Abortion

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

This is as far as I got before the laughter overcame me....

"the woman instructs her liver cells to grow or not grow" and....
"the woman can instruct her fetus's cells to grow or not grow"......

Maybe she can grow another liver or regenerate another toe if she needs one......and
I guess thats the end of abortion as we know it....the women needs only to instruct her fetus NOT to grow and that will be the end of it....how simple.

Could she instruct her eggs to reject fertilization in the first place and stop the process before it starts ? Damn, biology is so simple for Apple

How utterly stupid.

Now imagine.... This is after nearly two years of stomping his ass with biological facts repeatedly. He still comes back with another page of nonsense, which is merely a repeat of his previous nonsense. He's the longest winded son of a bitch I've ever known, to be completely wrong about something. But I swear... I think this latest concept of "moms can instruct fetuses not to grow" is the topper! I think it at least qualifies him to run for Senator in a red state.

Apple is one of those people, it doesn't matter what evidence you present, you may as well be talking to a brick wall. He knows it all, and doesn't mind telling you. He has his misinterpreted definitions and irrelevant youtube videos, and continues to refuse accepting the fetus is a living organism, even though he repeatedly indicates something is alive and growing. I have constantly asked him about this contradiction in physics, and he can't explain. We must just accept his conclusions that if it died before it was alive, it was never living.

 

[apple0154]

This is as far as I got before the laughter overcame me....

"the woman instructs her liver cells to grow or not grow" and....
"the woman can instruct her fetus's cells to grow or not grow"......

Maybe she can grow another liver or regenerate another toe if she needs one......and
I guess thats the end of abortion as we know it....the women needs only to instruct her fetus NOT to grow and that will be the end of it....how simple.

Could she instruct her eggs to reject fertilization in the first place and stop the process before it starts ? Damn, biology is so simple for Apple

How utterly stupid.

People wonder why I write lengthy posts and this post of yours is precisely the reason. It's like Ms. Boxer talking to Santorum. Every little detail has to be explained.

We'll start at square one. Let's say a woman grows up where there was a constant shortage of food. That information is coded in her genes. When she becomes pregnant her body sends signals to the fetus' genes telling them not to grow too big as a smaller person requiring less food will have a better chance at survival. Basis evolution at work. The woman's body communicates with the fetus on the cellular level. NOT cell phone. Cells, as in tissue.

Furthermore, what the woman consumes, from food to vitamins to drugs, lay down epigenetic markers on the fetus's cells which, in turn, tell the cell what to do. Here is a video. I have little doubt your attention span is severely limited so a quick overview can be seen from 6:20 - 8:30. If you don't watch the video I'm not interested in discussing this any further with you as althought I am a tolerant man you, like Dixie, are starting to bore me with your willful ignorance.

Just a reminder this whole discussion concerns the so-called "independence" of the fetus. I have said and still maintain the fetus is not an independent human being, separate from the woman, because the woman is capable of manipulating it's genes not to mention it's living inside the woman and physically attached to her. Claiming a fetus is an independent human being is what's "utterly stupid". It is neither independent nor a human being.

Watch the video and learn. If, after watching the 2 minute segment I noted you still do not understand watch the entire video. If you reply with a Santorum type question you will probably be ignored.

 

[apple0154]

Now imagine.... This is after nearly two years of stomping his ass with biological facts repeatedly. He still comes back with another page of nonsense, which is merely a repeat of his previous nonsense. He's the longest winded son of a bitch I've ever known, to be completely wrong about something. But I swear... I think this latest concept of "moms can instruct fetuses not to grow" is the topper! I think it at least qualifies him to run for Senator in a red state.

Apple is one of those people, it doesn't matter what evidence you present, you may as well be talking to a brick wall. He knows it all, and doesn't mind telling you. He has his misinterpreted definitions and irrelevant youtube videos, and continues to refuse accepting the fetus is a living organism, even though he repeatedly indicates something is alive and growing. I have constantly asked him about this contradiction in physics, and he can't explain. We must just accept his conclusions that if it died before it was alive, it was never living.

Watch the video and come out of your ignorant stupor. You'll appreciate the fresh air.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

We'll start at square one.

For the millionth time?

Let's say a woman grows up where there was a constant shortage of food. That information is coded in her genes.

It's actually NOT. This sort of thing may take many generations to result in actual changes to genetics within a species. Nevertheless, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether the fetus is a living organism.

When she becomes pregnant her body sends signals to the fetus' genes telling them not to grow too big as a smaller person requiring less food will have a better chance at survival. Basis evolution at work. The woman's body communicates with the fetus on the cellular level. NOT cell phone. Cells, as in tissue.

But the fetus is supposed to be an inanimate clump of innocuous cells, incapable of carrying on any process of life. How can the mom be instructing something that doesn't live, much less know how to grow ? If she is "telling them not to grow too big" it sounds like something is alive and growing, otherwise, your argument doesn't make one lick of sense. So one more time, we see that even your own explanation admits that the fetus is a living organism, taking instructions as it grows from the mother. You've again refuted your own argument.

Furthermore, what the woman consumes, from food to vitamins to drugs, lay down epigenetic markers on the fetus's cells which, in turn, tell the cell what to do.

Yes, the living organism known as the fetus, is dependent on the host for nutrition and environment. That doesn't change what it is, any more than other developmental stages of a living organism. You and I are STILL dependent on nutrition and environment, and without this, we will cease to be living organisms. It never changes what we were.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Watch the video and come out of your ignorant stupor. You'll appreciate the fresh air.

I don't need to watch the video, Apple. I am not the one in an ignorant stupor here. Maybe the problem is, you don't need to watch videos you are incapable of understanding? Until you can grasp the simple facts of biology, you should avoid videos, they seem to be confusing you more.

No one has disputed that the mother sends instructions to the fetus, that doesn't change what the fetus is, that actually confirms the fetus IS A LIVING ORGANISM, because it is apparently capable of processing instructions and responding. Not only have you proven the fetus to be a living organism, but also, an INTELLIGENT living organism.

 

[The Dude]

Still no anti abortion woman, carry on conservatards!

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Still no anti abortion woman, carry on conservatards!

Several times, it has been pointed out to your stupid ass, there aren't that many conservative women posters here. In fact, there was only ONE anyone could name, and she hasn't commented on this thread. I know that in your myopic, drug-induced world of fantasy, this means something significant, but really... it doesn't mean anything at all.

Now, if you want to say that 100% of liberal idiots favor the unabashed killing of innocent human life, you have a pretty good basis for that claim here. I won't dispute that fact.

 

[The Dude]

You cousin marrying hillbilly!
No woman here support abortion.
Not conservatives
Not liberals
Not independents
Just you old white klansman

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You cousin marrying hillbilly!
No woman here support abortion.
Not conservatives
Not liberals
Not independents
Just you old white klansman

Again, there aren't that many conservative women posting here. Now, there are numerous reasons for this, I am sure. Perhaps conservative women have their shit together and better things to do than obsessively rant on a message board, denigrating others and hurling constant insults because they are so miserable in their pathetic life? For whatever reason, they simply aren't here at JPP, so they can't very well post to threads here. This doesn't mean they don't care about abortion, or it's not an important issue to them, just that they aren't here and don't post on this board.

Last time I checked, we don't establish our laws and policies based on what people at JPP post. Maybe that has changed under Obama, but I doubt it. Myopic little bigoted twits like yourself, seem to think this is relevant, but the rest of us are smart enough to understand, JPP simply doesn't reflect the median view of America. We are heavily tilted toward Libertarian politics, with a healthy dose of Liberals and a small handful of Conservatives. The overwhelming majority of female posters here are Liberal. In fact, no one could name but one female conservative poster, and I actually believe Annie is more Libertarian than Conservative.

Now, you need to put down your bong and get back to groaning all my posts, you have a way to go to catch up with me.

 

[The Dude]

There aren't any woman posting against abortion!
There aren't any independent, liberal posting against.
Just alabubba stuck in the 60's old racist

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

There aren't any woman posting against abortion!
There aren't any independent, liberal posting against.
Just alabubba stuck in the 60's old racist

Well, Liberal and Libertarian women aren't generally opposed to abortion, moron. I realize your life is so shitty you need to cling to any point you can make, but informing us that liberal and libertarian women at JPP don't support abortion, is kind of desperate.

Funny you should keep mentioning "racism" in conjunction with opposition to abortion, when the whole entire "women's choice" movement was founded and promoted by a racist, for a racist purpose and intent.

 

[The Dude]

I'll stick with woman experts verses old republican males.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Let me also take this opportunity to interject a disclaimer here... I have not said that I oppose any and all abortion. I will even go so far as to say, if a measure to outlaw all abortion in America were to ever be on the ballot, I would have to vote against it. Of course, I am not fat or an old racist, so maybe that has something to do with it?

My argument has mainly been with Apple, over the basic biological fact of when an organism exists. We first have to agree on basic biological facts before we can reasonably have a debate about abortion. It has to be recognized we're talking about human life, not something superficial or a meaningless clump of cells. From that point, we can have a rational debate over when it's ethical or moral to terminate human life, and I have no problem engaging in that debate. But we're not there yet, we have to educate the idiots of the world first, on basic 6th grade biology.

The Dude wants to continue being an antagonistic troll on the subject, opting to hurl pejoratives and insults at people he doesn't know.... Very un-Dude like, as Walter would say. Some pinhead chortled that he read The Dude's posts in Jeff Bridges voice, as if it were really "The Dude" speaking, but I don't comprehend how he gets that... to me, he sounds like a belligerent obnoxious drunk in a bar, trying to get the last flurry of insults in.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I'll stick with woman experts verses old republican males.

Ah... you'll stick with the racists who created "women's choice" for the purpose of eradicating poor black babies?

And WHO is old? I am 10 years younger than the character who plays "The Dude" in the movie!

What's old, is your shtick.

 

[apple0154]

For the millionth time?

Unfortunately, yes.

It's actually NOT. This sort of thing may take many generations to result in actual changes to genetics within a species. Nevertheless, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether the fetus is a living organism.

Watch the video. It explains it. Why do you insist on maintaining your ignorance?

But the fetus is supposed to be an inanimate clump of innocuous cells, incapable of carrying on any process of life. How can the mom be instructing something that doesn't live, much less know how to grow ? If she is "telling them not to grow too big" it sounds like something is alive and growing, otherwise, your argument doesn't make one lick of sense. So one more time, we see that even your own explanation admits that the fetus is a living organism, taking instructions as it grows from the mother. You've again refuted your own argument.

Honestly, Dix. This is getting past a joke. The Mom instructs the fetus similar to how her body instructs her organs. The cells in her liver grow but her liver isn't an organism. Her liver is alive but her liver isn't an organism.

Watch the video. When you write things like, "You've again refuted your own argument" you're doing a Santorum. You're asking questions and saying things that clearly show you don't understand what you're talking about.

Yes, the living organism known as the fetus, is dependent on the host for nutrition and environment. That doesn't change what it is, any more than other developmental stages of a living organism. You and I are STILL dependent on nutrition and environment, and without this, we will cease to be living organisms. It never changes what we were.

It's dependent on much more than nutrition and environment. It depends on the woman's organs because it's organs are not functioning. It's waste removal system is not functioning so it depends on the woman's blood to carry the waste away. It is unable to obtain oxygen because it's lungs are not functioning so it depends on the woman to supply the oxygen.

While human beings are dependent on nutrition and environment they are not dependent on the internal functions of another human being. If you are unble to understand the difference it's sad.

 

[apple0154]

I don't need to watch the video, Apple. I am not the one in an ignorant stupor here. Maybe the problem is, you don't need to watch videos you are incapable of understanding? Until you can grasp the simple facts of biology, you should avoid videos, they seem to be confusing you more.

No one has disputed that the mother sends instructions to the fetus, that doesn't change what the fetus is, that actually confirms the fetus IS A LIVING ORGANISM, because it is apparently capable of processing instructions and responding. Not only have you proven the fetus to be a living organism, but also, an INTELLIGENT living organism.

According to your logic the woman's liver must be an organism because it responds to signals from the woman, as well.

 

[apple0154]

Still no anti abortion woman, carry on conservatards!

:lol:

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The Mom instructs the fetus similar to how her body instructs her organs. The cells in her liver grow but her liver isn't an organism. Her liver is alive but her liver isn't an organism.

It's nothing anywhere near the same, according to you. Does her liver have it's own genes who she sends instructions to? Is her liver female or male? More importantly, will her liver ever develop a nervous system, brain, heart, lungs, etc.? Will it have it's own unique DNA or blood type? As we see, from your own arguments as well as points I have raised, the liver is nothing at all like a fetus.

It's dependent on much more than nutrition and environment. It depends on the woman's organs because it's organs are not functioning. It's waste removal system is not functioning so it depends on the woman's blood to carry the waste away. It is unable to obtain oxygen because it's lungs are not functioning so it depends on the woman to supply the oxygen.

Again, the fact that it has these needs at this stage of life, doesn't negate the fact it is life. You've once again refuted your own argument and proven the fetus is a living human organism. It's becoming quite routine, every time you open your trap to try and "explain" it seems you are just proving yourself wrong even more. You've so contradicted your own argument, that it's downright funny at this point. Do you realize how much of a fool you are looking like here? I doubt it.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

While human beings are dependent on nutrition and environment they are not dependent on the internal functions of another human being. If you are unble to understand the difference it's sad.

And this is where you are incorrect. You see, they ARE dependent on the internal functions of another human being, before birth. It's a stage of everyone's life process, you and I were both dependent on our mother at one point in our life. After we were born, for a number of years, we were dependent on another human being, their time and energy was devoted to changing our diapers and disposing our waste, feeding us and nurturing us until we were able to do these things for ourselves. At no point, does this change who we are or what we are. You keep trying to apply this criteria, and it simply doesn't apply.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Well, Liberal and Libertarian women aren't generally opposed to abortion, moron. I realize your life is so shitty you need to cling to any point you can make, but informing us that liberal and libertarian women at JPP don't support abortion, is kind of desperate.

.

Which women who post here identify as Libertarian? I am just curious because they are the rarest of all species.