NationStates Jolt Archive

Yet another abortion thread. Fun, huh? In light of the other two I decided that yes, the whole abortion debate revolves around the question of whether a fetus is a human being or not.

So, without that discussion, I will add more questions. You have 3 ideals to choose from:

A) The fetus is not a living thing.
B) The fetus is a person.
C) The fetus has the potential to be a human being.

DO NOT DISCUSS THE IDEALS! You can go do that in the other thread. Choose the ideal that you agree with the most, and figure out what would happen if you or someone you knew was pregnant, and you/she was a teenager. You can include more details such as rape, social issues, and psychological consequences.

My conclusion: C. I would do it not only for social consequences, but for my future as well, regardless of whether I was raped or not. I would feel guilty, but I would give myself a chance and probably help the baby out in the sense that it wouldn't have a rough life in a troubled environment (not that I'm in one now, but what if I get pregnant?) If I was raped I wouldn't want the kid knowing about its father's mistakes, and dwelling on them.

You?

Yet another abortion thread. Fun, huh? In light of the other two I decided that yes, the whole abortion debate revolves around the question of whether a fetus is a human being or not.

So, without that discussion, I will add more questions. You have 3 ideals to choose from:

A) The fetus is not a living thing.
B) The fetus is a person.
C) The fetus has the potential to be a human being.

DO NOT DISCUSS THE IDEALS! You can go do that in the other thread. Choose the ideal that you agree with the most, and figure out what would happen if you or someone you knew was pregnant, and you/she was a teenager. You can include more details such as rape, social issues, and psychological consequences.

My conclusion: C. I would do it not only for social consequences, but for my future as well, regardless of whether I was raped or not. I would feel guilty, but I would give myself a chance and probably help the baby out in the sense that it wouldn't have a rough life in a troubled environment (not that I'm in one now, but what if I get pregnant?) If I was raped I wouldn't want the kid knowing about its father's mistakes, and dwelling on them.

You?
Why are you telling people what they can and can't discuss. All aspects of this issue should be open for discussion.

I think abortion is a personal choice. Just like homosexuality;)

please mods start cracking down on these! *leaves cookies and milk*

A) if someone I cared about got pregnant I would be supportive and tell them I'm there for them no matter what I wouldn't pressure any decision on them or even mention the options that being said if the guy wasn’t interested I’d tear him apart and force him to watch as I chop his balls off with a spoon:)

If I got pregnant I would sit in the corner and cry before killing myself with whatever object I could find (being a pregnant man will do that to you) oh and you never mentioned it being a human foetus…which is scary…

A fetus is potential life until it makes the jump to outside the womb. You want an absolute? That's mine. And until it makes the jump, the woman carrying the little parasite has the right to do with it what she will, even if I think her decision is morally repugnant. People make decisions that I find morally repugnant every day--why should this one be any different?

please mods start cracking down on these! *leaves cookies and milk*

A) if someone I cared about got pregnant I would be supportive and tell them I'm there for them no matter what I wouldn't pressure any decision on them or even mention the options that being said if the guy wasn’t interested I’d tear him apart and force him to watch as I chop his balls off with a spoon:)

If I got pregnant I would sit in the corner and cry before killing myself with whatever object I could find (being a pregnant man will do that to you) oh and you never mentioned it being a human foetus…which is scary…
So you urge the mods to shut down this thread, and then you proceed to write two whole paragraphs about said topic. That just makes no sense. Or you have too much time on your hands.

A fetus is potential life until it makes the jump to outside the womb. You want an absolute? That's mine. And until it makes the jump, the woman carrying the little parasite has the right to do with it what she will, even if I think her decision is morally repugnant. People make decisions that I find morally repugnant every day--why should this one be any different?
Strong language there, don't you think?

Strong language there, don't you think?
Possibly, but certainly nothing worse than the anti-abortion crowd throws out against women who decide to have abortions.

So you urge the mods to shut down this thread, and then you proceed to write two whole paragraphs about said topic. That just makes no sense. Or you have too much time on your hands.

well preferably the mods would close it after I posted so it would look like I won:D

Possibly, but certainly nothing worse than the anti-abortion crowd throws out against women who decide to have abortions.
Eh, can't argue with that. Especially those freaks who kill abortion doctors.

well preferably the mods would close it after I posted so it would look like I won:D
The important thing is to have fun, not to win:D

i think that every one needs to die some just sooner than others.... why live a happy life when you can be happy ruining others?:D

i think that every one needs to die some just sooner than others.... why live a happy life when you can be happy ruining others?:D

what’s most disturbing is I can find some logic behind that

Regardless of what I fetus is or isn't, I don't think there is anyone out there that would content it is "not a living thing." That is just flat country stupid.

Regardless of what I fetus is or isn't, I don't think there is anyone out there that would content it is "not a living thing." That is just flat country stupid.
It's just a bunch of cells, which are alive, so yes, it is a "living thing." Just like my arm, my leg, my ear, and of course, my wang.;)

Oh--

C, and terminate it if it didn't suit me.

It's just a bunch of cells, which are alive, so yes, it is a "living thing." Just like my arm, my leg, my ear, and of course, my wang.;)

Right. Those are also living, but less deserving of the label "thing" because their respective DNA is not unique to them as a whole.

Regardless of what I fetus is or isn't, I don't think there is anyone out there that would content it is "not a living thing." That is just flat country stupid.
It ain't self-sustaining, so there's your first crack in the "but it is a living thing" department. It's part of the woman's body and only as much alive as she is - minus the "living thing on its own".
Looks like flat country still has some potholes in it :D

Oh yeah, almost forgot about the categories:

a) Disagree on that one, but won't support claim that the fetus is a living thing.

b) Disagree; for to become a person, the (unborn) fetus needs to be born to live and then (maybe!) develop personality, hence, to become a person.
which leads to

c) I don't consider the fetus to be a human being until it is born. Potential doesn't mean anything. Hell, I have to potential to do a lot of things - none of which will ever come to pass, simply because the circumstances are not sustaining their development.

It ain't self-sustaining, so there's your first crack in the "but it is a living thing" department. It's part of the woman's body and only as much alive as she is - minus the "living thing on its own".
Looks like flat country still has some potholes in it :D

A parasite is a living thing. So are parts of a body. Neither are quite exactly analogous. It's somewhere between, but living regardless.

Right. Those are also living, but less deserving of the label "thing" because their respective DNA is not unique to them as a whole.

my arm is...alive!

not if Mrs Gren has anything to say about it!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRS_GREN

my arm is...alive!

not if Mrs Gren has anything to say about it!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRS_GREN

Well, according to MRS GREN movement is required, so a plant is not living either. But if we assume this as the technical definition of a "living thing," I will agree that it does not measure up.

Well, according to MRS GREN movement is required, so a plant is not living either. But if we assume this as the technical definition of a "living thing," I will agree that it does not measure up.

plants move silly look at there leaves you will notice they face sunlight and as the sun moves across the sky the leaves move to face the Sun

I learnt this when I was 10

It's just a bunch of cells, which are alive, so yes, it is a "living thing." Just like my arm, my leg, my ear, but not my wang.;)
FIX'D for honesty.



And necrophilia...
...Oh yeah, hot corpse-on-corpse action.

Right. Those are also living, but less deserving of the label "thing" because their respective DNA is not unique to them as a whole.
Considering that half the DNA of the fetus is exactly the same as the carrier of the fetus, it's not a stretch to say the fetus is part of the woman's body.

FIX'D for honesty.



And necrophilia...
...Oh yeah, hot corpse-on-corpse action.
What are you saying, that my wang is a limp piece of gangrene infested meat?

What are you saying, that my wang is a limp piece of gangrene infested meat?
Let's take it to our judges...

BING!

Yes, you're absolutely right!!!

Why are you telling people what they can and can't discuss. All aspects of this issue should be open for discussion.

True

I think abortion is a personal choice.

also true

[QUOTE] Just like homosexuality;)

Homosexuality is exactly like heterosexuality. If it's achoice, then...

The fetus is a human being.

I got pregnant really young, kept the kid, just tucked her in.

I had no less than 17 people tell me that I should get an abortion, I chose not to.

I was still young when I got pregnant with the second one, I only had 4 people tell me to get an abortion, 3 of them were doctors though.

I won't say that I made the "super greatest best choice ever for anyone" because I can't say that. I think abortion is morally wrong, but I won't deny someone else the choice to make what I might consider a mistake, their body, their baby, their life, I don't pretend to have enough knowledge about anything to make that decision for someone, and it was damn annoying during my pregnancies to be around people who thought they did.

Considering that half the DNA of the fetus is exactly the same as the carrier of the fetus, it's not a stretch to say the fetus is part of the woman's body.


Well if it's not a part of the womens body then it is not a stretch to use this to define the fetus:

par·a·site Pronunciation (pr-st)
n.
1. Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.

Well, according to MRS GREN movement is required, so a plant is not living either. But if we assume this as the technical definition of a "living thing," I will agree that it does not measure up.
You've never watched a sunflower over a prolonged time, have you? Always turn their heads to follow the sun - and even turn it the other way at night ot "anticipate" the rising sun. There's yer movement. Slow, but definitely there.

Considering that half the DNA of the fetus is exactly the same as the carrier of the fetus, it's not a stretch to say the fetus is part of the woman's body.

so you would be fine if somone you knew cut off their arm because it might inconveinance their life in some way.

You've never watched a sunflower over a prolonged time, have you? Always turn their heads to follow the sun - and even turn it the other way at night ot "anticipate" the rising sun. There's yer movement. Slow, but definitely there.
Not to mention the Venus Flytrap.

Those suckers are awesome...

Not to mention the Venus Flytrap.

Those suckers are awesome...
Yeah. Especially Audrey http://www.aspsmiley.com/smiley/smilies/audrey2.gif

Yeah. Especially Audrey http://www.aspsmiley.com/smiley/smilies/audrey2.gif
lol. Feed me.

so you would be fine if somone you knew cut off their arm because it might inconveinance their life in some way.
If they feel any better afterwards and don't collect a paycheck because they did that (meaning that they can still care for themselves and not become a "burdon on society") - sure, cut it off.

Hell, what are you supposed to do? First it takes Linda, then it comes after you and gets in your hand which goes bad... You sometimes just have to lop it off at the wrist!

If they feel any better afterwards and don't collect a paycheck because they did that (meaning that they can still care for themselves and not become a "burdon on society") - sure, cut it off.

Hell, what are you supposed to do? First it takes Linda, then it comes after you and gets in your hand which goes bad... You sometimes just have to lop it off at the wrist!
lol.

"Who's laughing now?! HAHAHA! AAUUGHHH!!!"

so you agree that if there is anyway posible that that arm may have helped the person or someone else, you'd want it to be there. If im reading what you said right.

lol.

"Who's laughing now?! HAHAHA! AAUUGHHH!!!"


Laugh not at the ignorant, for they might be incouraged to become president.

Well if it's not a part of the womens body then it is not a stretch to use this to define the fetus:

par·a·site Pronunciation (pr-st)
n.
1. Biology An organism that grows, feeds, and is sheltered on or in a different organism while contributing nothing to the survival of its host.
When you use the term "parasite", that degrades the fetus to something to NEEDS to be terminated. I'm in favor for abortion, but I don't think "parasite" is the right word to use. It's your call, though.

Laugh not at the ignorant, for they might be incouraged to become president.
and if that isn't hilarious, I don't know what is LOL

Laugh not at the ignorant, for they might be incouraged to become president.
Minus one evil hand plus the almighty boom-stick, yes. Oh. Wait. That was... king? Warleader? Salesman!!!

so you agree that if there is anyway posible that that arm may have helped the person or someone else, you'd want it to be there. If im reading what you said right.
No, I was thinking more in the direction of insurance fraud (you know, the lumber mill ain't spilling the profits you anticipated and you decide to lose two or three fingers in "a freak accident" to make cash).

And the way you're phrasing that right now, it is something totally different.

You were asking whether those people should be allowed to remove parts of their body and I'd agree with that.

I wouldn't, however, agree to force people to have to live with a part of their body that they absolutely resent. (Whether a doctor is allowed to remove your "evil liver" is another matter - if you don't want your liver, cut it out yourself, fine with me).

None of the above. A fetus is alive and it is a human being, but it is not a "person" in the philosophical sense of the word, and thus is not deserving of the human rights that go with that category.

ok

None of the above. A fetus is alive and it is a human being, but it is not a "person" in the philosophical sense of the word, and thus is not deserving of the human rights that go with that category.

define person, then i would like you to explain why something you consider a human does not deserve Human rights.

When you use the term "parasite", that degrades the fetus to something to NEEDS to be terminated. I'm in favor for abortion, but I don't think "parasite" is the right word to use. It's your call, though.

Parasite is quite correct in a technical sense. If you associate with the word in a negative way that is your choice, but the word is perfectly valid from a technical sense.

Parasite is quite correct in a technical sense. If you associate with the word in a negative way that is your choice, but the word is perfectly valid from a technical sense.

if a doctor said you had a parasite would you be worried? If he then laughed and said you're just pregnent.(if you were/are a woman.) Would you be angry and stop seeing that doctor. answer honestly.

Would you be angry and stop seeing that doctor. answer honestly.

If my doctor laughed and said I was pregnant would I stop seeing him?

Absolutly, as he is apparently such a shitty doctor that he couldn't notice the presence of a penis.

Regardless of the response we might have to the word, the term parasite can be correctly applied to a fetus. A fetus meets every technical definition to the word. Whatever emotional connotation we attach to the word is made up, and is not included in the technical definition.

If my doctor laughed and said I was pregnant would I stop seeing him?

Absolutly, as he is apparently such a shitty doctor that he couldn't notice the presence of a penis.

Regardless of the response we might have to the word, the term parasite can be correctly applied to a fetus. A fetus meets every technical definition to the word. Whatever emotional connotation we attach to the word is made up, and is not included in the technical definition.

we could also apply this to a dog, those in a coma, or the very seriously mentaly chalanged.

and you didn't realy answer my question. i asked that you looked at it in the veiw of a woman. as for your doctor not noticeing a penis. i doubt he can see through your pants. i and can't see you period.

we could also apply this to a dog, those in a coma, or the very seriously mentaly chalanged.

Methinks you don't know what the word means.

Parasite
n 1: an animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another
animal or plant); the parasite obtains nourishment from
the host without benefiting or killing the host [ant: host]

The dog, though it gets fed by its owner, does not live on, or in its owner.

Those in a coma, though they are fed through a machine, are not connected on, or inside, a plant or animal.

The mentally challenged, though they may be dependant on others, once again, are not attached to, or reside inside, another living being.

It can not be applied to a dog, a coma patient, or someone with mental deficiency unless they live on, or in, a plant or animal and derive nurishment from that host yet provide no biological benefit.

A fetus resides within the female host, requires that host to provide nurishment, and privdes no biological benefit to that host woman.

That is the definition of parasite. Don't make such stupid claims until you know what you're talking about.

and you didn't realy answer my question. i asked that you looked at it in the veiw of a woman. as

That doctor may have shitty bedsite mannor, and be completely insenstive. This does not mean the word was used incorrectly. I remember a college professor once got into a lot of trouble for using the word "niggerdly" in a public lecture. While the word has NO connection in oriding to the racial epitaph, and he used the word quite correctly, still doesn't mean it's a smart thing. Regardless, a fetus IS a parasite within the literal meaning of the word.

Arthais101- I got a question maybe you can help me with.

How come when I call a fetus a baby I get called out for "appealing to emotion" or "using emotive terms" but people go around calling a fetus a "parasite" and don't?

Now, I know by the technical definition a fetus can be considered a parasite, but really, don't people just use that term to piss off the pro-life crowd? it does have a negative connotation yes?

the last two. those refering to people are in the society. so well no they are not literaly connected. they are parasites of those that have to care for them. attached by bonds of relation. and if you love your dog you are atached to it. not on but attached to. they all fit the rest of the definition except for the literal sense of in/on.

Arthais101- I got a question maybe you can help me with.

How come when I call a fetus a baby I get called out for "appealing to emotion" or "using emotive terms" but people go around calling a fetus a "parasite" and don't?

Now, I know by the technical definition a fetus can be considered a parasite, but really, don't people just use that term to piss off the pro-life crowd? it does have a negative connotation yes?

I am sure it does have negative connotations, and I am sure it is used sometimes as shock value. However the fact is that it is, technically, an accurage desciption. As such I use it, because it is technically correct.

Also I would question whether people who describe a fetus as a person are NOT questioned for "appealing to emotion". That seems to be what started this line of discussion.

That doctor may have shitty bedsite mannor, and be completely insenstive. This does not mean the word was used incorrectly. I remember a college professor once got into a lot of trouble for using the word "niggerdly" in a public lecture. While the word has NO connection in oriding to the racial epitaph, and he used the word quite correctly, still doesn't mean it's a smart thing. Regardless, a fetus IS a parasite within the literal meaning of the word.

you continue to dance around my question. if you were a woman and your doctor told you you had a parasite would you be worried. if after a few minutes of watching you pancik and worry he/she said that you were just pregnant, would you be anrgy? yes he is useing corectly but i bet you most people would be worried if the thought they had a parasite.

define person, then i would like you to explain why something you consider a human does not deserve Human rights.

A being with rationality, self-awareness, consciousness, identity, etc. I don't think all humans deserve what we commonly take to be human rights; I think they would be better classified as the rights of personhood.

the last two. those refering to people are in the society. so well no they are not literaly connected. they are parasites of those that have to care for them. attached by bonds of relation. and if you love your dog you are atached to it. not on but attached to. they all fit the rest of the definition except for the literal sense of in/on.

That is like saying a motorcycle and a car both move on roads and utilize a gasoline combustion engine, so a motorcycle is a car, except it has only 2 wheels and not 4. Which ignores the fact that having 4 wheels is a defining characteristic of a car.

To say that they are parasites except they are not attached i/on to something ignores the fact that the attachment in/on something is a fundamental aspect OF a parasite.

It is fundamentally incorrect to say that they are "types" of parasites that don't attach into or onto a host. That is a fundamental part of what a parasite IS.

My cat may be my DEPENDANT, but it is no parasite. And to say that he is a parasite, except for the fact that he is not attached to me is to admit that it is no form of parasite at all.

you continue to dance around my question. if you were a woman and your doctor told you you had a parasite would you be worried. if after a few minutes of watching you pancik and worry he/she said that you were just pregnant, would you be anrgy? yes he is useing corectly but i bet you most people would be worried if the thought they had a parasite.

Yes, I probably would.

That doesn't mean the use of the word is wrong. If you chose to get offended when you hear a fetus refered to as a parasite...that is your choice to. I am not misleading you in the slightest when I say "a fetus is a parasite". It is your choice to be bothered by that. It doesn't mean the term is incorrect.

A being with rationality, self-awareness, consciousness, identity, etc. I don't think all humans deserve what we commonly take to be human rights; I think they would be better classified as the rights of personhood.

do you realy beleave you have full self awareness, and are you at sometimes irational. if so then at those times of irationality we could, by your definition, shoot you through the head and not even be looked at funny.

do you realy beleave you have full self awareness, and are you at sometimes irational. if so then at those times of irationality we could, by your definition, shoot you through the head and not even be looked at funny.

A being can be rational - that is, it can have the capacity for rational thought - without always acting rationally.

do you realy beleave you have full self awareness, and are you at sometimes irational. if so then at those times of irationality we could, by your definition, shoot you through the head and not even be looked at funny.

I suggest you invest in a dictionary, or at least realize that a rational being has the capacity to be rational, not necessarily behaves rationally at all times.

Really now, learn some english before spouting off.

I am sure it does have negative connotations, and I am sure it is used sometimes as shock value. However the fact is that it is, technically, an accurage desciption. As such I use it, because it is technically correct.

Also I would question whether people who describe a fetus as a person are NOT questioned for "appealing to emotion". That seems to be what started this line of discussion.
yeah, I get ya. It's the same for me when they call people "anti-choice" instead of pro-life, it's all an attempt to piss them off, even though they are technically "anti-choice"

What is this, NS Abortion Debate Mad Libs?

(Direction)-wingers all agree that a Fetus is (Adjective). Many beleive that means that they should (verb) abortionists. Pro-(Noun)ers are often too (adjective) to (verb) the subject.

This could be fun... :)

yeah, I get ya. It's the same for me when they call people "anti-choice" instead of pro-life, it's all an attempt to piss them off, even though they are technically "anti-choice"

As I have stated before, I picky about words. If something is a parasite, I will call it a parasite. If someone is against giving choice, I will call that person anti choice. I will reject the call of "pro abortion" as this is not an accurate description, as many pro choice individuals would not actually chose an abortion for themselves.

Yes, I probably would.

That doesn't mean the use of the word is wrong. If you chose to get offended when you hear a fetus refered to as a parasite...that is your choice to. I am not misleading you in the slightest when I say "a fetus is a parasite". It is your choice to be bothered by that. It doesn't mean the term is incorrect.

people are offended when one person calls an african american a negro. (sorry to all i offended i am just trying to make a point.) but it is seen as the correct term. so your saying i can run around useing that term and chalking it up to its there fault if there affended?

I suggest you invest in a dictionary, or at least realize that a rational being has the capacity to be rational, not necessarily behaves rationally at all times.

Really now, learn some english before spouting off.

you learn some freaking manners. oh no i made a slight error in my rememberance of a freaking dictionary entry.

people are offended when one person calls an african american a negro. (sorry to all i offended i am just trying to make a point.) but it is seen as the correct term. so your saying i can run around useing that term and chalking it up to its there fault if there affended?

We should recognize that words have negative association. Additionally if we do not wish to offend we avoid the terms with negative connotations.

That still does not mean the word is not technically a correct one.

Moreover, the term "negro", as well as its more offensive pair, have evolved in our language to have specific terminology of racial inferiority. As such the meaning has changed to one that is in some contexts actually intentionally offensive.

I still believe the term "parasite" is, in a general sense, understood to be exactly what it is.

do you realy beleave you have full self awareness, and are you at sometimes irational. if so then at those times of irationality we could, by your definition, shoot you through the head and not even be looked at funny.
Ah - with that reasoning, you better never fall asleep :eek: :sniper:

Once an entity develops the means to feel, anything from needs, to feelings, to pain; that is when they start to become person-like but are not a person yet. The status of personhood is only granted after birth.

The fetus cannot feel anything until the 14th (?) week (Not 100% sure on that number, though), it has therefore no means to feel needs, which is the basis for any personality traits.

you learn some freaking manners. oh no i made a slight error in my rememberance of a freaking dictionary entry.

If you wish to debate the definition of a word it behooves you to know what the word means first. You come across as an idiot otherwise.

We should recognize that words have negative association. Additionally if we do not wish to offend we avoid the terms with negative connotations.

That still does not mean the word is not technically a correct one.

Moreover, the term "negro", as well as its more offensive pair, have evolved in our language to have specific terminology of racial inferiority. As such the meaning has changed to one that is in some contexts actually intentionally offensive.

I still believe the term "parasite" is, in a general sense, understood to be exactly what it is.

then you understand nothing and should leave the obviosly garbage ridden room you call a home. leave your mothers house and spend a few hours in the sunlight. because i bet you i would find not one person who would be offended if a went around telling them they were once a parasite.

then you understand nothing and should leave the obviosly garbage ridden room you call a home. leave your mothers house and spend a few hours in the sunlight. because i bet you i would find not one person who would be offended if a went around telling them they were once a parasite.

Beautiful fallacy you got running there.

Maybe I, unlike you, just make it a point to hang around with educated people.

then you understand nothing and should leave the obviosly garbage ridden room you call a home. leave your mothers house and spend a few hours in the sunlight. because i bet you i would find not one person who would be offended if a went around telling them they were once a parasite.

Is there a word that you would prefer to "parasite" that conveys an equivalent meaning?

If you wish to debate the definition of a word it behooves you to know what the word means first. You come across as an idiot otherwise.

you know what. i am just going to be the man and state my finnal postion and go to bed. because i unlike you have a life.

My postion: I don't care if you want to kill the child inside you. all i want is that you know that you are killing a living breathing being that could one day have amounted to something. And i want them to be given a lamenated peice of paper stating exactly what you have done.

The fetus is your mom and then your mom. :p

Beautiful fallacy you got running there.

Maybe I, unlike you, just make it a point to hang around with educated people.

sorry last thing, i must defend my friends.

I hang around with more educated people then you have been taught by. seeing as how a kindergarten education doesn't take much knowladge to pass on.

you know what. i am just going to be the man and state my finnal postion and go to bed. because i unlike you have a life.

Fallacy again. You're getting good at this.

all i want is that you know that you are killing a living breathing being

I encourage that every day. I had chicken for dinner tonight. What about you?

And i want them to be given a lamenated peice of paper stating exactly what you have done.

Only if we can get people to tell you "you fail at life" every time you say something as stupid as this.

I hang around with more educated people then you have been taught by. seeing as how a kindergarten education doesn't take much knowladge to pass on.

that much knowladge? *chuckle*

I would question your knowladge, considering you screwed up the definition of "rational being" and you insisted a dog was a parasite.

I got a graduate degree kiddo, how bout you?

you continue to dance around my question. if you were a woman and your doctor told you you had a parasite would you be worried. if after a few minutes of watching you pancik and worry he/she said that you were just pregnant, would you be anrgy? yes he is useing corectly but i bet you most people would be worried if the thought they had a parasite.

As a woman, can I weigh in and say that no, I would not be angry. I would be amused. At the most I would be surprised at the doctors willingness to RISK my being irrational and angry about it.

But then, I'm not anti-abortion, and I *do* believe that people should just suck it up and accept that fetuses ARE parasites - instead of fighting the technical terminology, which isn't going to change just to please you, why not fight the negative connontation and stop associating irrational emotions to technical language?

The fetus cannot feel anything until the 14th (?) week (Not 100% sure on that number, though), it has therefore no means to feel needs, which is the basis for any personality traits.

The fetus is guarenteed to feel nothing up to the 14th week (due to lack of even the basic spinal chord) and only has intermittent feeling until the 24th week (when the spinal chord and central nervous system are fully formed)

This is why elective abortions are only allowed before the 14th week, and abortions are completely illegal after 24 weeks.

Seems like the perfect compromise to me - you don't get to 'choose' to have an abortion unless there is no way for the fetus to be aware of it or feel it. And you can only have an 'emergency' abortion (late term abortions are provided for medical reasons only - danger to the mother/child etc) in the period BEFORE the child's brain becomes fully formed and functioning.

you know what. i am just going to be the man and state my finnal postion and go to bed. because i unlike you have a life.

My postion: I don't care if you want to kill the child inside you. all i want is that you know that you are killing a living breathing being that could one day have amounted to something. And i want them to be given a lamenated peice of paper stating exactly what you have done.

Hands up who's surprised at this being the viewpoint of a man? No one? At least we're all on the same page...

I also like the irony of 'killing a living, breathing being'... maybe you think that abortions happen AFTER birth? Because otherwise, I fail to see how abortion kills any 'breathing' being.

And you do know that a) hightening the emotional and psychological trauma of abortion through a 'laminated piece of paper' would be a shitty, pointless thing to do; a move which makes you look far more anti-woman than anti-abortion, and b) that people can throw such things away without much drama anyway, making it even more pointless...

C) The fetus has the potential to be a human being.

The early fetus has the potential to become a human being, but isn't yet. I put the change at the point where the fetus itself is capable of caring; this is at the activation of brain and neural net.

When you use the term "parasite", that degrades the fetus to something to NEEDS to be terminated. I'm in favor for abortion, but I don't think "parasite" is the right word to use. It's your call, though.
A fetus is an endobiological parasite.

Nearly all the posts on here are discussing what the fetus is, which I didn't want. I wanted people to discuss the situation, NOT WHAT THE FETUS IS. :mad:

As a woman, can I weigh in and say that no, I would not be angry. I would be amused. At the most I would be surprised at the doctors willingness to RISK my being irrational and angry about it.

But then, I'm not anti-abortion, and I *do* believe that people should just suck it up and accept that fetuses ARE parasites - instead of fighting the technical terminology, which isn't going to change just to please you, why not fight the negative connontation and stop associating irrational emotions to technical language?



The fetus is guarenteed to feel nothing up to the 14th week (due to lack of even the basic spinal chord) and only has intermittent feeling until the 24th week (when the spinal chord and central nervous system are fully formed)

This is why elective abortions are only allowed before the 14th week, and abortions are completely illegal after 24 weeks.

Seems like the perfect compromise to me - you don't get to 'choose' to have an abortion unless there is no way for the fetus to be aware of it or feel it. And you can only have an 'emergency' abortion (late term abortions are provided for medical reasons only - danger to the mother/child etc) in the period BEFORE the child's brain becomes fully formed and functioning.



Hands up who's surprised at this being the viewpoint of a man? No one? At least we're all on the same page...

I also like the irony of 'killing a living, breathing being'... maybe you think that abortions happen AFTER birth? Because otherwise, I fail to see how abortion kills any 'breathing' being.

And you do know that a) hightening the emotional and psychological trauma of abortion through a 'laminated piece of paper' would be a shitty, pointless thing to do; a move which makes you look far more anti-woman than anti-abortion, and b) that people can throw such things away without much drama anyway, making it even more pointless...


it breaths. it only gets its oxygen from its mother.

and who says i am a man. or a woman. who can tell what i am.

Yet another abortion thread. Fun, huh? In light of the other two I decided that yes, the whole abortion debate revolves around the question of whether a fetus is a human being or not.

...You?
I feel that no, the abortion debate does not remotely revolve around whether a fetus is a human being or not. Whether or not a fetus is a human person would have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on my choice to have an abortion, should I be in such a position. Whether or not a fetus is a human person has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether or not I support the right to abortion.

Even if a fetus is a complete, full, individual human person, I support a woman's right to end her participation in a pregnancy AT ANY TIME and FOR ANY REASON. The personhood of the fetus is completely irrelevant.

it breaths. it only gets its oxygen from its mother.

Given that an embryo doesn't even have functional lungs (or, indeed, a respiratory system of any kind) until weeks into the pregnancy, I'd say that's a dubious statement.

i
and who says i am a man. or a woman. who can tell what i am.
You said you're a man:

i am just going to be the man and state my finnal postion and go to bed. because i unlike you have a life.

Seems like the perfect compromise to me - you don't get to 'choose' to have an abortion unless there is no way for the fetus to be aware of it or feel it. And you can only have an 'emergency' abortion (late term abortions are provided for medical reasons only - danger to the mother/child etc) in the period BEFORE the child's brain becomes fully formed and functioning.

That is a totally unacceptable non-compromise.

No born human being has the right to use my body or my organs without my consent. No born human being may attach themselves to my body against my wishes, and use me as a life-support system. No born human being can so much as draw my blood without my consent. Yet you propose to grant a fetus such rights, rights which no born human has.

No human person may use my body against my wishes, no matter how fully functioning their brain is. Having a fully developed nervous system does not give me the right to use your body without your consent.

Even if I will DIE without the use of your body (example: people in urgent need of immediate organ transplant), I am not ever permitted to harvest your tissues or organs without your consent. Not even if you are the reason I need them (i.e. if you shot me through the kidney or something, and I need your kidney if I'm going to survive). Not even if there is no other alternative (i.e. no other donor in the whole world).

The personhood of a fetus has absolutely nothing to do with the subject of abortion. What is of import is the personhood of human females; do human females have the same rights as human males? Do human females retain their rights after they become pregnant, or does pregnancy strip a human female of her right to bodily autonomy?

Nearly all the posts on here are discussing what the fetus is, which I didn't want. I wanted people to discuss the situation, NOT WHAT THE FETUS IS. :mad:
The opening post is a bit unclear on that. Are you saying you want people to discuss their own wishful thinking? As in, "If I found myself pregnant, I would have an easier time getting an abortion if I knew the fetus wasn't a person"?

That is a totally unacceptable non-compromise.
Tell me something--when did "compromise" get redefined into "bend over and take it the way we tell you to take it. And smile about it too."?

Given that an embryo doesn't even have functional lungs (or, indeed, a respiratory system of any kind) until weeks into the pregnancy, I'd say that's a dubious statement.


You said you're a man:

who says that i was not stating that i, a woman, if i were such a thing, there is no telling, i could be one you never know, was more a man then he. and it still breathes parsay. it still requires oxygen. lack of lungs not stoping that need.

Tell me something--when did "compromise" get redefined into "bend over and take it the way we tell you to take it. And smile about it too."?
Why, when women were created, my friend.

See, it's a "compromise" if women are allowed to retain a few basic human rights, in exchange for quietly handing over bodily autonomy. It's a "compromise" if women are sometimes allowed to make medical decisions for themselves as though they were actual autonomous beings, as long as they don't expect that they will always be granted this special treat. It's a "compromise" if women are generously permitted some measure of human dignity, as long as they don't expect to get to keep these rights after a male has spooged inside them.

who says that i was not stating that i, a woman, if i were such a thing, there is no telling, i could be one you never know, was more a man then he. and it still breathes parsay.

Hey, if you want to call yourself a liar, that's your business.


it still requires oxygen. lack of lungs not stoping that need.
Many things require oxygen and do not breath. Try building a campfire without any air, and see how well you do. I suppose you're going to tell me that campfires "breath," right?

Why, when women were created, my friend.

See, it's a "compromise" if women are allowed to retain a few basic human rights, in exchange for quietly handing over bodily autonomy. It's a "compromise" if women are sometimes allowed to make medical decisions for themselves as though they were actual autonomous beings, as long as they don't expect that they will always be granted this special treat. It's a "compromise" if women are generously permitted some measure of human dignity, as long as they don't expect to get to keep these rights after a male has spooged inside them.
That's all very true, and it's only gotten worse in the current political climate, where the word "bipartisanship" has a very similar definition to "compromise" these days.

The fetus is human but not a person.

The opening post is a bit unclear on that. Are you saying you want people to discuss their own wishful thinking? As in, "If I found myself pregnant, I would have an easier time getting an abortion if I knew the fetus wasn't a person"?

I thought it wa clear. Most of the abortion debate consists of what the fetus is, not what someone would do. So, if the fetus is ___, what would you do? I didn't create this to discuss what it is, I created it to discuss what would happen.

The fetus is human but not a person.

A distinction that requires rather vague philosophical definitions to work. I prefer to state that a fetus is not a person, and even through its development at a point becomes a person, its personhood does not outweigh the mother's right to self determination.

A distinction that requires rather vague philosophical definitions to work. I prefer to state that a fetus is not a person, and even through its development at a point becomes a person, its personhood does not outweigh the mother's right to self determination.
I stated that the fetus is not a person but it's certainly human. I think that the distinction between a human and a person is an important one to make and states clearly what is at stake.

when have i called myself a liar. i am merely stating that i could be anything. i could be a woman, a man, some sort of government agent. and you would never know. same as we will not know who you are. and you seem very pro-woman. an extreamist if you ask me. A pregnant woman had her chance to chose in the bedroom. if she was raped that is different and it is still her choice. If the condem broke or the pill didn't work it is still your fault for relying on the inventions of men. I say woman loose the "right" to choose when they consent to sex.

Why, when women were created, my friend.

See, it's a "compromise" if women are allowed to retain a few basic human rights, in exchange for quietly handing over bodily autonomy. It's a "compromise" if women are sometimes allowed to make medical decisions for themselves as though they were actual autonomous beings, as long as they don't expect that they will always be granted this special treat. It's a "compromise" if women are generously permitted some measure of human dignity, as long as they don't expect to get to keep these rights after a male has spooged inside them.

Have you ever considered that some people might not accept an absolute right to bodily autonomy for anyone?

That's all very true, and it's only gotten worse in the current political climate, where the word "bipartisanship" has a very similar definition to "compromise" these days.
I think a lot of people need to wise up and recognize that there are some subject on which no compromise is appropriate.

Slave owners want to keep their slaves; slaves want to be free and equal citizens. What might be a good compromise? Some slaves go free while other do not? Partly free the slaves, but refuse them some of the rights of full citizens?

Rapists want to rape; their targets would prefer not to be raped. What compromise shall we advocate? Perhaps some people should be raped, but not others? Or perhaps all people should be raped from time to time, while being allowed to avoid rape other times? Perhaps we can decide that certain behaviors make a person deserving of rape, and therefore it's okay for rapists to use those victims?

Forgive me, but I do not think it is a virtue to accept "compromise" on all subjects.

The subject of bodily autonomy is such a subject. The "compromise" that has been proposed on this thread is a violation of women that is beyond anything we do to even our convicted murderers and rapists. Even criminals on death row retain the right to refuse organ harvesting, yet this blithe "compromise" would strip every pregnant woman of that right. Unacceptable.

I stated that the fetus is not a person but it's certainly human. I think that the distinction between a human and a person is an important one to make and states clearly what is at stake.

I think that the distinction between "human" and "person" is largely a philosophical one with a rather weak distinction.

I prefer to use "human" and "person" interchangably, and rather simply like to call a fetus a non human life.

Have you ever considered that some people might not accept an absolute right to bodily autonomy for anyone?
Sure. There are people who believe their bodies are somebody else's property. There are many people who believe their bodies belong to a God or magical spirits. I support their right to believe as they wish. If they attempt to lay claim to my body, I ever-so-gently correct them. :D

I think that the distinction between "human" and "person" is largely a philosophical one with a rather weak distinction.

I prefer to use "human" and "person" interchangably, and rather simply like to call a fetus a non human life.

The fetus is clearly an entity of the human species, though. It is biologically human.

I think that the distinction between "human" and "person" is largely a philosophical one with a rather weak distinction.

I prefer to use "human" and "person" interchangably, and rather simply like to call a fetus a non human life.
I like mine. You like yours.

I think that the distinction between "human" and "person" is largely a philosophical one with a rather weak distinction.

Hardly!

Your liver is human. Your liver is not, however, a person. I'd say that's a pretty significant distinction.


I prefer to use "human" and "person" interchangably, and rather simply like to call a fetus a non human life.
You are incorrect when you do so. A fetus is human life, just as an egg cell is human life. Just as a skin cell is human life. Just as your liver is human life.

when have i called myself a liar. i am merely stating that i could be anything. i could be a woman, a man, some sort of government agent.
Government agents don't have genders? :eek:
and you would never know. same as we will not know who you are. and you seem very pro-woman. an extreamist if you ask me.
So everyone who is "pro-woman" (aka feminist) is an extremist? BS.
A pregnant woman had her chance to chose in the bedroom. if she was raped that is different and it is still her choice. If the condem broke or the pill didn't work it is still your fault for relying on the inventions of men. I say woman loose the "right" to choose when they consent to sex.

How very Christian of you. I'm sure Jesus was THRILLED to hear that.


Knowing full well, of course, that Jesus Himself was a feminist. :eek:

Sorry Bottle, his post was just that stupid that I had to say something.

The fetus is clearly an entity of the human species, though. It is biologically human.
That's what I was going for. To suggest its not, I feel gives pro-life people an opportunity to find fault in the pro-choice stance.

I thought it wa clear. Most of the abortion debate consists of what the fetus is, not what someone would do. So, if the fetus is ___, what would you do? I didn't create this to discuss what it is, I created it to discuss what would happen.
Well, then I answered that with my first post.

The personhood of the fetus would have no bearing on my decision whatsoever. If I wanted to be pregnant, I would continue the pregnancy. If I did not want to be pregnant, I would abort the pregnancy.

when have i called myself a liar. i am merely stating that i could be anything. i could be a woman, a man, some sort of government agent. and you would never know. same as we will not know who you are. and you seem very pro-woman. an extreamist if you ask me. A pregnant woman had her chance to chose in the bedroom. if she was raped that is different and it is still her choice. If the condem broke or the pill didn't work it is still your fault for relying on the inventions of men. I say woman loose the "right" to choose when they consent to sex.

Ah, I'm such a big fan of the dirty whore argument.

:rolleyes:

You are incorrect when you do so. A fetus is human life, just as an egg cell is human life. Just as a skin cell is human life. Just as your liver is human life.

My liver is not a "human organism" in that it does not have the full set of characteristics that define "human".

And neither does a fetus. A fetus, and my liver, both contain human DNA, neither are a human organism.

Ah, I'm such a big fan of the dirty whore argument.

:rolleyes:
I like dirty whores, too.

Government agents don't have genders? :eek:

So everyone who is "pro-woman" (aka feminist) is an extremist? BS.


How very Christian of you. I'm sure Jesus was THRILLED to hear that.


Knowing full well, of course, that Jesus Himself was a feminist. :eek:

Sorry Bottle, his post was just that stupid that I had to say something.

No i say there is pro-woman, and anti-man. Anti-man being the extream. I am fine with prowoman. not fine with anti-man. (keep in mind i could be anything and no government agents are not allowed sexes.) Also who says im christain, in fact i will deny that i am catholic online. which makes it legaly binding. ;)

Sure. There are people who believe their bodies are somebody else's property. There are many people who believe their bodies belong to a God or magical spirits. I support their right to believe as they wish. If they attempt to lay claim to my body, I ever-so-gently correct them. :D

And there are people, like me, who don't believe in absolute rights at all, and believe that there are social obligations (like protecting life) that supercede individual negative rights like that of bodily autonomy.

That does not translate into support for slavery, rape, or double standards with regard to women or pregnant women.

when have i called myself a liar. i am merely stating that i could be anything. i could be a woman, a man, some sort of government agent. and you would never know. same as we will not know who you are.

...Ok. You have fun with that.


and you seem very pro-woman. an extreamist if you ask me.

Yes, I advocate the radical, extremist notion that women are actual human beings, and that our system of law should acknowledge them as such. I'm crazy like that.


A pregnant woman had her chance to chose in the bedroom.

A pregnant woman has a chance to choose every single day of her life. Just as anybody else does.


if she was raped that is different and it is still her choice.

Oh yes, I know this one by heart: it's ok for a woman to have an abortion, as long as she didn't enjoy the sex.


If the condem broke or the pill didn't work it is still your fault for relying on the inventions of men. I say woman loose the "right" to choose when they consent to sex.
Yeah, like how people give up their right to get a blood transplant the moment they choose to get in a car...see, if you get into an accident, it's your own fault that you decided to drive! And if you might need a blood transfusion, well, you shouldn't have chosen to get in the car, now should you?

Sure. There are people who believe their bodies are somebody else's property. There are many people who believe their bodies belong to a God or magical spirits. I support their right to believe as they wish. If they attempt to lay claim to my body, I ever-so-gently correct them. :D
Like the gentle hug of a python? ;)

And there are people, like me, who don't believe in absolute rights at all, and believe that there are social obligations (like protecting life) that supercede individual negative rights like that of bodily autonomy.

That does not translate into support for slavery, rape, or double standards with regard to women or pregnant women.
Why are the rights of bodily autonomy negative?

My liver is not a "human organism" in that it does not have the full set of characteristics that define "human".

Your liver is not an organism, but it is human. I think the distinction you are looking for is the one between something that is "human" and something that is "a human individual" or "a human organism." It is a very crucial distinction.


And neither does a fetus. A fetus, and my liver, both contain human DNA, neither are a human organism.
At certain late stages of development, a fetus is indeed a human organism. Whether or not this means it is a human person is where the debate comes in, since nobody has yet provided a comprehensive and universally-accepted definition of human personhood.

Like the gentle hug of a python? ;)
Or the soothing effects of a fast-acting neurotoxin...

;)

Given that an embryo doesn't even have functional lungs (or, indeed, a respiratory system of any kind) until weeks into the pregnancy, I'd say that's a dubious statement.

To be perfectly technical, the embryo never has functional lungs. The fetus doesn't either. The lungs do not become fully functional until birth - when the first breath is taken. And proper pulmonary circulation begins soon thereafter (unless the baby has a defect, in which case it has to be corrected).

Ah, I'm such a big fan of the dirty whore argument.

:rolleyes:

not dirty whore, just that they already made the decision. im fine with them having sex. they just need to realise the consequences. if I drink too much and then crash into another car and hurt that person. i suffer consequences. but woman can have sex willy nilly then go to a doctor and basicly erase the evidence of their activities.

not dirty whore, just that they already made the decision. im fine with them having sex. they just need to realise the consequences. if I drink too much and then crash into another car and hurt that person. i suffer consequences. but woman can have sex willy nilly then go to a doctor and basicly erase the evidence of their activities.
What the hell are you doing in a car if you've been drinking too much? You should have had a plan before you started drinking. Hmmm. Much like many women have a plan before they decide to have sex.

not dirty whore, just that they already made the decision. im fine with them having sex. they just need to realise the consequences. if I drink too much and then crash into another car and hurt that person. i suffer consequences. but woman can have sex willy nilly then go to a doctor and basicly erase the evidence of their activities.

"Erase the evidence..."

A woman who has an unplanned pregnancy can't just go to the doctor, get an abortion, and everything goes away. An abortion, itself, is a major decision - and one that she will live with for the rest of her life. You discount it as if it were just a day-trip to the park.

Why are the rights of bodily autonomy negative?

I suppose they don't have to be, but Bottle seems to be talking about the negative right of bodily autonomy here - no one has the right to compromise someone else's bodily autonomy by compelling her to accept a fetus (or to participate in blood transfusion).

To be perfectly technical, the embryo never has functional lungs. The fetus doesn't either. The lungs do not become fully functional until birth - when the first breath is taken. And proper pulmonary circulation begins soon thereafter (unless the baby has a defect, in which case it has to be corrected).
Yeah, I was hedging; the lungs are theoretically functional before birth, but they aren't literally functional until after birth.

As for the original question (so that the OP doesn't get mad at me):

For the options, none of the above really. At some point the fetus is a potential human person. At some point it is a human person. I'm fairly certain that second time point is after the point at which elective abortions are performed, so the question becomes rather moot.


If someone I knew had an unplanned pregnancy: I would support them and their decision in any way I could. This might mean being there for them after an abortion, taking them to appointments for prenatal care, being there for them after and adoption, or helping babysit after a baby was born. I would help talk them through the decision, but it wouldn't be mine to make.

If I was pregnant (which, at this point, would be unplanned): I'd have a baby a little sooner than I thought. My fiance and I have discussed this, and neither of us would want to have an abortion. We'd probably push our marriage plans (although not the actual wedding ceremony) forward a bit so that we could already be legally married when the baby was born. We'd get me on better insurance (probably his). And then we'd start saving money like mad.

...Ok. You have fun with that.


Yes, I advocate the radical, extremist notion that women are actual human beings, and that our system of law should acknowledge them as such. I'm crazy like that.


A pregnant woman has a chance to choose every single day of her life. Just as anybody else does.


Oh yes, I know this one by heart: it's ok for a woman to have an abortion, as long as she didn't enjoy the sex.


Yeah, like how people give up their right to get a blood transplant the moment they choose to get in a car...see, if you get into an accident, it's your own fault that you decided to drive! And if you might need a blood transfusion, well, you shouldn't have chosen to get in the car, now should you?


No getting in a car does not deny you blood transfusions if so then too many people would die and that would be bad. we want a positive outcome not a negative. a child is wonderfull and there are plenty of people out there who cannot have them. Give your child to one of them. so that they might enjoy what you wont. you would support a breast cancer foundation by giving things you don't use or get enjoyment from to say a garrage sale put on by that foundation. or do you veiw those as yours and they shouldn't be used or enjoyed by others.

not dirty whore, just that they already made the decision. im fine with them having sex. they just need to realise the consequences.

Pregnancy is one possible consequence of sex. Childbirth is only one possible consequence of pregnancy; abortion or miscarriage are also possible consequences of pregnancy. A woman who aborts her pregnancy is experiencing the consequences of sex every bit as much as a woman who carries her pregnancy to term.


if I drink too much and then crash into another car and hurt that person. i suffer consequences.

Yes. However, one of those consequences is NOT that you will be denied medical care because you were drunk. You are still allowed to receive medical care if you choose.


but woman can have sex willy nilly then go to a doctor and basicly erase the evidence of their activities.
Yes, damn those sluts! They think that they get to retain bodily autonomy even after they've been fucked! Those sperm-rejecting harlots should be forced to bear children whether they like it or not, to teach them the consequences of acting as if they get to make choices! If a woman gets fucked, she had damn well better STAY fucked!

No getting in a car does not deny you blood transfusions if so then too many people would die and that would be bad. we want a positive outcome not a negative. a child is wonderfull and there are plenty of people out there who cannot have them. Give your child to one of them. so that they might enjoy what you wont. you would support a breast cancer foundation by giving things you don't use or get enjoyment from to say a garrage sale put on by that foundation. or do you veiw those as yours and they shouldn't be used or enjoyed by others.
Orphanages are overflowing all over the world.

What the hell are you doing in a car if you've been drinking too much? You should have had a plan before you started drinking. Hmmm. Much like many women have a plan before they decide to have sex.

yes but my plan does not invovle killing (how can something not alive die. you cannot kill a rock. you can kill a cow. cows are alive rocks are not. you can kill' euthanize whatever a fetus and it dies. but people argue it is not alive.) another thing. if a plan means someone dies so i don't get in trouble or reduce my image then it sucks as a plan.

yes but my plan does not invovle killing (how can something not alive die. you cannot kill a rock. you can kill a cow. cows are alive rocks are not. you can kill' euthanize whatever a fetus and it dies. but people argue it is not alive.) another thing. if a plan means someone dies so i don't get in trouble or reduce my image then it sucks as a plan.
I can't decipher this... somebody else get to it.

No getting in a car does not deny you blood transfusions if so then too many people would die and that would be bad.

Childbirth kills 17 times more women than abortion.

But I guess women aren't "people," so it's not so bad if they die.

we want a positive outcome not a negative.

And a positive outcome is ensuring that 51% of the human population is stripped of the most fundamental human rights. Wheee!

Any doubt that you are male has long since evaporated.


a child is wonderfull and there are plenty of people out there who cannot have them. Give your child to one of them. so that they might enjoy what you wont.

A kidney is wonderful, and there are plenty of people out there who haven't got one. Give your kidney to one of them, so that they might enjoy what you won't.


you would support a breast cancer foundation by giving things you don't use or get enjoyment from to say a garrage sale put on by that foundation. or do you veiw those as yours and they shouldn't be used or enjoyed by others.
Wow. I'm the sperm-rejecting man-hating baby killer, and even I'm not going to go around comparing a baby to the crap you give away at a garage sale.

"Hey, ladies, why can't you just take one for the team, huh? Sure, you'll endanger your life and your health. Sure, you'll be forever giving up your body as you know it. Sure, you don't want to do any of this, and you're being forced to against your wishes. But just think: when the labor is over, you can toss the kid to some strangers who aren't willing to adopt one of the millions of children already waiting in orphanages around the world!! Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?"

Once again it all boils down to the old argument. If we allow abortions then people might have sex without concequences. And if they are able to have sex without concequences...well then people won't be afraid to have sex.

And without the fear of bad things happening to you, people will start having sex more.

And damned if we can't have that, because if people start having sex more, they might start thinking it's ok to do things they like to do, and not feel GUILTY about it. And if people can do things they like, without feeling guilty for doing them, then they might start recognizing that this isn't a bad thing, and it certainly isn't a sinful thing. And if we do that, then what role does the church have, if not to tell us we've been bad and will go to hell, unless we do what they tell us to do?

Once again it all boils down to the old argument. If we allow abortions then people might have sex without concequences. And if they are able to have sex without concequences...well then people won't be afraid to have sex.

And without the fear of bad things happening to you, people will start having sex more.

And damned if we can't have that, because if people start having sex more, they might start thinking it's ok to do things they like to do, and not feel GUILTY about it. And if people can do things they like, without feeling guilty for doing them, then they might start recognizing that this isn't a bad thing, and it certainly isn't a sinful thing. And if we do that, then what role does the church have, if not to tell us we've been bad and will go to hell, unless we do what they tell us to do?
:rolleyes:

Once again it all boils down to the old argument. If we allow abortions then people might have sex without concequences. And if they are able to have sex without concequences...well then people won't be afraid to have sex.

And without the fear of bad things happening to you, people will start having sex more.

And damned if we can't have that, because if people start having sex more, they might start thinking it's ok to do things they like to do, and not feel GUILTY about it. And if people can do things they like, without feeling guilty for doing them, then they might start recognizing that this isn't a bad thing, and it certainly isn't a sinful thing. And if we do that, then what role does the church have, if not to tell us we've been bad and will go to hell, unless we do what they tell us to do?

Only one nit to pick: replace "people" with "women." It's currently quite okay for men to have sex, and to enjoy it. Men are not supposed to be afraid of having sex, men are supposed to be afraid that women may get the crazy notion that they can choose when, how, and with whom to have sex.

:rolleyes:

What do you think:

they just need to realise the consequences. ...woman can have sex willy nilly then go to a doctor and basicly erase the evidence of their activities.

Is supposed to mean? sex should have concequences, and abortion allows you to have sex without concequence.

Why should sex have concequence? What purpose does that serve other than to make people afraid to have sex, or "suffer the concequences". Why should I have to suffer ANYTHING about an act that harms nobody without their consent?

Only one nit to pick: replace "people" with "women." It's currently quite okay for men to have sex, and to enjoy it. Men are not supposed to be afraid of having sex, men are supposed to be afraid that women may get the crazy notion that they can choose when, how, and with whom to have sex.

Well I was refering generally to specific religions that define "sex without procreation" is sin, regardless of who.

If we're talking general society, then sure, you're right. But I think many, MANY of the anti abortion arguments, once you boil them down to their most simple, consists of "don't have abortions, because abortions mean people can have sex without worrying about it, and god doesn't want that, so god doesn't want abortions"

Pregnancy is one possible consequence of sex. Childbirth is only one possible consequence of pregnancy; abortion or miscarriage are also possible consequences of pregnancy. A woman who aborts her pregnancy is experiencing the consequences of sex every bit as much as a woman who carries her pregnancy to term.


Yes. However, one of those consequences is NOT that you will be denied medical care because you were drunk. You are still allowed to receive medical care if you choose.


Yes, damn those sluts! They think that they get to retain bodily autonomy even after they've been fucked! Those sperm-rejecting harlots should be forced to bear children whether they like it or not, to teach them the consequences of acting as if they get to make choices! If a woman gets fucked, she had damn well better STAY fucked!

but i go to prison. i suffer. those who get abortions do not suffer. not one bit. and yes those fucked better stay fucked because those dead stay dead and those without arms continue to not have fully mobile arms. if you want me to seem extream ill seem extream:

we should just kill anyone woh has pre marital sex. its the consequence of their actions. they don't have any rights after sex.

is this what you want me to sound like: big bad christian wants people to live. even though others might suffer because of it. boo hoo. i want an abortian but Mr. jesus lover said i can't. it's not my fault i went and had sex. it's not my fault i got pregnant. because i didn't expect it to happen. i said to myself...

self, sex is fun and of course i won't get pregnant because i don't want to.

but myself didn't listen. and now im pregnant.

Go cry to someone else. you made your choice you didn't think out all the consequences and now your angry. My thought is that somewhere in your life a man hurt you emotionaly. and now you want to get back at them. thats why you asumed im a man.

And i will now say that yes i am a man. and yes i am a christian. and i don't hate woman. i hate people like you who want rights but only the positive. you want to work but if you get paid slightly less then men in the same postion you whine about it. even though there in a diferent company half way across the US.

Childbirth kills 17 times more women than abortion.

But I guess women aren't "people," so it's not so bad if they die.

And a positive outcome is ensuring that 51% of the human population is stripped of the most fundamental human rights. Wheee!

Any doubt that you are male has long since evaporated.


A kidney is wonderful, and there are plenty of people out there who haven't got one. Give your kidney to one of them, so that they might enjoy what you won't.


Wow. I'm the sperm-rejecting man-hating baby killer, and even I'm not going to go around comparing a baby to the crap you give away at a garage sale.

"Hey, ladies, why can't you just take one for the team, huh? Sure, you'll endanger your life and your health. Sure, you'll be forever giving up your body as you know it. Sure, you don't want to do any of this, and you're being forced to against your wishes. But just think: when the labor is over, you can toss the kid to some strangers who aren't willing to adopt one of the millions of children already waiting in orphanages around the world!! Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside?"

you just don't get it. this is what im refuring to. you claim that your life will be ruined if you have a child. have you ever had a child?

but i go to prison. i suffer. those who get abortions do not suffer. not one bit. and yes those fucked better stay fucked because those dead stay dead and those without arms continue to not have fully mobile arms. if you want me to seem extream ill seem extream:

we should just kill anyone woh has pre marital sex. its the consequence of their actions. they don't have any rights after sex.

True colors come out, and we're not at all surprised.

is this what you want me to sound like: big bad christian wants

That's pretty much what we expected you to sound like.

because i didn't expect it to happen. i said to myself...

self, sex is fun and of course i won't get pregnant because i don't want to.

but myself didn't listen. and now im pregnant.

Here's where you're just a fucking dumbass. You think people don't recognize they CAN'T get pregnant. Sometimes it happens, even with best intention. And people go into it not thinking "gee, I can never get pregnant", they go into it thinking "well, if I do, at least I can get an abortion".

thats why you asumed im a man.

She assumed you were a man because you SAID you were a man, you freaking dumbass.

And i will now say that yes i am a man.

we know, you said that already.


and yes i am a christian.

We know.

and i don't hate woman.

I don't hate black people, but I want slaves. Bullshit. If you want to take the rights of any group away, ANY group, that manifests a hatred towards that group.

i hate people like you who want rights but only the positive.

There's no such thing as a negative right. By definition all rights are positive.

you want to work but if you get paid slightly less then men in the same postion you whine about it. even though there in a diferent company half way acros the US.

Now you're just being an ignorant asshole.

Hey, who here wants to see the telegraph that this joker sent me a few nights ago, anyone want to see his true colors?

but i go to prison. i suffer. those who get abortions do not suffer. not one bit.

You quite obviously have no idea what you are talking about. I have known several women who have had abortions. Each has suffered. Either you don't know anyone who has had an abortion, or you have no compassion whatsoever.

you just don't get it. this is what im refuring to. you claim that your life will be ruined if you have a child. have you ever had a child?

Please point out where she said that.

Seriously, who wants to see the PM he sent me a bit ago, nice showing of true colors on that one.

Seriously, who wants to see the PM he sent me a bit ago, nice showing of true colors on that one.

If you want to post it, then post it.

show us! :cool:

Certainly. This was sent to me a day ago by our dear friend here, in regards to the early conversation about the parasitic nature of a fetus. note, this was not in response to any TG I sent, totally out of the blue:

you brain dead fucktard. i shit more inteligence then you will ever have. And i hope that when you get old enough that other people have to care for you, you get dumped in some two bit shit hole of a nursing home where they abuse the patiants physicaly and emotionaly. and I hope that one day i will get to meet you in person so that i might laugh in your face. that i might look apon you and what your degree has gotten you. maybe pelt you with your precious dictionary.

Yes...he spelled "inteligence" wrong, something I was sure to point out to him.

Now you're just being an ignorant asshole.

Hey, who here wants to see the telegraph that this joker sent me a few nights ago, anyone want to see his true colors?

telegraph? i know not of any telegraph. why would i send you a telegraph. I keep nothing secret. ooh who want's to know how old i am. first you have to guess.

Please point out where she said that.

everywhere. read the part about take one for the team.

Admittedly the name was different on the TG, however:

1) the typing structure was the same

2) it made specific references to a conversation he and I had

3) everyone should go back and read pages 3-6 of this thread, and wonder who ELSE would be prompted to send this.

Certainly. This was sent to me a day ago by our dear friend here, in regards to the early conversation about the parasitic nature of a fetus. note, this was not in response to any TG I sent, totally out of the blue:



Yes...he spelled "inteligence" wrong, something I was sure to point out to him.

can you prove it was me. who sent it to you?

Admittedly the name was different on the TG, however:

1) the typing structure was the same

2) it made specific references to a conversation he and I had

3) everyone should go back and read pages 3-6 of this thread, and wonder who ELSE would be prompted to send this.

there are several people who type like me. there are also several people who like to keep things private. I am not one who does that though. also other people can read, not just you. and they can gather enough information to type something like that out of anger. or you could have typed it. you did say you had education. and anyone can forge anger.

Yes...he spelled "inteligence" wrong, something I was sure to point out to him.

i must point out that you seem to eager to point out "my" spelling mistake like you did last night. trying to make some sort of conection. there is a spell checker you know. and someone with my horible ability to spell would have used it. i even corrected the mistake you pointed out to me. i must thank you for that. i hate looking like an idiot to those that think me one for my beleifs.

Orphanages are overflowing all over the world.

Didn't you know? Adoption isn't about taking in a child who needs a home. No, of course not. Adoption is about a person getting the perfectly healthy little blonde, blue-eyed infant they always wanted.

Didn't you know? Adoption isn't about taking in a child who needs a home. No, of course not. Adoption is about a person getting the perfectly healthy little blonde, blue-eyed infant they always wanted.
Who can spot hypocrisy when they see it? We can!

Didn't you know? Adoption isn't about taking in a child who needs a home. No, of course not. Adoption is about a person getting the perfectly healthy little blonde, blue-eyed infant they always wanted.

blonde blue-eyed infants don't last though. its a shame. were running out of landfills to put the ones that change.

Is supposed to mean? sex should have concequences, and abortion allows you to have sex without concequence.

Why should sex have concequence? What purpose does that serve other than to make people afraid to have sex, or "suffer the concequences". Why should I have to suffer ANYTHING about an act that harms nobody without their consent?
so because one person says something on the internet all of the sudden it's a huge church conspiracy to keep people from having sex because sex is bad?

oh Arthais101 where have you gone. and is bottle with you. you seemed to wither away. are you afraid of a 15 year old? i hope not, i do not wish to inspire fear only understanding.

so because one person says something on the internet all of the sudden it's a huge church conspiracy to keep people from having sex because sex is bad?

and i didn't even say sex is bad, people just should not have a 'get out of jail free' card.

and i didn't even say sex is bad, people just should not have a 'get out of jail free' card.
Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison. Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison. Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison.


I can't stop these words from spinning in my head.

Sex isn't bad...

so because one person says something on the internet all of the sudden it's a huge church conspiracy to keep people from having sex because sex is bad?


well to be fair not just one person but many on the internet and elsewhere has shared this point of view.

I cant remember the exact details, but does anyone remember the issue that came up where they found a cure to prevent a certain STD and church leaders came out against it because it would promote promiscuity?

But you are correct that the whole argument doesnt boil down to the points raised in that post, although for some it does, or at least seems to.

"Erase the evidence..."

A woman who has an unplanned pregnancy can't just go to the doctor, get an abortion, and everything goes away. An abortion, itself, is a major decision - and one that she will live with for the rest of her life. You discount it as if it were just a day-trip to the park.He has to--it's a part of the whole "dirty slut" argument.

well to be fair not just one person but many on the internet and elsewhere has shared this point of view.

I cant remember the exact details, but does anyone remember the issue that came up where they found a cure to prevent a certain STD and church leaders came out against it because it would promote promiscuity?

But you are correct that the whole argument doesnt boil down to the points raised in that post, although for some it does, or at least seems to.
It's the HPV virus vaccine, that helps prevent cervical cancer--some of the biggest anti-abortion groups were opposed to it, and said that they were because they thought it would promote promiscuity. And while other groups didn't actively oppose it, none of the anti-abortion groups came out in favor of the vaccine.

and i didn't even say sex is bad, people just should not have a 'get out of jail free' card.

By equating the ending of a pregnancy with a "get out of jail free card", you equate sex with a crime.


I cant remember the exact details, but does anyone remember the issue that came up where they found a cure to prevent a certain STD and church leaders came out against it because it would promote promiscuity?

Quite a few churches are opposed to the recently developed vaccination for HPV (which can cause cervical cancer). They want to tell young girls (who are the prime age to get it specifically because they are not yet sexually active) that it is better to just abstain than be vaccinated for it. Of course, these are the same people that think we shouldn't teach teenagers about condoms because if they don't know about condoms, they won't have sex. :rolleyes:

Edit: Nazz beat me to it, owell.

It's the HPV virus vaccine, that helps prevent cervical cancer--some of the biggest anti-abortion groups were opposed to it, and said that they were because they thought it would promote promiscuity. And while other groups didn't actively oppose it, none of the anti-abortion groups came out in favor of the vaccine.


thank you!

just like the argument proposed earlier, there certainly are large groups of people going, "oh noes! they are going to have sex without repercussions! they deserve cervical cancer, they do. we can't give them a free pass for going against Gods laws, even if the govt. says it isn't illegal."

Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison. Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison. Sex isn't bad... sex is like prison.


I can't stop these words from spinning in my head.

Sex isn't bad...

ok so you don't like my anology. do i care? no, not at all. im not saying prison im saying woman have the right to chose... to have sex or not. after that its in the hands of fate. or god. or whoever you decide governs your life. unless you think you do. then you shall go to hell;) ;)

By equating the ending of a pregnancy with a "get out of jail free card", you equate sex with a crime.



Quite a few churches are opposed to the recently developed vaccination for HPV (which can cause cervical cancer). They want to tell young girls (who are the prime age to get it specifically because they are not yet sexually active) that it is better to just abstain than be vaccinated for it. Of course, these are the same people that think we shouldn't teach teenagers about condoms because if they don't know about condoms, they won't have sex. :rolleyes:

Edit: Nazz beat me to it, owell.

Question: can't HPV also be transmitted through pregnancy?

so because one person says something on the internet all of the sudden it's a huge church conspiracy to keep people from having sex because sex is bad?

One person? no no no, course not dear.

But when you hear the same arguments, over, and over, and over again, you recognize themes.

Now some people do have OTHER arguments sure, but many many MANY of them boil down to that, we can't have people having sex without concequences!

Well, why not? The only logical answer is "because they'll have more sex".

And the only thing wrong with people having more sex is...if you think sex is generally a "bad thing"

its in the hands of fate. or god. or whoever you decide governs your life. unless you think you do. then you shall go to hell

My point thus is proven.

ok so you don't like my anology. do i care? no, not at all. im not saying prison im saying woman have the right to chose... to have sex or not. after that its in the hands of fate. or god. or whoever you decide governs your life. unless you think you do. then you shall go to hell;) ;)

actually women have the right to choose an abortion according to the law of the land, after they choose to have sex and accidentally get pregnant. so despite your lack of willingness to allow them that choice, they still have it.

so they are doing nothing illegal and the consequence of mental anguish after the abortion is definitely hell for some women but having and unwanted child would be hell for the parent as well as the child.

ok so you don't like my anology. do i care? no, not at all. im not saying prison im saying woman have the right to chose... to have sex or not. after that its in the hands of fate. or god. or whoever you decide governs your life. unless you think you do. then you shall go to hell;) ;)
Isn't hell a bad enough punishment? I don't mind if you think I'm going there. Can you possibly come up with a punishment worse? Why don't you let the sinners sin and then your God can sort us all out later? You live how you want to live, I live how I want to live, you go to heaven and I'll go to hell. Sound good?

Question: can't HPV also be transmitted through pregnancy?

Yes, although (according to wikipedia anyways), it's pretty rare. Most STDs can be transmitted from mother to child, IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV#Perinatal_transmission

ok so you don't like my anology. do i care? no, not at all. im not saying prison im saying woman have the right to chose... to have sex or not. after that its in the hands of fate. or god. or whoever you decide governs your life. unless you think you do. then you shall go to hell;) ;)

I'd gladly take the possibilty of hell for the certainty that I won't be forced to give up the right to choose what happens with my body by some big bearded fairy in the sky, thank you so much.

Yes, although (according to wikipedia anyways), it's pretty rare. Most STDs can be transmitted from mother to child, IIRC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV#Perinatal_transmission


I thought so. I'm so thankful for that HPV vaccine because I have a few good friends who have it. I would hate to think that it wouldnt be available because some church or anti-abortion groups don't like the idea of people having too much sex.

Quite a few churches are opposed to the recently developed vaccination for HPV (which can cause cervical cancer). They want to tell young girls (who are the prime age to get it specifically because they are not yet sexually active) that it is better to just abstain than be vaccinated for it. Of course, these are the same people that think we shouldn't teach teenagers about condoms because if they don't know about condoms, they won't have sex. :rolleyes:

Edit: Nazz beat me to it, owell.
I am aware of that :( and it sucks.

But for Atharis to say that someone being pro-life all boils down to them thinking sex is bad.........it just seems strawman-ish to me (is that a word?)

I am aware of that :( and it sucks.

But for Atharis to say that someone being pro-life all boils down to them thinking sex is bad.........it just seems strawman-ish to me (is that a word?)

I don't think he meant it as a general statement... he must have been refering to our particular little fanatic in this thread here.

I don't think he meant it as a general statement... he must have been refering to our particular little fanatic in this thread here.

I do not mean for all, this is true.

I meant for THIS poster, and how he represents the views of MANY. Not all, certainly not ALL.

But several.

any vaccine that saves lives is great. i don't think that people with stds deserve them because god stoped being fire and brimstone when he sent jesus. and i feel sorry for people with stds because some of the bigger groups do not donate to solveing those problems because they think those people deserve it.

But if the child would be healthy, the mother would be healthy i don't think the child should be killed. because i believe that a fetus is alive at conseption. that is my position.

you have yours.

i would like to withdraw most of what i said last night due to crankieness. im not asking it to be considered null just that you know that i was tired and feeling unwell. i did not send that telegram.

I don't think he meant it as a general statement... he must have been refering to our particular little fanatic in this thread here.


He did qualify later saying that he didn't mean all anti-choicers, but the viewpoint is prevalent.

I do not mean for all, this is true.

I meant for THIS poster, and how he represents the views of MANY. Not all, certainly not ALL.

But several.


i speak only for myself. that is all i can speak for. lumping others in with me is your choice. defineing myself from others is mine. again you have your veiws i have mine. you have your experiances i have mine. slightly less due to my age. i do not lump you in with others. do not lump others in with me.

Q : (fill in the blanks) So, the fetus is ___, and then ___

A: inconvenient, aborted


Doesnt much matter if it's human or person or alive or other. It is inconvenient and it is legal to terminate it.

Q : (fill in the blanks) So, the fetus is ___, and then ___

A: inconvenient, aborted


Doesnt much matter if it's human or person or alive or other. It is inconvenient and it is legal to terminate it.


is it wrong of me to have filled in the blanks as: BBQ'd, consumed?

is it wrong of me to have filled in the blanks as: BBQ's, consumed?

More than likely is. Yes. But hey whatever flies in your neighborhood is none of my business.

is it wrong of me to have filled in the blanks as: BBQ's, consumed?

nope, aslong as i get to use your fetus as an example for mine.

laughwhore, hated

nope, aslong as i get to use your fetus as an example for mine.

laughwhore, hated

ahh yes... hate because of an obvious joke... very Christian of you indeed. Perhaps you should call the PC police on me.

nope, aslong as i get to use your fetus as an example for mine.

laughwhore, hated

What the big deal with eating foetuses? I mean they just throw them in the bin anyway.

ahh yes... hate because of an obvious joke... very Christian of you indeed. Perhaps you should call the PC police on me.

retaliation because of an obvious joke, how very athiest of you. no ones got your back but you. so you better defend it to the death.

What the big deal with eating foetuses? I mean they just throw them in the bin anyway.

I never said human faeiouteuses anyway... maybe I meant duck fetaeiouses :p

I never said human faeiouteuses anyway... maybe I meant duck fetaeiouses :p

You ever eaten an egg? Foetuses.

retaliation because of an obvious joke, how very athiest of you. no ones got your back but you. so you better defend it to the death.


Why do you assume I am atheist? I could be a man or a woman or perhaps a govt. agent.

actually I'm not an atheist. I believe in God, just not the Christian God.

What retaliation were you talking about anyway? Saying that hate isn't very Christian. Did you consider that name calling? Hmmm, maybe I am thinking of a different religion... I have heard many hateful Christians spout their anger and hatred many times, but I coulda swore...

You ever eaten an egg? Foetuses.


That was my point. I think. :cool:

retaliation because of an obvious joke, how very athiest of you. no ones got your back but you. so you better defend it to the death.

I think you just proved his point.

That was my point. I think. :cool:

You said BBQd. Then eaten. How do you keep the eggs from falling through the grill?

I think you just proved his point.


Well he is only 15, I think we can safely assume that puberty has his hormones in a rage and that he really doesn't understand the true message of his Lord and Savior Jesus Christo.

You said BBQd. Then eaten. How do you keep the eggs from falling through the grill?

Ever hear of Balut? Fertilized duck eggs with a partly grown fetus-duck inside. mmm mmm good.

*vegetarian* shhhh

Why do you assume I am atheist? I could be a man or a woman or perhaps a govt. agent.

actually I'm not an atheist. I believe in God, just not the Christian God.

What retaliation were you talking about anyway? Saying that hate isn't very Christian. Did you consider that name calling? Hmmm, maybe I am thinking of a different religion... I have heard many hateful Christians spout their anger and hatred many times, but I coulda swore...


christains are angry all the time. its proven fact. because if we're not angry it would make us have to think. also good for you for not being athiest. people who believe there is nothing to believe have problems. the problem with all religion is that most people use it to divide themselves from others. "there not ___ so i can be mean to them. There going to hell anyways." I reataliate because i pride myself in my religion. but not in those who are in it. out of curiosity, of what religion do you hail.

You ever eaten an egg? Foetuses.
no, the eggs you eat are not fertilized.

Ever hear of Balut? Fertilized duck eggs with a partly grown fetus-duck inside. mmm mmm good.

*vegetarian* shhhh

I'll try most things but I think I draw the line at that

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Balut_Egg.jpg

christains are angry all the time. its proven fact. because if we're not angry it would make us have to think. also good for you for not being athiest. people who believe there is nothing to believe have problems. the problem with all religion is that most people use it to divide themselves from others. "there not ___ so i can be mean to them. There going to hell anyways." I reataliate because i pride myself in my religion. but not in those who are in it. out of curiosity, of what religion do you hail.
so, I am angry all the time? and I am because then I don't have to think?

cool, I so did not know that.

Well he is only 15, I think we can safely assume that puberty has his hormones in a rage and that he really doesn't understand the true message of his Lord and Savior Jesus Christo.

I am a very stable 15 year old. i read alot and i think too much. i understand the message as it has been taught. i do however dislike an insult to that which i believe in as you would.

no, the eggs you eat are not fertilized.

They're not? Why does the chicken lay them then? How is an egg formed without the genetic information from both parents?

so, I am angry all the time? and I am because then I don't have to think?

cool, I so did not know that.
You need to calm down.

so, I am angry all the time? and I am because then I don't have to think?

cool, I so did not know that.

Think about it. christains have crusades. witch hunts. slavery.(most southern slave owners were of some christain faith.) i am a christian too. and i use christain to describe the entirety of it. you your self may not be angry all the time. but if christains did'nt have someone to be angry at we would think and a new form of christianity would be created. think of luther. he thought and bam a new form of christianity. if there had been a war of some sort he would be to ocupied condeming the hethens.

christains are angry all the time. its proven fact. because if we're not angry it would make us have to think. also good for you for not being athiest. people who believe there is nothing to believe have problems. the problem with all religion is that most people use it to divide themselves from others. "there not ___ so i can be mean to them. There going to hell anyways." I reataliate because i pride myself in my religion. but not in those who are in it. out of curiosity, of what religion do you hail.

I don't follow any religion and have many atheist friends who are fine people with nothing to worry about in the spiritual realm. They are very kind, giving, and loving people. You are doing the same thing here that you say you don't like people to use religionto do.

"They're not religious so I can say thay have problems."

If you have pride in your religion, then learn some of the most important messaes from jesus (in my eyes) and follow them... like "turn the other cheek" and "let he without sin cast the first stone", as well as "Time is never wasted if you're wasted all the time".

They're not? Why does the chicken lay them then? How is an egg formed without the genetic information from both parents?
a chicken lays unfertilized eggs, those are the ones you can take away from her, if it's got a baby chick in it she won't let you take it.

You need to calm down.
I'll keep that in mind. :rolleyes:

They're not? Why does the chicken lay them then? How is an egg formed without the genetic information from both parents?

The same way eggs are formed in human females. And egg will form in a regular period of time, it doesn't have to be fertilised.
The difference is that we humans have done away with the shell and the yolk and all that... mostly.

I'll try most things but I think I draw the line at that

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Balut_Egg.jpg


ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww

They're not? Why does the chicken lay them then? How is an egg formed without the genetic information from both parents?

God made it so.

I'll keep that in mind. :rolleyes:
I was joking...

I was joking...
cool, cause I was gonna do this really cool flame, but then I thought "what if he isn't kidding?"

Ever hear of Balut? Fertilized duck eggs with a partly grown fetus-duck inside. mmm mmm good.

*vegetarian* shhhh

So just out of curiosity did you mean Balut when you said BBQd and eaten?

Because quite frankly I thought you meant human fetuses.

As you implied unless you say nobody can know what you meant.

cool, cause I was gonna do this really cool flame, but then I thought "what if he isn't kidding?"
Now I want to see the really cool flame...

Now I want to see the really cool flame...
I could put it, but then get reported, or I could TG it to you, and then you could save it and report me next time I piss you off..........hmm?

I could put it, but then get reported, or I could TG it to you, and then you could save it and report me next time I piss you off..........hmm?
I could just act all offended and then you can have the satisfaction of offending me without fearing that you'll get in trouble.

So just out of curiosity did you mean Balut when you said BBQd and eaten?

Because quite frankly I thought you meant human fetuses.

As you implied unless you say nobody can know what you meant.


Does it really truely matter? Even if I did mean human Fetii, would you take it seriously?

I could just act all offended and then you can have the satisfaction of offending me without fearing that you'll get in trouble.
I don't know.......I am still afraid.........

no, the eggs you eat are not fertilized.

You can buy fertilised eggs here although I dont know why you'd do it to eat them. Some do though.

quick somone tell me im stupid. no ones done it in a while and im starting to feel smart.

I don't know.......I am still afraid.........

then you need to conjure up all that anger you have building up inside again and unleash the fury upon Desperate measures - just don't take it to Sinuhuian proportions.

I don't know.......I am still afraid.........
Lets make up. I can't stay angry with you.

You can buy fertilised eggs here although I dont know why you'd do it to eat them. Some do though.
true, but in general the eggs you would buy are not, at least we sold the unfertilized eggs when I was working on my uncle's farm, I tried to take a baby-chick containing egg once when I was 4, I still have the scar, the chickens protect those, the "empty" ones though? they could care less if you take them.

quick somone tell me im stupid. no ones done it in a while and im starting to feel smart.
You tempt us...

Lets make up. I can't stay angry with you.
okey-dokey jerk ;)

You tempt us...
now to be fair, a few months back someone called me an idiot and Tactical Grace said it was not a flame.

You tempt us...

here i'll help. ostriges can't fly.

when have i called myself a liar. i am merely stating that i could be anything. i could be a woman, a man, some sort of government agent. and you would never know. same as we will not know who you are. and you seem very pro-woman. an extreamist if you ask me. A pregnant woman had her chance to chose in the bedroom. if she was raped that is different and it is still her choice. If the condem broke or the pill didn't work it is still your fault for relying on the inventions of men. I say woman loose the "right" to choose when they consent to sex.
1. So taking precautions, if they fail, means you made the choice to have a child?

2. Having consentual sex means you choose to have a child?

What sort of twisted, fucked-up reasoning could ever lead you to those conclusion? Seriously. What sort of utterly whacked-out set of guidelines did you use?

now to be fair, a few months back someone called me an idiot and Tactical Grace said it was not a flame.

yes but that was you.

Does it really truely matter? Even if I did mean human Fetii, would you take it seriously?

At first I didnt think it truly did. Then you went to all the trouble to try to squirm out from under it being human fetuses barbecued and eaten and turn it into duck fetuses. At that point you piqued my curiosity. So now I wonder if you could possibly somehow have had Balut in mind from the start. No need to go into it if it is something you'd rather be kept hidden.

now to be fair, a few months back someone called me an idiot and Tactical Grace said it was not a flame.

With a thread full of evidence it's less of an insult and more just a statement of fact.

Edit: I just re-read this and realised how insulting it comes across. The post wasn't aimed at you smunkee.

1. So taking precautions, if they fail, means you made the choice to have a child?

2. Having consentual sex means you choose to have a child?

What sort of twisted, fucked-up reasoning could ever lead you to those conclusion? Seriously. What sort of utterly whacked-out set of guidelines did you use?

1. I think it.

2. I type it.

those are the steps i use to post. don't like it find somone older.

not dirty whore, just that they already made the decision. im fine with them having sex. they just need to realise the consequences.
Then, as was pointed out to Barrygoldwater in another thread, medical science needs to be junked. You fucked up and broke your arm? Oh well--no cast for you. That would be avoiding the consequences. You have cancer? Oh well--chemo/radiation would be avoiding the consequences. Ectopic pregnancy? Oh well--you're dead. Removing the fetus would be avoiding the consequences.

yes but that was you.
ah, but I am smarter wiser and cooler than you, in fact, I think I could probably report you for flamebait, you know asking someone to call you stupid, it's like bait......

At first I didnt think it truly did. Then you went to all the trouble to try to squirm out from under it being human fetuses barbecued and eaten and turn it into duck fetuses. At that point you piqued my curiosity. So now I wonder if you could possibly somehow have had Balut in mind from the start. No need to go into it if it is something you'd rather be kept hidden.


okay you got me I meant human fetuses as, of course, that is what this thread was about but I couldn't resist the chance to twist reality around for those who have a hard time taking a joke. squirming out of things is what I do best, next to squirming into them.

1. I think it.

2. I type it.

those are the steps i use to post. don't like it find somone older.
That's not what I asked, Poindexter. I asked what sort of twisted, fucked up reasoning you used to come to your utterly whacked-out conclusion, not the method you use to transfer that twisted fucked-up reasoning leading to the whacked-out conclusion onto here.

ah, but I am smarter wiser and cooler than you, in fact, I think I could probably report you for flamebait, you know asking someone to call you stupid, it's like bait......

so you are saying that he is dumber and uncool?

ah, but I am smarter wiser and cooler than you, in fact, I think I could probably report you for flamebait, you know asking someone to call you stupid, it's like bait......

yes but its my birthday and i haven't gotten a present yet. :(

1. I think it.

2. I type it.

those are the steps i use to post. don't like it find somone older.

hey, you are the one who asked someone to call you stupid... this guy just complied with your wishes... in a roundabout way.

so you are saying that he is dumber and uncool?
I can not be held responsible for what someone were to imagine in my posts. :cool:

Certainly. This was sent to me a day ago by our dear friend here, in regards to the early conversation about the parasitic nature of a fetus. note, this was not in response to any TG I sent, totally out of the blue:



Yes...he spelled "inteligence" wrong, something I was sure to point out to him.
As well as "patiants", "physicaly", and "emotionaly".

That's not what I asked, Poindexter. I asked what sort of twisted, fucked up reasoning you used to come to your utterly whacked-out conclusion, not the method you use to transfer that twisted fucked-up reasoning leading to the whacked-out conclusion onto here.

that is my reasoning i reason that if it came to my head it must be good enough to post on the web. tell me what reasoning you used to decide that my conclusions were fucked-up?

okay you got me I meant human fetuses as, of course, that is what this thread was about but I couldn't resist the chance to twist reality around for those who have a hard time taking a joke. squirming out of things is what I do best, next to squirming into them.

See? Doesnt that feel better?

I am aware of that :( and it sucks.

But for Atharis to say that someone being pro-life all boils down to them thinking sex is bad.........it just seems strawman-ish to me (is that a word?)
Every single argument against abortion that relies on "god" in any manner will boil down to that.

retaliation because of an obvious joke, how very athiest of you. no ones got your back but you. so you better defend it to the death.
athiest = most athy

atheist = one who lacks belief in the existence of a god or gods.

Just to help you with your spelling.

As well as "patiants", "physicaly", and "emotionaly".

we have yet to prove i did that. as i deny it. and anyone could have writen that. he even admited it wasn't my name.

true, but in general the eggs you would buy are not, at least we sold the unfertilized eggs when I was working on my uncle's farm, I tried to take a baby-chick containing egg once when I was 4, I still have the scar, the chickens protect those, the "empty" ones though? they could care less if you take them.

I wonder how soon after laying a fertilised egg a hen knows it is fertile and begins to protect it?

Every single argument against abortion that relies on "god" in any manner will boil down to that.

i think we have left that topic. you should stay with the times.

we have yet to prove i did that. as i deny it. and anyone could have writen that. he even admited it wasn't my name.
I'd ignore it at this point. Plead the fifth.

okey-dokey jerk ;)
At least I'm a likable jerk, though.

See? Doesnt that feel better?


no, I feel it has ruined everything and now I have to find a new joke.

So, the fetus is dead, and then ZOMBIE FETUS EATS ITS WAY OUT OF THE WOMB!

that is my reasoning i reason that if it came to my head it must be good enough to post on the web.
Hoo-boy. Got ourselves a live one here.


tell me what reasoning you used to decide that my conclusions were fucked-up?
If I get on a plane, do I give consent for it to be hijacked and flown into a building?

i think we have left that topic. you should stay with the times.
You should learn to grasp context, Poindexter. And to read the conversation in nested format.

Now apologize for your gross ignorance (144x!)

Strong language there, don't you think?


I just wonder why it's "moraly repugnant" to get rid of "a little parasite" . . .

Kinda funny how much you can anger people by talking about a 2 inch long blob of pre-eminent organic matter.

I find it interesting that most of the people who make policy decisions on abortion are old, white men. Seems a little wrong, doesn't it?

You should learn to grasp context, Poindexter. And to read the conversation in nested format.

Now apologize for your gross ignorance (144x!)

im sorry for your gross ignorance

im sorry for your gross ignorance

irony thy name is 'duuuuuuuh"

Kinda funny how much you can anger people by talking about a 2 inch long blob of pre-eminent organic matter.

I find it interesting that most of the people who make policy decisions on abortion are old, white men. Seems a little wrong, doesn't it?

yes, old people shouldn't make decisions.

irony thy name is 'duuuuuuuh"

but my names soup. you should realy get your eyesite looked at.

im sorry for your gross ignorance
It's only funny on Laugh-in. And that's been off-the-air in first-run for over 30 years.