BrianHanson wrote:Fine if you think it’s okay for birth control I won’t argue the point.
Cortes never made that claim. Please read a post and understand the points before you reply.
kneedragger I suggest you do the same. I stated that abortion should not be used for birth control, his question “why not?” can be interpreted in two distinct ways, I am bored with answering the same questions so I chose option B, where he supports it as birth control and was challenging me, its’ not that hard to follow really, if you folks want to twist my words why won’t I twist yours?
Kneedragger-
12-13 weeks is not a viable fetus that’s why. In fact 23 weeks is generally considered the minimum, I stand by 3 months because you are not killing something that could live. Simple again.
Kneedragger in regards to your last several points, since I do not consider a 3 month old fetus a human (and neither do the majority of physicians, ethicists, scientists etc.) I do not see how I am ignoring the weakest members of society. I hope that partial birth abortionis banned evrywhere, I would like to see a more stringent set of guidelines for abortion (regarding convenience abortions etc) and I would hope that we would develop a better set of preventative measure (more birth control availability since we can’t stop all the sex). My reference to social programs for people with disabilities was targeted at the right wing folks that are against abortion, gay adoption, and spending money to help take care of societies cast-offs.
[/quote]
BrianHanson…Good luck in trying to convince Zeb and the others on your points; you’ll find that they are absolutely unwilling to move from the position of “at the moment of conception it’s human life”. They believe that even an eight cell zygote is “human life”, so there’s virtually NO chance of moving them on their positions. Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith.
I’ve loosely been following these threads, and I must commend you on your efforts though; arguing with a social conservative is like trying to convince the sun to rise in west and set in the east. If you’re lucky, Zeb will get mad and put you on ignore. lol
I did not write the part you have cited, that was from Kneedragger. I’m sure you are right though it probably is a banana. I was going to say it’s just a collection of cells without a fully developed brain, lungs, heart etc. It is at the 12 week point most like a parasite living off its host. It is awful to say it, but at 12 weeks it is not viable, hence my drop dead cut-off, the flip side is that my wife and I have never had or considered an abortion, it is after all a personal choice.[/quote]
So, i suppose it’s ok if i eat a 3 month old fetus.
After all, it’s what i usually do with bananas.[/quote]
Are you seriously comparing human tissue to a banana? Is this the best argument you and Cortes can come up with? Wow…
No.
We are rhetorically comparing human tissue to a banana.
Brian seriously think this “tissue” is not human, though.
That being said, i’m curious to know why i can’t eat this non-human “collection of cells”.
Brian already “proved” it was devoid of ethical value. But i suppose it still has some nutritionnal value.
That’s protein after all.
[quote]kamui wrote:
No.
We are rhetorically comparing human tissue to a banana.
Brian seriously think this “tissue” is not human, though.
That being said, i’m curious to know why i can’t eat this non-human “collection of cells”.
Brian already “proved” it was devoid of ethical value. But i suppose it still has some nutritionnal value.
That’s protein after all.[/quote]
My point was that human tissue, by and of itself, does not constitute “human life”. I’ve made this point ad nauseam in other similar discussions. Do you believe otherwise? Do you believe that all human tissue should be raised to title of “human life”?
And if you’re into cannibalism, then by all means, eat up…
BrianHanson wrote:Fine if you think it’s okay for birth control I won’t argue the point.
Cortes never made that claim. Please read a post and understand the points before you reply.
kneedragger I suggest you do the same. I stated that abortion should not be used for birth control, his question “why not?” can be interpreted in two distinct ways, I am bored with answering the same questions so I chose option B, where he supports it as birth control and was challenging me, its’ not that hard to follow really, if you folks want to twist my words why won’t I twist yours?
Kneedragger-
12-13 weeks is not a viable fetus that’s why. In fact 23 weeks is generally considered the minimum, I stand by 3 months because you are not killing something that could live. Simple again.
Kneedragger in regards to your last several points, since I do not consider a 3 month old fetus a human (and neither do the majority of physicians, ethicists, scientists etc.) I do not see how I am ignoring the weakest members of society. I hope that partial birth abortionis banned evrywhere, I would like to see a more stringent set of guidelines for abortion (regarding convenience abortions etc) and I would hope that we would develop a better set of preventative measure (more birth control availability since we can’t stop all the sex). My reference to social programs for people with disabilities was targeted at the right wing folks that are against abortion, gay adoption, and spending money to help take care of societies cast-offs.
[/quote]
BrianHanson…Good luck in trying to convince Zeb and the others on your points; you’ll find that they are absolutely unwilling to move from the position of “at the moment of conception it’s human life”. They believe that even an eight cell zygote is “human life”, so there’s virtually NO chance of moving them on their positions. Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith.
I’ve loosely been following these threads, and I must commend you on your efforts though; arguing with a social conservative is like trying to convince the sun to rise in west and set in the east. If you’re lucky, Zeb will get mad and put you on ignore. lol[/quote]
I’ve never put anyone on ignore, not even you. I think B r i a n is proving to be plenty of fun. Why would I want to ignore him?
[quote]kamui wrote:
No.
We are rhetorically comparing human tissue to a banana.
Brian seriously think this “tissue” is not human, though.
That being said, i’m curious to know why i can’t eat this non-human “collection of cells”.
Brian already “proved” it was devoid of ethical value. But i suppose it still has some nutritionnal value.
That’s protein after all.[/quote]
My point was that human tissue, by and of itself, does not constitute “human life”. I’ve made this point ad nauseam in other similar discussions. Do you believe otherwise? Do you believe that all human tissue should be raised to title of “human life”?
And if you’re into cannibalism, then by all means, eat up…
[/quote]
Biologically ? a fetus, not matter how old it is, is a living organism belonging to the homo sapiens specie. Ie : an human being.
Philosophically ?.
I suppose you can always give a narrower meaning to “human life”.
It’s pretty convenient if you want to deny the intrinsic ethical value of some human beings.
But it’s pretty arbitrary too. And dangerous.
That being said, why is cannibalism wrong again ?
Why should i respect dead bodies more than fetuses ?
“No more an human life” is somehow superior to “not yet an human life” ?
How comes that i can destroy a fetus but that i can’t eat it ?
Eating a “collection of cells” is somehow worst than wasting it ?
Attached is my child, her name is Elizabeth = D Her shirt says “Who’s cuter than me?” jajaja
Thanks Cortes! I can honestly say that children are the largest blessing of my life and I have experienced some spectacular things thus far in this life!
As for your suggestion about the happiest baby book, I had that book along with many other baby items almost a month before she arrived. I got literally everything for $185 and I mean everything! One of the items was that book! As a side note, YAY used items at an eighth the price of new baby items, via the internet!
To save you some coin, the baby Einstein CD’s ‘baby lullabies’ is complete junk! They were a gift from a mother in law and they were listened to once and will soon be available via eBay. The best music I have found is the series ‘Guess How Much I Love You’ and the 2nd/3rd CD’s are awesome classical tunes.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
I appreciate the congrats, kneedragger, and congrats right back at you!
Now get right over to amazon and immediately purchase Harvey Karp’s “The Happiest Baby on the Block.”
I guarantee you, you will be back here to thank me. It is an absolute life-saver for those first crazy 3 to 4 months of your baby’s life.
BrianHanson, you have a headache because you fail to understand simple topics and the science is apparently over your head. I will try to make a simple subject even less complex. However I may fail. Please bear with me.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:Kneedragger-
12-13 weeks is not a viable fetus that’s why.[/quote] This sentence is an example of your arbitrary lines drawn in the sand. Abortion is legal in this country during all nine months of gestation. A fetus is currently viable at twenty two weeks. Science will continue to improve and help premature babies. [quote]BrianHanson wrote: In fact 23 weeks is generally considered the minimum, I stand by 3 months because you are not killing something that could live. Simple again.[/quote] 23 weeks is one week short of SIX MONTHS. I am NOT drawing anything around your supposedly simple stance. Do you doubt me still? Ok, I will type this out and read slowly until you click with the math. One week is seven days long and four weeks in a typical month. Four weeks plus four weeks is eight weeks, or two months. Are you still with me? Add another four weeks and you have twelve weeks, or three months. Add another four weeks and you have sixteen weeks, or four months. Have I lost you yet? I surely hope not. Add another four weeks to sixteen and you have twenty weeks, or five whole months. This is well past the halfway stage of pregnancy and the child will actually have most if not all of the traits they will have after they enter the world where we meet them.
[quote]BrianHanson wrote: Kneedragger in regards to your last several points, since I do not consider a 3 month old fetus a human[/quote] You have to provide science to back your claim. If NOT human, what is a human embryo? [quote]Brian Henson wrote: (and neither do the majority of physicians, ethicists, scientists etc.)[/quote] Without a doubt you are completely wrong! Science proves the case for life! Have you not been paying attention? [quote]BrianHanson wrote: I do not see how I am ignoring the weakest members of society.[/quote] What are the unborn if NOT the weakest member of our society? [quote]BrianHanson wrote: I hope that partial birth abortionis banned evrywhere, I would like to see a more stringent set of guidelines for abortion (regarding convenience abortions etc) and I would hope that we would develop a better set of preventative measure (more birth control availability since we can’t stop all the sex).[/quote] Aren’t all abortions “convenience abortions?” My wife’s ObGyn told us today that people who choose abortion are often overlooking other options, favoring what they see as more convenient: an abortion. I ask you, why stop any abortions if you think one is justifiable? [quote]BrianHanson wrote: My reference to social programs for people with disabilities was targeted at the right wing folks that are against abortion, gay adoption, and spending money to help take care of societies cast-offs.[/quote] I have never made a single one of the claims you insist that I have. Thank you for placing ideas and thoughts in MY thought process and arguments. This may very well be the reason why you are so willfully ignorant. You believe you know what I am saying without actually digesting my posts.
The war Barry fights with other countries is horrible enough, now he is fighting against the women of this country! The most horrendous portion, people are continuing to fall for his progressive thinking. The people who listen to Barry’s lies, they still believe after three and a half years that GW Bush is to blame for our current conditions. Bush was not the greatest president in history, yet I would trade his flaws for Barry’s greatest virtues. Barry was voted into office because he promised to fix and change ALL of the wrongs left by the Bush administration. Barry dug this country into a deeper hole.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Anyone been following the undercover work at Planned Parenthood concerning gender-selectivie abortion? In both cases the undercover folks were counseled on how to arrange an abortion if it was female (they explicitly said they were planning to abort the child if it was going to be female).
The PP folks said no problem and instructed them how to go about getting financial (defrauding medicaid) help for tests to determine the sex at the earliest possible time (mainly by not mentioning the gender selection reason). Apparently, when Obama was asked about banning gender selective abortions (which by far results in termination of females), he said no. War on Women, indeed.[/quote]
Please find one post of mine, ONE which is religiously driven.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
. . . . Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith. . . . lol[/quote]
How many disabled people do you personally know? I could be wrong, but I am guessing that your lack of experience is leading to your lack of understanding. A few moments with a disabled person will help you to realize that a disabled person is no less human then you and me. No less worthy of life. They are people after all.
The happiest people I know are actually disabled. Some are SEVERELY disabled and you would not know by their joy for life. There is no need to take my word for it; please meet them yourself.
Because for the past many years you’ve gobbled up the liberals twisted logic. And now, when faced with a few facts you really don’t know what to say.
[/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Please find one post of mine, ONE which is religiously driven.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
. . . . Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith. . . . lol[/quote]
[/quote]
Interesting how you would include yourself when I never mentioned you by name. Interesting indeed…
BrianHanson wrote:Fine if you think it’s okay for birth control I won’t argue the point.
Cortes never made that claim. Please read a post and understand the points before you reply.
kneedragger I suggest you do the same. I stated that abortion should not be used for birth control, his question “why not?” can be interpreted in two distinct ways, I am bored with answering the same questions so I chose option B, where he supports it as birth control and was challenging me, its’ not that hard to follow really, if you folks want to twist my words why won’t I twist yours?
Kneedragger-
12-13 weeks is not a viable fetus that’s why. In fact 23 weeks is generally considered the minimum, I stand by 3 months because you are not killing something that could live. Simple again.
Kneedragger in regards to your last several points, since I do not consider a 3 month old fetus a human (and neither do the majority of physicians, ethicists, scientists etc.) I do not see how I am ignoring the weakest members of society. I hope that partial birth abortionis banned evrywhere, I would like to see a more stringent set of guidelines for abortion (regarding convenience abortions etc) and I would hope that we would develop a better set of preventative measure (more birth control availability since we can’t stop all the sex). My reference to social programs for people with disabilities was targeted at the right wing folks that are against abortion, gay adoption, and spending money to help take care of societies cast-offs.
[/quote]
BrianHanson…Good luck in trying to convince Zeb and the others on your points; you’ll find that they are absolutely unwilling to move from the position of “at the moment of conception it’s human life”. They believe that even an eight cell zygote is “human life”, so there’s virtually NO chance of moving them on their positions. Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith.
I’ve loosely been following these threads, and I must commend you on your efforts though; arguing with a social conservative is like trying to convince the sun to rise in west and set in the east. If you’re lucky, Zeb will get mad and put you on ignore. lol[/quote]
I’ve never put anyone on ignore, not even you. I think B r i a n is proving to be plenty of fun. Why would I want to ignore him?[/quote]
Perhaps you never did, and perhaps I’m confusing you with Sloth. I do believe that you had mentioned to me once that you were going to during the great “honkey” incident from another thread. If I was wrong about that then I apologize.
I never said YOU have an issue with funding programs for the disabled, in fact I stated in my original post that my issue is with those people.
I was stating my opinion on abortion and how I personally wish it were legislated, in my ideal world there would be no abortions, however we do not live in my ideal world.
Not all abortions are convenience abortions, what if the pregnancy will result in the death of the mother? Is that convenience? Is the life of the fetus more valuable than the life of the mother?
I think that abortion as birth control is reprehensible, I also think that the majority of people against abortion are also the people clamoring for lower taxes and slashing programs like food stamps and WIC, you can’t take care of unwanted children for free.
12-13 weeks is only arbitrary in the sense that a fetus is not viable for another two months, but I think 12 weeks is enough time to make an informed decision. You seem to think that I believe late term abortions are acceptable, I do not.
If science proved that “life” begins at conception they need better lawyers to argue their case.
If I grow a thumb in a lab would you call that a human being? It is the same as a newly formed fetus really, no brain, no lungs, heart, expressions, emotions etc. Tissue is not what makes a human being, tissue makes part of a human being.
How many disabled people do I know? Lots, I was a Voc Rehab counselor at the VA, dealing with disabled veterans. Plus I spent 6 weeks in a wheelchair and underwent 14 surgeries after an accident involving a helicopter, me and gravity, I have more metal in me than a KIA Optima. I said nothing disparaging about the disabled, I said that if people want to defend them ( i.e. the unborn disabled) a good way to do that is to fund programs that help parents care for their disabled children.
bf - I will BOLD the language YOU use. These posts were from this very page.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Please find one post of mine, ONE which is religiously driven.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
. . . . Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith. . . . lol[/quote]
[/quote]
Interesting how you would include yourself when I never mentioned you by name. Interesting indeed…
[/quote]
You very well never named me in particular but inferred that I used religion to argue the case for LIFE! Never have I done this, yet I do use simple high school biology. I may explain something in more detail but I generally use broad terminology. I shall bold your terms used to imply that I used religion without changing a single word.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
BrianHanson…Good luck in trying to convince Zeb and the others on your points; you’ll find that they are absolutely unwilling to move from the position of “at the moment of conception it’s human life”. They believe that even an eight cell zygote is “human life”, so there’s virtually NO chance of moving them on their positions. Their positions are religiously driven (although they will falsely deny that), and I know how hard it is to argue with someone driven by blind faith.
I’ve loosely been following these threads, and I must commend you on your efforts though; arguing with a social conservative is like trying to convince the sun to rise in west and set in the east. If you’re lucky, Zeb will get mad and put you on ignore. lol[/quote]
This last paragraph is addressing Zeb alone. The noun and pronouns used infer other people who are pro-LIFE, they use religion to drive the arguments against the slaughter of innocent children. That means [i]ANYONE[/i] who is pro-LIFE will use religion. Am I mistaken? I never have used religion to argue the case for life, never even one time.
