|
|
Post by Zuma on Jul 29, 2011 18:47:10 GMT -8
A living sperm units with a living egg. There is no period of non-life, so whatever "it" is, it is alive. When two human beings reproduce, they don't create a different type of being then themselves. Therefore, "it" is clearly human. Therefore, the unborn are alive and human. And on this thinking, does that mean male masturbation is akin to abortion? |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 29, 2011 21:30:29 GMT -8
A living sperm units with a living egg. There is no period of non-life, so whatever "it" is, it is alive. When two human beings reproduce, they don't create a different type of being then themselves. Therefore, "it" is clearly human. Therefore, the unborn are alive and human. This is my stance. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 29, 2011 21:31:50 GMT -8
Ok, you want thoughtful. Those that are anti-abortion call themselves "pro-life" What is the definition of life? Is it HUMAN Life? What makes us HUMAN and the ape not HUMAN? Is the aborting of a Non-HUMAN life OK? Answer and we can continue. I don't know the definition of life, but the unborn are clearly alive. (a living sperm units with a living egg and creates a living zygote. There is no period of non-life). If the unborn was not alive, you wouldn't need an abortion to stop it's growth, that is kill it. Since I am unable to define life, can I go kill another human being? Clearly the unborn are human. Because their parents are human. Two humans reproduce another human (not an ape). The zygote is human, the fetus is human, the new born is human, the toddler is human, the child is human, the teenager is human, the adult is human and the senior citizen is human. We're human, because that is the type of being we are. Yes, if the unborn are not human, then go have abortions all you want. Unless they are an endangered species, then you go to jail. Couldn't have explained my feelings any better than this. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Jul 30, 2011 9:49:53 GMT -8
Well, at least I am sober.  Last resort of a desperate man in search of a convincing argument. Really pathetic response. =Bob Only a waisted drunk would resort to that kind of language. All I can do is point out I am sober to keep from getting in the pig pen with you. Now, back to the issue. When does human life begin and should anyone have the right to terminate it? |
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Jul 30, 2011 13:53:02 GMT -8
A living sperm units with a living egg. There is no period of non-life, so whatever "it" is, it is alive. When two human beings reproduce, they don't create a different type of being then themselves. Therefore, "it" is clearly human. Therefore, the unborn are alive and human. And on this thinking, does that mean male masturbation is akin to abortion? No, masturbation is not abortion. Just because something is "alive", doesn't mean you CAN'T kill it (or let it die). For example, plants are alive. It is OK to kill plants. The human sperm is "alive" human sperm, but not a human being. The human egg is an "alive" human egg, but not a human being. That is why it is OK to let sperm and the egg die. However, when the egg and sperm unite, then we have a unique human being. That is the unique "you" and the unique "me", that is the genetic blend of our parents. That is when "we" began. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 30, 2011 18:32:51 GMT -8
And on this thinking, does that mean male masturbation is akin to abortion? No, masturbation is not abortion. Just because something is "alive", doesn't mean you CAN'T kill it (or let it die). For example, plants are alive. It is OK to kill plants. The human sperm is "alive" human sperm, but not a human being. The human egg is an "alive" human egg, but not a human being. That is why it is OK to let sperm and the egg die. However, when the egg and sperm unite, then we have a unique human being. That is the unique "you" and the unique "me", that is the genetic blend of our parents. That is when "we" began. Pretty simple huh? Nobody can dispute what you've written. |
|
|
|
Post by soniat on Nov 13, 2011 23:05:59 GMT -8
What about Abortion ?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Nov 14, 2011 15:02:54 GMT -8
It helps to keep the world's overpopulation problem down. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Nov 27, 2011 9:39:14 GMT -8
Well, at least I am sober. Last resort of a desperate man in search of a convincing argument. Really pathetic response. =Bob I gave you the issue. Now you can respond to the basic question when you sober up or continue your pathetic little man verbal attacks behind your booze soaked brain and computer screen. Lets also talk about raising the tax on tobacco to punish weak minded and weak willed smokers. |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Dec 9, 2011 19:37:25 GMT -8
Last resort of a desperate man in search of a convincing argument. Really pathetic response. =Bob Only a waisted drunk would resort to that kind of language. All I can do is point out I am sober to keep from getting in the pig pen with you. Now, back to the issue. When does human life begin and should anyone have the right to terminate it? Pooh, when you care go offer something of substance, come back and talk to me. In the mean time - f x x x off. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Dec 9, 2011 19:39:45 GMT -8
What about it? Make your case. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Dec 18, 2011 20:16:58 GMT -8
While it is wrong, I respect the contention that it should never be legal to have an abortion, including rape, incest, etc.
But if you concede that there are ANY set of circumstances that abortion should be permitted, then you are putting your own judgments over those of the woman and her own body. Simple as that.
I personally think abortion should be legal to anyone up to the point of viability. If the baby can live outside of the womb, then it is living and a separate entity from the mother. If the baby cannot live outside the womb, it is part of the mother and you, me, and the government has no f'ing right to say a goddamn word about what she does.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Dec 23, 2011 19:24:15 GMT -8
If a fetus is a human being should every miscarriage be investigated as a potential murder?
|
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Dec 27, 2011 19:06:03 GMT -8
Hi Aztec70
If the fetus's parents are human, you can rest assured that the fetus is human too. No "if's" about it.
But no, not every natural death is investigated as a potential murder, therefore not every miscarriage would be investigated as a murder. Prior to abortion being legal were miscarriages always investigated as potential murders?
|
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Dec 27, 2011 19:23:48 GMT -8
Hi Azteccc
We've discussed this before, but I just don't think your reasoning works.
If you are against abortion after viability, you are doing the exact thing that you state you cannot do.
"If you concede that there are ANY set of circumstances that abortion should be permitted..." (You think abortion should be permitted prior to viability, but not after)
Hence you too are "putting your own judgments over those of the woman and her own body."
I don't think the second part of your post works either:
"If the baby can live outside of the womb, then it is living and a separate entity from the mother. If the baby cannot live outside the womb, it is part of the mother and you, me, and the government has no f'ing right to say a goddamn word about what she does."
The unborn are always alive, and always a separate entity from the mother.
The "baby" is living whether it is dependent on the mother or not. When the "baby" is not viable, it is not dead.
The unborn are dependent on their mother, but the mother's body and the unborn's body are not the same. They are two different bodies. The baby will have different DNA, can have a different blood type, or be a different sex than the mother.
So two bodies are involved in abortion, the mother's and the unborn's.
Finally, I don't think ones dependency on another should determine whether we can kill them or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by markyc on Dec 27, 2011 20:15:58 GMT -8
I'm pro-life, and pro-choice. I don't know anybody that is anti-life
|
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Dec 28, 2011 9:52:18 GMT -8
And I don't know anyone who is anti-choice.
We are all pro-choice about some things and not others.
For example, I would guess that you don't believe a person should be able to "choose" to kill an innocent human being.
|
|
|
|
Post by markyc on Dec 29, 2011 16:02:40 GMT -8
And I don't know anyone who is anti-choice. We are all pro-choice about some things and not others. For example, I would guess that you don't believe a person should be able to "choose" to kill an innocent human being. I believe the Chinese and the North Koreans are anti-choice. And no, I dont believe in killing humans, but I do believe in freedom. The freedom to make a personal choice about ones own body. |
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Dec 29, 2011 19:58:00 GMT -8
Good point about China and North Korea.
I agree, one should be able to make a personal choice about ones own body. However, abortion isn't just a personal choice about ones own body. Another body is involved. The unborn. What choice does he or she get?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Dec 31, 2011 7:54:41 GMT -8
Only a waisted drunk would resort to that kind of language. All I can do is point out I am sober to keep from getting in the pig pen with you. Now, back to the issue. When does human life begin and should anyone have the right to terminate it? Pooh, when you care go offer something of substance, come back and talk to me. In the mean time - f x x x off. =Bob When you finally come to, you will see I have pointed you to the issue. |
|
