Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
So you DO believe that the fetus, albeit underdeveloped, is a potential human life?
Where have I denied that? I have only ever denied that it's a FUTURE anything, not a POTENTIAL something. Eggs are a potential omelette, not a future one, because I might not use them. Do you even read the thread?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
And if her "punishment" causes a really shitty life for the baby, what then? Because you do realise that she might not even give it up for adoption if forced to keep it, she might try herself and fail. Two lives ruined, your solution to that is what?-AC
Wait, wait, wait! I thought you said "Stop your fearmongering premonitions on the future!!! Its all in your head and your're making shit up!" Unquote...
I think you just made a MAJOR assumption about the future. And its one of those things with prerequisites A,B, and C, which you deem is impossible to happen, right? Why do you care anyways, its not YOUR life! Apathy, remember?
This is BS to think the kid will have a bad life. Millions of kids who are born have bad lives for a time (low and behold, some of them actually get out of it and have a GOOD life) -are the parents allowed to look into their future, decide whether it is good or not and therefore judge a child's life worthy of living? Is that what abortion is: euthanasia? A mercy killing? This is exactly why abortion must be ended -to deter further thought along these very lines.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Wait, wait, wait! I thought you said "Stop your fearmongering premonitions on the future!!! Its all in your head and your're making shit up!" Unquote...I think you just made a MAJOR assumption about the future. And its one of those things with prerequisites A,B, and C, which you deem is impossible to happen, right? Why do you care anyways, its not YOUR life! Apathy, remember?
Pardon? Where did I say that's a definite outcome? I said it's a possible option, as possible as her choosing to raise it and being fine with it.
I simply asked his opinion on THAT possibility, but so close! So close.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
This is BS to think the kid will have a bad life. Millions of kids who are born have bad lives for a time (low and behold, some of them actually get out of it and have a GOOD life) -are the parents allowed to look into their future, decide whether it is good or not and therefore judge a child's life worthy of living? Is that what abortion is: euthanasia? A mercy killing? This is exactly why abortion must be ended -to deter further thought along these very lines.
You're asking me if I think that's what abortion is, assuming that, then giving me an answer. It doesn't work that way.
I don't care what the reason for abortion is, ultimately. Some I think are lame, but it's not anything to do with the foetus, and it's not anything to do with me.
It's not a child definitely. You think cells are children? No, you don't do you? Oh, "Future". Yeah, I forget. Sorry, I don't have the ability to time travel and live in the future.
-AC
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
there are, but in this case violence is the best one.
Violence against who? Nothing you can do with violence ever makes a difference, that is clear from the Iraq war, that is clear from any number of killings. In the end, the person just looks like an idiot and the entire cause is lost or looked bad upon.
I dont know who you are really, and i bet you're a good perosn, but I know how tragedy starts so dont do something stupid. 😎
Someday there will be another way to teach the world what it needs to learn. Not only will I tell you this, I will promise it. Ask no more.
It's like watching Sidious and Vader, and that other one nobody really cared about.
Can you at least do something? In 10 years, if we're still around, come here and show us how much you've changed the world? That's a civil request from me to you. I'll give you my email address so you can call in when you've achieved the goal.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Pardon? Where did I say that's a definite outcome? I said it's a possible option, as possible as her choosing to raise it and being fine with it.I simply asked his opinion on THAT possibility, but so close! So close.
Where did I hear this earlier as well? I remember!: "You can't make judgements off of possible outcomes!" And yet you turn around and make a judgement.
You're asking me if I think that's what abortion is, assuming that, then giving me an answer. It doesn't work that way.
Care to tell me how it does work then?
I don't care what the reason for abortion is, ultimately. Some I think are lame, but it's not anything to do with the foetus, and it's not anything to do with me.
So you really dont care, yes, you've made that clear already.
It's not a child definitely. You think cells are children? No, you don't do you? Oh, "Future". Yeah, I forget. Sorry, I don't have the ability to time travel and live in the future.-AC
And yet you just made a prediction above about how a child's life would be if it were not aborted?
Your failure to even acknowledge the existance of a future is what disturbs me most. A person is still the same person from his death all the way back to his conception. Nature would not have changed that, and neither should we have the right to interfere.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's like watching Sidious and Vader, and that other one nobody really cared about.Can you at least do something? In 10 years, if we're still around, come here and show us how much you've changed the world? That's a civil request from me to you. I'll give you my email address so you can call in when you've achieved the goal.
-AC
There'll be no need for an email. You'll know.
o.O Wow I've definitely missed a lot....
I think we've pretty much covered that some see abortion as murder, which we all know is wrong. And we've also established that men should NOT comment on child labor. I may sound like I'm changing opinions but, how much different is a dumpster baby than a baby never born?
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Where did I hear this earlier as well? I remember!: "You can't make judgements off of possible outcomes!" And yet you turn around and make a judgement.
There's only a few possible outcomes of keeping a child. You were talking about a future world society crippled by abortion.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Care to tell me how it does work then?
By not making up scenarios.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
So you really dont care, yes, you've made that clear already.
Then why ask?
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
And yet you just made a prediction above about how a child's life would be if it were not aborted?
No, I asked one man his opinion on ONE possible outcome. Not suggesting it's any more likely than any other.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Your failure to even acknowledge the existance of a future is what disturbs me most. A person is still the same person from his death all the way back to his conception. Nature would not have changed that, and neither should we have the right to interfere.
I acknowledge what it is; a concept.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
There'll be no need for an email. You'll know.
Dream big.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriI read the thread. If its a potential human life, then it is a future something. If it reaches childbirth, it has achieved its future as a newborn infant. your logic is....well, its not really anything, because it does not exist.
Where have I denied that? I have only ever denied that it's a FUTURE anything, not a POTENTIAL something. Eggs are a potential omelette, not a future one, because I might not use them. Do you even read the thread?-AC
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I read the thread. If its a potential human life, then it is a future something. If it reaches childbirth, it has achieved its future as a newborn infant. your logic is....well, its not really anything, because it does not exist.
False, entirely.
Potential means something or someone possessing the possible ability to become more than it is/they are.
From the English dictionary:
po·ten·tial
Adj;
1. possible, as opposed to actual: the potential uses of nuclear energy.
2. capable of being or becoming: a potential danger to safety.
3. Grammar. expressing possibility: the potential subjunctive in Latin; the potential use of can in I can go.
Noun;
4 possibility; potentiality: an investment that has little growth potential.
6. a latent excellence or ability that may or may not be developed.
E.g: Potential boyfriend/girlfriend, potential omelette, potential husband/wife, potential career.
In this case, potential human being. Capable of BECOMING one, not "Will definitely become.".
If it meant FUTURE, it would be guaranteed, it isn't. It's only possible.
Here's an excerpt from the American English Dictionary:
po·ten·tial
Adj;
1. Capable of being but not yet in existence*; latent: a potential problem.
2. Having possibility, capability, or power.
3. Grammar; of, relating to, or being a verbal construction with auxiliaries such as may or can; for example, it may snow.
Noun;
1. The inherent ability or capacity for growth, development, or coming into being.
2. Something possessing the capacity for growth or development.
*Not yet in existence, as in the human life is not yet in existence. The foetus just has the potential to be one, the cells just have the POTENTIAL to be a foetus.
So, that again;
Potential; possibly something else. Not future anything for certain, possibly, if allowed to be, not actually existing.
Do you have an argument to any of the aforementioned points and facts? Or do you wish to drop the "It's a future something if it has potential!" argument and proceed, civilly, to another area of abortion discussion?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauridid you just....resort to a dictionary? WOW.....those definitions prove nothing. it's common sense that a fetus, even at first conception, is a potential FUTURE life. and by being a potential FUTURE life, the fetus had a FUTURE. whether it is aborted, it has a FUTURE. either in a trash can, or in a baby crib, but the fact that it has a FUTURE is undeniable.
False, entirely.Potential means something or someone possessing the possible ability to become more than it is/they are.
From the English dictionary:
[b]po·ten·tial
Adj;
1. possible, as opposed to actual: the potential uses of nuclear energy.
2. capable of being or becoming: a potential danger to safety.
3. Grammar. expressing possibility: the potential subjunctive in Latin; the potential use of can in I can go.Noun;
4 possibility; potentiality: an investment that has little growth potential.
6. a latent excellence or ability that may or may not be developed.E.g: Potential boyfriend/girlfriend, potential omelette, potential husband/wife, potential career.
In this case, potential human being. Capable of BECOMING one, not "Will definitely become.".
If it meant FUTURE, it would be guaranteed, it isn't. It's only possible.
Here's an excerpt from the American English Dictionary:
po·ten·tial
Adj;
1. Capable of being but not yet in existence*; latent: a potential problem.
2. Having possibility, capability, or power.
3. Grammar; of, relating to, or being a verbal construction with auxiliaries such as may or can; for example, it may snow.Noun;
1. The inherent ability or capacity for growth, development, or coming into being.
2. Something possessing the capacity for growth or development.*Not yet in existence, as in the human life is not yet in existence. The foetus just has the potential to be one, the cells just have the POTENTIAL to be a foetus.
So, that again;
Potential; possibly something else. Not future anything for certain, possibly, if allowed to be, not actually existing.
Do you have an argument to any of the aforementioned points and facts? Or do you wish to drop the "It's a future something if it has potential!" argument and proceed, civilly, to another area of abortion discussion?
-AC [/B]
is that clear enough? do you need some flash cards, or are you gonna bombard us with more dictionary quotes?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
did you just....resort to a dictionary? WOW.....those definitions prove nothing. it's common sense that a fetus, even at first conception, is a potential FUTURE life. and by being a potential FUTURE life, the fetus had a FUTURE. whether it is aborted, it has a FUTURE. either in a trash can, or in a baby crib, but the fact that it has a FUTURE is undeniable.is that clear enough? do you need some flash cards, or are you gonna bombard us with more dictionary quotes?
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Every ejaculatory emission contains millions of spermatocytes with the potential to combine with the oocyte that's expelled during each ovulatory cycle to become a zygote. Every masturbatory emission and period is the loss of potential "lives."
Is that clear enough for you?
Originally posted by Adam_PoEwe are talking about the sperm that actually slips past the goalie. not the millions that are expelled every time a man ejaculates.
Is that clear enough for you?
Yes, yes, that kind of phrase keeps being said, but I maintain that telling me I can't impose my morals onto anyone else is imposing your own morals on me.
Let's compare:
You: I think abortion is wrong. Proof? well... angels and stuff. Regardless, women shall not have abortion cause I think it's wrong.
Us: Because you, nor anyone, can factually prove abortion is wrong the choice should be left to the pregnant woman.
The last statement really does seem like something "the Controller" would say, no? Perhaps you should get the governments to ship people who disagree with you to far away islands as well.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
did you just....resort to a dictionary? WOW.....those definitions prove nothing. it's common sense that a fetus, even at first conception, is a potential FUTURE life. and by being a potential FUTURE life, the fetus had a FUTURE. whether it is aborted, it has a FUTURE. either in a trash can, or in a baby crib, but the fact that it has a FUTURE is undeniable.is that clear enough? do you need some flash cards, or are you gonna bombard us with more dictionary quotes?
Did you just...resort to denying fact...again? Those definitions prove what "Potential" means, and what it means is not what you desire it to mean. It's not a future anything, it's a possible something, not definite something. So now it's come to a point where not only science, but the English language, is wrong, because you got a definition out of your ass.
That does not mean it has a predetermined future, and it certainly does not mean it's a predetermined future life. The fact that "something" will happen to it does not make it a future anything in particular.
Speaking of trash cans, leave your fact-denying debates there next time. You've got fact and proof in front of you, and for the sake of not actually admitting that I just smacked you in the face with the definitions of the word you're using, definitions that, not ONCE prove a connection to what you imply, you just shut your eyes, block your ears and go "Lalalalala.". Very petulant.
Maybe leaving the debate to those who know how is probably a good option.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Did you just...resort to denying fact...again? Those definitions prove what "Potential" means, and what it means is not what you desire it to mean. It's not a future anything, it's a possible something, not definite something. So now it's come to a point where not only science, but the English language, is wrong, because you got a definition out of your ass.
That does not mean it has a predetermined future, and it certainly does not mean it's a predetermined future life. The fact that "something" will happen to it does not make it a future anything in particular.
Speaking of trash cans, leave your fact-denying debates there next time. You've got fact and proof in front of you, and for the sake of not actually admitting that I just smacked you in the face with the definitions of the word you're using, definitions that, not ONCE prove a connection to what you imply, you just shut your eyes, block your ears and go "Lalalalala.". Very petulant.
Maybe leaving the debate to those who know how is probably a good option.
-AC [/B][/QUOTE] Dude, it's common sense. You can't deny that if a woman is impregnated that she has a growing fetus inside her. this fetus is a potential human being, if allowed to develop properly. are we agreed on this part?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Dude, it's common sense. You can't deny that if a woman is impregnated that she has a growing fetus inside her. this fetus is a potential human being, if allowed to develop properly. are we agreed on this part?
She has cells, at first. Those cells have the potential (Remember, the factual, official definitions count. Not ones you just make up.) to become a foetus, if allowed. If that foetus develops, it has the POTENTIAL to be a human being.
It isn't anything other than what it is in the present. Until it actually becomes a human being, it isn't one. If it's in the womb as a foetus, that's all it is.
No, that's not how it is, so we're not agreed.
I just gave you every conceivable definition of "Potential" in our language; it clearly states it as meaning "Able to become something; possibility.". Not "Has an alternate future self.".
You are saying "Either way, something will happen to it.". So? That's like saying a chicken egg is a future-still a chicken egg, cos nothing might happen. It makes no sense.
Common sense does not overrule fact. I somehow knew that every definition, despite them all proving you wrong, would be "Open to interpretation.". Stupid, but I knew it'd happen.
-AC
A fetus has the potential to become a human being. A zygote has the potential to become a human being. An oocyte has the potential to become a human being. So? It isn't currently a human being, ergo it isn't afforded the rights of a human being.
50% of fertilized oocytes are lost to spontaneous abortion, prior to the women even knowing they're pregnant.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauriwell, you asked me to debate intelligently, and I tried, but you weaseled out.
She has cells, at first. Those cells have the potential (Remember, the factual, official definitions count. Not ones you just make up.) to become a foetus, if allowed. If that foetus develops, it has the POTENTIAL to be a human being.It isn't anything other than what it is in the present. Until it actually becomes a human being, it isn't one. If it's in the womb as a foetus, that's all it is.
No, that's not how it is, so we're not agreed.
I just gave you every conceivable definition of "Potential" in our language; it clearly states it as meaning "Able to become something; possibility.". Not "Has an alternate future self.".
You are saying "Either way, something will happen to it.". So? That's like saying a chicken egg is a future-still a chicken egg, cos nothing might happen. It makes no sense.
Common sense does not overrule fact. I somehow knew that every definition, despite them all proving you wrong, would be "Open to interpretation.". Stupid, but I knew it'd happen.
-AC