Abortion

Originally posted by Shirley Manson
So, your opinion is that this pre-baby should not be killed because it's growing, living inside a person's body.
What's your opinion about cancer? You think tumors should not be removed from the body? It's just the same. It's living, growing, with no emotions. Who would you give the right to live? It's not the poor, little cancer thingy's fault that, let's say, X's been smoking for ten years. Face the consequences.
I'm not saying that a baby is equal to cancer, only that this embryo is just a couple of cells.

Cancer is not alive you dumbass. Nor will it ever become Sentient. Cancer is a harmful condition which ultamately leads to early death. Being Pregnant is not the same as having Cancer.

But I do agree that a Woman does not have to give birth as "punishment" for having Sex.

It's an absurd argument that most Conservative Youths are trying to push, "She had it coming ! She should have never had sex ! It's her fault ! She should PAY for her crime ! Blah blah blah"

mute point? 😂
[:edit: aww why did you edit that out?]

cancerous cells are indeed alive
(well, in the sense of functional)

Originally posted by Chiki Mina
[quote]This just KILLED all your credibility. You really don't know what you are talking about !

Emotions exist in the brain, not the heart. The Heart having emotions is JUST A MYTH....emotions, thoughts, feelings all exist in the MIND, not the heart. That is FACT, so please quit trying to argue otherwise.
[quote]

*shrugs* meh, Im not arguing. You and I just have different opinions. I do know what I'm talking about and you also know what you're talking about. Theres no use arguing lol. All I can say without a silly argument about religion and emotions etc etc is that I'm against abortion. That's all I have to say.

I am personally against Abortion to. But since I am not a woman, I will never have to deal with it, so I have no right to force a woman to give birth, niether do you.

As long as the Abortion is done early, then there is NO PROBLEM what-so-ever. At the early stages of Fertilization there is NO NERVOUS SYSTEM, so the Foetus CANNOT feel pain ❌

There is no brain, no nerves, no sentience. Just a cluster of cells in the very beginning.....an Abortion done early is immoral in NO WAY whatsoever, because there is NO SUFFERING involved.

Now Partial Birth Abortion is a different story...Thankfully, that has been outlawed.

Originally posted by PVS
mute? 😂

cancerous cells are indeed alive
(well, in the sense of functional)

I changed my argument....

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Just a cluster of cells in the very beginning

as is a tumor. i mean, you can argue it (as i disagree with the parallel as well), but i hardly see grounds to call him a dumbass over it.

Originally posted by PVS
as is a tumor. i mean, you can argue it (as i disagree with the parallel as well), but i hardly see grounds to call him a dumbass over it.

You are probably right. But to compare a Feotus to a Cancer growth is hardly logical. I find it a cop-out for Abortion, and an excuse for justication of it.

What's the need ? You don't have to excuse your favor of choice by equating a Foetus with cancer.

There is nothing wrong with an Abortion done early. Nothing what-so-ever. There is no suffering, no brain, no nervous system...just a removal of a zygote. That is all there is too it. Why do you, or anyone, feel the need to justify Abortion by "sugar coating" it ?

For you to equate a Foetus with a cancer growth is JUST AS INVALID and DESPERATE as equating a Foetus with a full grown Human Being.

*edit* double post

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Why do you, or anyone, feel the need to justify Abortion by "sugar coating" it ?

why dont you learn to read other people's posts before you offer your rightous retort? i wasnt agreeing with him, but rather pointing out that you were wrong. a tumor is a bundle of live cells. simple as that.

why is it such a trend on this forum to put words in people's mouths? is it that difficult to debate without doing so? its cheap and only serves to make you look like a weak minded fool before all your peers.

:edit: FFS my reply was only a sentence long. you really dont belong in a debate if you cant take that in and process it 😖

Originally posted by PVS
as is a tumor. i mean, you can argue it (as i disagree with the parallel as well) , but i hardly see grounds to call him a dumbass over it.

Originally posted by PVS
why dont you learn to read other people's posts before you offer your rightous

Pfft..... B*tch, don't get me started. I aint here to preach.

Originally posted by PVS
retort? i wasnt agreeing with him, but rather pointing out that you were wrong. a tumor is a bundle of live cells. simple as that.

I wasn't talking about YOU....I said "you" in general.

Originally posted by PVS
why is it such a trend on this forum to put words in people's mouths? is it that difficult to debate without doing so?

I like to put other things in people's mouths. droolio

Originally posted by PVS
its cheap and only serves to make you look like a weak minded fool before all your peers.

I think I already gave that impression long ago..... 😮

Originally posted by PVS
FFS my reply was only a sentence long. you really dont belong in a debate if you cant take that in and process it 😖

Again...I was not talking about YOU...I meant "you" as a general pronoun. I meant you as in "you all" .

you're just lying to backpeddle after being called out for not having the attention span to read a 2-line post. and oh that gay joke just roffled my waffle [/sarcasm]

Originally posted by PVS
you're just lying to backpeddle after being called out for not having the attention span to read a 2-line post. and oh that gay joke just roffled my waffle [/sarcasm]

Again....you feel the need to lie to yourself to appear correct. I will let it slide....in....droolio

My next Gay Joke will Ripple your Nipple ! 😱

LOL

Originally posted by .😖pace Opera:.
when did i ever say that i was a virgin?

anyways, the definition between intercourse and

SEXUAL intercourse are a little different.

sexual intercourse?
genital contact, esp. the insertion of the penis into the vagina followed by orgasm; coitus; copulation.
[Origin: 1790–1800

no, homosexuals cannot experience that.

I could be thinking of someone else, but I an 99.9% sure you have said that you abstain from sex (until marriage) and you promote masturbation as a viable alternative. So, am I wrong and you are indeed NOT a virgin?

Dude, I copy and pasted the definition of 'intercourse' from Websters-Merridian and supplied the link so no one could say I was making shit up. And, as Alliance pointed out, your own post defines sexual intercourse as
"genital contact".

If a man inserts his penis into a woman's anus or mouth, that is not sexual intercourse (a.k.a Sex)?

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Cancer is not alive you dumbass. Nor will it ever become Sentient. Cancer is a harmful condition which ultamately leads to early death. Being Pregnant is not the same as having Cancer.

But I do agree that a Woman does not have to give birth as "punishment" for having Sex.

It's an absurd argument that most Conservative Youths are trying to push, "She had it coming ! She should have never had sex ! It's her fault ! She should PAY for her crime ! Blah blah blah"

Don't call me a dumbass, I know what I'm talking about, I'm not like that "emotions come from the heart" girl, I never talk about things I don't know about. Yes, I know that cancer is an uncontrolled, abnormal growth of cells. And it's also alive, or else, it wouldn't be able to grow.
I said cancer IS NOT equal to a baby, I only said that, in the very beginning, both are just a bunch of cells. The conclusion is that no one, under any circumstances, can tell me what to do with my body, not even God.

Originally posted by Shirley Manson
The conclusion is that no one, under any circumstances, can tell me what to do with my body, not even God.

Actually the law tells you that you must wear a seat belt on it, that you cannot put a certain level of alcohol in it and drive (nor a certain higher level in it and run the streets), that you cannot use it to harm another person, and that you may not display it nude, nor use it for sex with another person in public.

Just a little tip too, :

God don't like ugly.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Actually the law tells you that you must wear a seat belt on it, that you cannot put a certain level of alcohol in it and drive (nor a certain higher level in it and run the streets), that you cannot use it to harm another person, and that you may not display it nude, nor use it for sex with another person in public.

Just a little tip too, :

God don't like ugly.

1. Driving is not a right, it’s a privilege.
2. Drinking and driving same as above
3. Yes you can to defend oneself or in the defense of another.
4. You can display it nude but not in public places but in certain places.
5. Same as 4

Alright, that was funny...

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Actually the law tells you that you must wear a seat belt on it, that you cannot put a certain level of alcohol in it and drive (nor a certain higher level in it and run the streets), that you cannot use it to harm another person, and that you may not display it nude, nor use it for sex with another person in public.

Just a little tip too, :

God don't like ugly.

1. Been in cars and have not worn a seat belt. Nothing happens except a $60 fine anyway, if youre stupid enough to get caught.

2. If you're stupid enough to drive drunk you deserve to get pulled over and/or die.

3. People assault other people all the time and nothing happens. Especially in high school.

4. I've seen more nude people than you'd care to hear about.

5. There used to be a contest on a radio station to see how many couples could have the most sex in public places. Amazingly, noone was ever arrested. Surprising how much leniency the law actually gives you.

God must not like you then.

Originally posted by Mr. Sandman
4. I've seen more nude people than you'd care to hear about.

😛