Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
so let's just kill the little underdeveoped bastard, so we are not "inconvenienced."....right?
I love the way you try and manipulate it, to try and make it sound like an evil act which doesn't require consideration. In response to your question yes, it's got nothing to do with you, whatever their reasons for wanting an abortion, they want one and that's what matters. They do not want to be a parent, why should someone be forced to be one?
Originally posted by chillmeistergendude, that was a joke.
I love the way you try and manipulate it, to try and make it sound like an evil act which doesn't require consideration. In response to your question yes, it's got nothing to do with you, whatever their reasons for wanting an abortion, they want one and that's what matters. They do not want to be a parent, why should someone be forced to be one?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Right back atcha. You are assuming that the ball of cells is not a baby. Duh, it's not a fully formed fetus. But it is a potential human life.
i assume nothing, therefore i would never impose laws on others based on assumption and religion. but im not trying to explain that you again, just so you can ignore it and carry on your 'emrbyo=baby' parroting. your ONLY ****ing reason for posting here...that single assumption/belief parroted as fact. and people like you dont want to reason or understand other points of view, because you're all stupid outwardly oppressive isolationist assholes.
Originally posted by chillmeistergenwell, I believe that, but I was still kidding. Get the stick out of your ass and you would see that.
Oh right, dude . The whole statement still stands, as that's basically still your backing for the argument; that a potential life should be more than potential, and left to bloom into actual life.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
So I am guessing that you know everything there is to know on this, from conception to birth? every stage of fetal development? every phase of all three trimesters? are you Doogie Howser?
I know more than you, enough to know the science of the debate. You do not, and it's clouding your perception. As proven here;
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You are assuming that the ball of cells is not a baby
It's not. It factually, scientifically, medically is not.
Cells are not babies, they are an entirely different biological organism to anything resembling a human.
Did you go to school?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
not a big wicker basket fan, sorry.
So it depends on if you like what's being discussed.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Scientifically we are not technically the same. One is a human being, one is a human foetus. What's so hard to understand? Eggs aren't chickensEveryone here is proving the difference, all you do is ignore the facts and insist there isn't one. If you want to be taken seriously, get some facts, get some science.
We don't "like" to think it, it IS that way. Are you telling me that science is wrong? Factually proven biology is wrong?
I answered it here; "Murder IS murder, but abortion isn't murder. Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, and considering murder is ONLY a legal term, it cannot apply to anything legal, or anything that isn't a human being.".
You're asking me if there's a difference between committing murder on two different ages of human being. No, there's not, to me.
Foetuses are factually not human beings, ergo; you do fail.
No, not FUTURE life, potential. Why are you constantly ignoring this? What have you got that says anything exists besides the present? I have given many reasons and proof that you are wrong, as have people on here, including a scientist.
Eggs are potential omelettes, ideas are potentially successful, do you see where I'm going?
Potential may be enough for you, but not everyone.
There's plenty in the exchange between RJ, Xmarks and myself. Plenty of science, plenty of definitions. Go check it out. You won't, you'll ignore it.
You're learning.
It's a human foetus, not a human being. A hair off my hair is a human hair, human toenails are on my toes, I have human teeth in my mouth.
What are they? Humans? Is getting a haircut considered murder to you?
Fair enough point, as long as it stays in your mind and doesn't become actions forced on women.
Why was slavery abolished? Wouldn't have anything to do with forcing people to do stuff, oppression, restriction of freedom etc would it?
They dictate what is scientifically accurate and what isn't, not what's morally right or wrong.
Science dictates what a foetus is and isn't, what cells are and are not. Unfortunately, this does not bode well for you as it goes against what you want them to be.
-AC
Chickens and chicken eggs are the same species. Humans and human fetuses are the same species.
Ive factually proved several things already, which you also ignore. One of them was that a "child" includes a fetus, and yet you will say a human child is not human.
If a "potential human" is not important, and potential truly means nothing, then why has our society for thousands of years been attached to an education system that prepares for a potential future?
Social Darwinism is not good. Hitler had to learn that with a bullet.
Your hair is part of YOUR body, a fetus is not. It is a symbiote. The mother does not even share the same DNA as the child. And a hair cannot grow into a person, and isnt human, because hair grows on many animals.
If you think that taking abortion away as a "right" is oppression -remember what abortion is doing in the way of oppressing a child. They dont get any rights according to you.
Science may dicatate fact, and not morality. But then why is only science accepted, when it is the lesser of the two?
Answer these questions:
What is a human?
What does it take to be a human?
Originally posted by Alpha Centauriyou left out the last part of my post, you dolt.
I know more than you, enough to know the science of the debate. You do not, and it's clouding your perception. As proven here;It's not. It factually, scientifically, medically is not.
Cells are not babies, they are an entirely different biological organism to anything resembling a human.
Did you go to school?yup. graduated in the top 10%. you?
So it depends on if you like what's being discussed.he brought up wicker baskets. I stated I do not like them......problem?
-AC [/B][/QUOTE]
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Chickens and chicken eggs are the same species. Humans and human fetuses are the same species.
Are chickens and chicken EGGS the same thing altogether? Species, yes. Everything else? Yes or no. Simple question.
The answer is no. Coming from the same species does not mean exactly the same lifeform.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Ive factually proved several things already, which you also ignore. One of them was that a "child" includes a fetus, and yet you will say a human child is not human.
Huh? Quote where I said a HUMAN CHILD is not human. I said a human foetus and human cells are not human BEINGS. Same species, different stages of development, like chickens and chicken eggs. So to act like they are all the same thing is wrong.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
If a "potential human" is not important, and potential truly means nothing, then why has our society for thousands of years been attached to an education system that prepares for a potential future?
It means nothing in regards to your linking it to the future. If you value potential, then that's FINE by me. Just stop making it out to be something it isn't. A potential anything isn't DEFINITELY the next step up.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Social Darwinism is not good. Hitler had to learn that with a bullet.
One can only hope.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Your hair is part of YOUR body, a fetus is not. It is a symbiote. The mother does not even share the same DNA as the child. And a hair cannot grow into a person, and isnt human, because hair grows on many animals.
It's a human hair. Cells of reproduction are human (As in CREATED by.) cells, not human organisms or beings. Human foetuses are not human BEINGS, we are. We are the next step up, they are not equal just because they have potential to be.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
If you think that taking abortion away as a "right" is oppression -remember what abortion is doing in the way of oppressing a child. They dont get any rights according to you.
It's not oppressing a CHILD, it's a FOETUS or it's CELLS. These have no rights. You want them to, but they have none.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Science may dicatate fact, and not morality. But then why is only science accepted, when it is the lesser of the two?
Because it shows what an organism is, not what is wrong or right to do with it.
Originally posted by The Black Ghost
Answer these questions:What is a human?
What does it take to be a human?
A born baby is a human being, as long as it's in the womb, it's not.
Second one; Something that keeps you alive independently outside of the womb.
-AC
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
you left out the last part of my post, you dolt.
Yes, I know. It said "It's still a potential human life." and "It's not a fully formed foetus.". Correct. It's not ANY kind of foetus when it's cells, though.
So you saying we ASSUME it's not a baby cos it's cells is wrong, we know it isn't, as science proves.
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
yup. graduated in the top 10%. you?
We don't "graduate" here, but it begs my question;
How do you not know that cells are not humans?
Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
he brought up wicker baskets. I stated I do not like them......problem?
I was under the impression it was ok to be wasteful of wicker because you dislike it.
-AC
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I love the way you try and manipulate it, to try and make it sound like an evil act which doesn't require consideration.
The majority of reasons people get abortions are evil to me.
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
In response to your question yes, it's got nothing to do with you, whatever their reasons for wanting an abortion, they want one and that's what matters. They do not want to be a parent, why should someone be forced to be one?
With that kind of logic in play, I could say the allied powers should have left Nazi Germany alone. Since the holocaust had nothing to with them.
Originally posted by Emperor Ashtar
With that kind oflogic I could say the allied powers were wrong since the holocaust had nothing to with them.
Well no you couldn't. The Holocaust was a decision on far more than a personal level, it also affected millions of living breathing human beings. Which cells and foetuses are not.