Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Abortion is the killing a human life. When will you learn to accept that? Or better yet, when will you comprise of an argument that actually devalidates that fact?
You are aware, of course, that there is no human life at conception, correct?
This is a fact, by the way. Medically, scientifically, factually.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not inevitable, it can be stopped. You are still proving that a foetus has to become one, so it can't BE one.-AC
Just about anything can be stopped, carnal. A foetus should be considered a baby, porque it will eventually become one.
Many expectant couples have already named their 'bun in the oven' and have developed deep sentimental attachments to them. I did, with all three of my sons.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Dead is a state of no longer living. It has nothing to do with identity or organism classification.A Feotus is an unborn child which becomes more and more baby like as the time passes. It is human. A Human Being? No... a human being involves an ego, full sentience, and some range of intelligence.
Being Human, however, does not. As long as you are of the SPECIES of human, then you are one. A Feotus falls right under that, as does a human courpse.
Dead or alive...a human is still human. Born or unborn, a human is still human.
Shall I ask who the **** you are to decide this? 'It's not a human being... but it's still human.' Is this the basis of your argument? You failed to define to me what human is. And until you do, you'll be doing nothing but wasting space on this thread by trying to pass off personal opinions as fact.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Abortion is the killing a human life. When will you learn to accept that? Or better yet, when will you comprise of an argument that actually devalidates that fact?
I think that we've all learned, accepted, and established the fact that abortion is the killing of something, but what? A foetus of course, but is it the killing of a human? This is a question that leaves several conclusions, none of which we can prove is correct.
So, Skipy... would you like to continue to throw your propaganda around, or accept the fact that this topic will ultimately come to endless conclusions?
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Just about anything can be stopped, carnal. A foetus should be considered a baby, porque it will eventually become one.Many expectant couples have already named their 'bun in the oven' and have developed deep sentimental attachments to them. I did, with all three of my sons.
its natural to develope an attachment for what will eventually be, but the fact is
its still an unthinking and unfeeling fetus. parents' personification of a fetus
doesnt change that.
its healthy in that it helps to strengthen family bond for mom/dad/siblings/etc,
but for the fetus, on its own, it means nothing.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Just about anything can be stopped, carnal. A foetus should be considered a baby, porque it will eventually become one.Many expectant couples have already named their 'bun in the oven' and have developed deep sentimental attachments to them. I did, with all three of my sons.
I thought you said you dealt with what is? Well then realise that it is NOT a baby. It's a foetus.
So? You having attachments to foetuses doesn't change the fact that they are foetuses, not babies. You can't single handedly change science because you liked them.
You may want it to be considered a baby, but that would be factually incorrect. It's a foetus on its way to becoming a baby, and if it's on its way to becoming one, it can't already be one. IE: It's not yet a baby because it has to become one.
-AC
Originally posted by Phoenix2001
Shall I ask who the **** you are to decide this? 'It's not a human being... but it's still human.' Is this the basis of your argument? You failed to define to me what human is. And until you do, you'll be doing nothing but wasting space on this thread by trying to pass off personal opinions as fact.
How slow is this dude?
Can you not read? If you are of the human species, than you are human. If you are concieved from two human beings, you are human. A Foetus is human...not a human being..but human nonetheless.
You have no facts to prove that the Foetus is not human, all you can do is prove that it is not a human being...and that is not the argument. There is no propaganda, so get over it sonny. 😉
It is human life..it's not a chicken, it's not a bacteria, it's not a bird, or a plane, or a tree, or a fungus. It's human. And it's not a partial human, or a part of a human. It is a human itself.
How blind can you be?
Originally posted by Phoenix2001
I think that we've all learned, accepted, and established the fact that abortion is the killing of something, but what? A foetus of course, but is it the killing of a human? This is a question that leaves several conclusions, none of which we can prove is correct.So, Skipy... would you like to continue to throw your propaganda around, or accept the fact that this topic will ultimately come to endless conclusions?
This topic, like many on the forums, will never be ""solved". That's a given. People will have thier opinions, no matter what kind of fact you throw on the table. The point is to absorb as much info as possible, and to share your ideas with others on the matter.
Again, no propaganda intended. You cannot deny that the foetus is human. To excuse the Foetus as non-human is the most rediculous fkn argument I heard from anyone on these forums.
Originally posted by Alliance
Thats you. Not everyone feels the same way. Some people realize it is just a clump of cells.
And some realize that playing music to a fetus, or cooing and talking to it produce reactions, like kicking or moving around.
It responds to stimuli, but is not a sentient being?
hmmm......
My b.s. sense is tingling.
Originally posted by sithsaber408
And some realize that playing music to a fetus, or cooing and talking to it produce reactions, like kicking or moving around.It responds to stimuli, but is not a sentient being?
hmmm......
My b.s. sense is tingling.
sithsaber40 those people have convinced themselves of a lie. 😉
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
How slow is this dude?Can you not read? If you are of the human species, than you are human. If you are conceived from two human beings, you are human. A Foetus is human...not a human being..but human nonetheless.
It is apparent that you are the slow one. You are using the term 'human' as if it should apply to everything that is human-like. Apes have human-like characteristics, so why don't we call them humans? If I was conceived from a human and a chimp, what would I be called then? It's much harder to label something human than you think it is. If a human foetus is human then so is human sperm. Considering the fact that you do not agree that neither sperm cells or egg cells can account for being human, you contradict yourself using this logic.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
You have no facts to prove that the Foetus is not human, all you can do is prove that it is not a human being...and that is not the argument. There is no propaganda, so get over it sonny. 😉
I never said I had any facts to prove that the foetus is not human. You're asking other readers as to why it is difficult to grasp your logic, and calling some of us idiots, particularly me, when we challenge it. I'm not sure about you, but that sounds an awful like propaganda to me.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
It is human life..it's not a chicken, it's not a bacteria, it's not a bird, or a plane, or a tree, or a fungus. It's human. And it's not a partial human, or a part of a human. It is a human itself.
Wtf? No one is claiming it to be any of these things you have listed here. You have stated it was human, not a human being, just human. What does 'human' mean to you? What makes it 'human'? Your answer was that it is human because it was conceived from two human beings. If humans are to evolve into bigger, hairier, more robust creatures in a million years time, would you still consider a foetus growing in an evolved females womb to be human?
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
This topic, like many on the forums, will never be ""solved". That's a given. People will have thier opinions, no matter what kind of fact you throw on the table. The point is to absorb as much info as possible, and to share your ideas with others on the matter.
So, by continually repeating your points over and over again and calling someone a dumbass for not agreeing with those points is educating someone? Sounds strange to me...
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Again, no propaganda intended. You cannot deny that the foetus is human. To excuse the Foetus as non-human is the most rediculous fkn argument I heard from anyone on these forums.
Oh, I can deny the foetus for being human. You must really be fooling yourself if you don't think calling a foetus a human is just as ridiculous as saying that it is not human.
Originally posted by Lord Urizen
How slow is this dude?Can you not read? If you are of the human species, than you are human. If you are concieved from two human beings, you are human. A Foetus is human...not a human being..but human nonetheless.
You have no facts to prove that the Foetus is not human, all you can do is prove that it is not a human being...and that is not the argument. There is no propaganda, so get over it sonny. 😉
It is human life..it's not a chicken, it's not a bacteria, it's not a bird, or a plane, or a tree, or a fungus. It's human. And it's not a partial human, or a part of a human. It is a human itself.
How blind can you be
This topic, like many on the forums, will never be ""solved". That's a given. People will have thier opinions, no matter what kind of fact you throw on the table. The point is to absorb as much info as possible, and to share your ideas with others on the matter.
Again, no propaganda intended. You cannot deny that the foetus is human. To excuse the Foetus as non-human is the most rediculous fkn argument I heard from anyone on these forums.
Stop dodging my post.
You realise and accept that there is factual, scientific and resultantly undeniable proof that there is no human life at conception, correct? You must, you have to. It being created by humans doesn't make it human, it will be a human being if left. It's just created by a human, no more or less. You seem to be of the rationale that it has to be something, so might as well label it as that which suits you.
You don't have that right. Even when it stops being non-human zygote and becomes a foetus, it's a human foetus, not a human being. Even then it's only being attached to the word human as a result of the species creating it, which is why most doctors and scientists just call it a foetus, not a human anything. There is a difference. A human foetus does not have a human life, at all, by any stretch. You have a human life, I have a human life, a foetus doesn't have that. If left and allowed to be born, yes, otherwise no. There is no human "life" until birth, it's that simple. There's "life" on Mars, but would you go there expecting sentient beings and shopping malls? I hope not.
You are, as many have, misusing and abusing the word "life". Sithsaber and Whob have both tried tirelessly to debate me and others on this and failed miserably, so why you continue is a bit strange.
-AC
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
sithsaber408 those people have convinced themselves of a lie. 😉
Which group?
Those who connect with the fetus and get a response, or those who say that they are not sentient beings?
Seriously, it wasn't clear the way you posted it. 🙂
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You are, as many have, misusing and abusing the word "life". Sithsaber and Whob have both tried tirelessly to debate me and others on this and failed miserably, so why you continue is a bit strange.-AC
I never "failed miserably" in any debate with you.
We came to a stand-still due to semantics.
We both have different defintions of "life", "human", and "murder".
As last I recalled, you had compared a human fetus to a bus "on the road" to a store, meaning that although it was on its way, it was not at the store yet(i.e., not yet human life worth protecting), and I said that just becuase it was on its way, was not a justification to "blow it off the road", we both had a good chuckle, and that was it.
Refresh my memory, because other than a "good riddance" when I made my now seemingly-futile attempt at a final post when I had said my peace, you didn't win some great victory in any debate.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
A human foetus does not have a human life, at all, by any stretch. You have a human life, I have a human life, a foetus doesn't have that. If left and allowed to be born, yes, otherwise no. There is no human "life" until birth, it's that simple. There's "life" on Mars, but would you go there expecting sentient beings and shopping malls? I hope not.-AC
Especially using garbage logic such as this.
Killing a human baby is a crime, specifically murder. (technically infantcide, but you get the point.)
Killing a human fetus that is 1 week from birth is no different. (you are smart enough to know that the uterus is not some "yellow brick road" that magically transforms a fetus to a human being at birth, rather it is a simple tunnel that brings the baby from the womb to here. Its a transportation device, nothing more.)
The baby is just as much a sentient human being with a right to live as is a fetus 1 week from birth.
Or one month from birth.
And comparing it to a dog, a dead body, a human heart, skin/hair/nail cells is all irrelevant bullshit since it is a human life in development, and none of the above that we are talking about.
Add to that the new scientific advances in liquid ventalation (see seperate thread http://www.killermovies.com/forums/f11/t412420.html ) that allow babies born as young as 5 months old to develop outside the womb and grow into 100% normal, happy, fully-functioning little girls that run animal rescue websites.....
And your logic for pre-meditated killing of humans based on age and residence is growing thin indeed.
🤘