stated he should have the balls to admit that he did it for no other reason than sport. The left should have the balls to admit that their efforts to dehumanize the fetus is nothing more than an attempt to justify the snuffing out of a life for the sake of convenience.

Immie

I think I'm going to stop humoring people who can ONLY "debate" by using childish name-calling and grade-school insults. So I'll respond to immie and not to whoever the other ranting person is.

I thought the point of when life began was what the whole stance was about? One believes it happen starts like a few days or a week after conception, the other believes life begins when the fetus can sustain itself. Isn't that why the one side is called "pro-life"? Because they believe life begins earlier than the other side?

My view isn't about "snuffing out life", it's about giving women the choice to have an abortion or not.

I've never had anyone answer why society only views early pregnancies ending as a dying baby in terms of abortion, and no other time. I wish someone would humor me at some point and try answering them.

The way you started that, I thought you were saying I was being childish and name-calling.

No, I disagree with you about what "pro-life" means. To me, and I may be wrong, pro-life means defending the life of the unborn. In the same way as pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion, pro-life does not necessarily mean defending life in all cases such as the death penalty. The terms pro-life and pro-choice have been adopted by both sides to represent views on abortion.

I know those are not your views, but you have picked up that line from the pro-choice movement and that is exactly what they use the "when life begins" discussion for. They use it to justify their stance.

I am not going to humor you in that regards, because it does not matter to my point, but I will say that when my wife miscarried we grieved over it. We did not have a funeral for it, but neither was there a funeral for my father.

Immie

Immie thanks for your respectful replies, and no I wasn't referring to you in the 1st post. I think you're different than others on this thread and that you don't judge me and view me as your moral inferior because of my view on the subject.

I think we've discussed this before, personally I don't want my view of pro-choice shoved on others. I want it to be a state issue, and if the state chooses a pro-life law i'll be fine with it as it'll show the republic at work, it likely will never become an issue in my life or my future children's lives but if it did I would then react accordingly.

 

[JBeukema]

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin..

Science can tell us when a human organism is created. It can tell us whether it is alive.

'When life beings' = 'When a system first meets the conditions of being both alive and a human'

It is a simple question of biology

Still wrong. It can tell us when it isn't alive but it can't tell us when it becomes a living human (noun).

Yes, it can. Or can science not tell us what species something is now?

The answer science gives us: fertilization. When two germ cells merge, they create a new organism. That organism is human by definition- you could check its DNA and confirm that. It's also obviously human as two humans can only produce human offspring.

Or did she get pregnant by her dog?

(Are you stilling waiting 2b a real jd? )

 

[Spoonman]

The thing is, abortion rates continued to climb and climb for years after they were made legal. There's really no question that more women obtained abortions once they were legalized. I can't think of anyone who disputes it, even though the numbers have always been hinky and malleable, and continue to be today.

And again....what a woman chooses to do with her body is her business and unless you're her, her doctor or God you have no say over it.

PERIOD

.

Not if she's using that body to kill someone.

Period.

thumbs up bro.

 

[Spoonman]

Science can tell us when a human organism is created. It can tell us whether it is alive.

'When life beings' = 'When a system first meets the conditions of being both alive and a human'

It is a simple question of biology

Still wrong. It can tell us when it isn't alive but it can't tell us when it becomes a living human (noun).

Yes, it can. Or can science not tell us what species something is now?

The answer science gives us: fertilization. When two germ cells merge, they create a new organism. That organism is human by definition- you could check its DNA and confirm that. It's also obviously human as two humans can only produce human offspring.

Or did she get pregnant by her dog?

(Are you stilling waiting 2b a real jd? )

WTF? Humans are created by 2 germ cells?

 

[JBeukema]

Still wrong. It can tell us when it isn't alive but it can't tell us when it becomes a living human (noun).

Yes, it can. Or can science not tell us what species something is now?

The answer science gives us: fertilization. When two germ cells merge, they create a new organism. That organism is human by definition- you could check its DNA and confirm that. It's also obviously human as two humans can only produce human offspring.

Or did she get pregnant by her dog?

(Are you stilling waiting 2b a real jd? )

WTF? Humans are created by 2 germ cells?

Germ cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Spoonman]

Yet more lies...there is no scientific answer to the question when does life begin.

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin. You willfully twist things to suit your agenda and just flat out lie.

Scientists are still trying to figure out whether Jbukema is alive

 

[Spoonman]

Yes, it can. Or can science not tell us what species something is now?

The answer science gives us: fertilization. When two germ cells merge, they create a new organism. That organism is human by definition- you could check its DNA and confirm that. It's also obviously human as two humans can only produce human offspring.

Or did she get pregnant by her dog?

(Are you stilling waiting 2b a real jd? )

WTF? Humans are created by 2 germ cells?

Germ cell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks, but that link proves nothing.

 

[Anguille]

Yes, there is. Life begins when a system meets the definition of 'alive'. You know, homeostasis and all that. A human life begins with the creation/emergence of a system that is both alive and human.

No, you are incorrect to claim that there is scientific evidence that answers the question when does human life begin. You willfully twist things to suit your agenda and just flat out lie.

Scientists are still trying to figure out whether Jbukema is alive

Brain dead for sure.