forced sterilization, who supported it?

Death is also a process......and Science and Biology don't "derive definitions" from somewhere....they produce/manufacture/create, the definitions from observable reality....and language can be inadequate to explain or describe some phenomena.
as a layman, I would argue that once the human being can longer regenerate cells, it is dead.....before that, it is in the process of dying and before that, in the process of growing....haha


So an individual who is declared brain dead but the body is still regenerating cells is still alive?

You say:
"However, if you insist on going the scientific route, no problem. A human being is described as an organism. An organism is described as something able to carry on the processes of life. Self-contained, if you will. That does not mean another organism breathes for it. That does not mean it requires the organs and bodily functions of another organism in order to carry on the processes of life."


So, its plain, you've flunked the last two subjects....school is out for today.

A human being is not required to breathe in the normal sense in its earliest stage of life......it shares a circulatory system to sustain its nourishment.......just as an adult human being eats apples to sustain its nourishment....in both case, a requirement to carry on the processes of life....

Most organisms require the assistance of a host to procreate/reproduce.......but thats another subject.....

Are you saying that eating an apple is the same as taking sustenance from another person's body? If so, I suggest you stop watching that Twilight program that's on TV.

You're one freaky dude, Bravo.
 
My daddy is stronger than your daddy, so there. :tongout:

The idea of personage has changed over the centuries. The religious use one definition and it varies according to the religion, and the legal system uses another. Tertulluon's notion didn't satisfy St. Augustine, Augustine's didn't satisfy others. This is a centuries old debate, postulated by some great minds.

I would think that if thre was a God with a definite opinion in this matter he old have been a little clearer on their definition of when life begins, instead of leaving it open oe human interpretation.
 
Are you claiming they are?

Look, before we go any further either post some proof or let's just move on. OK?

Yes I am. The reasons for abortion at this stage of pregnancy are many and varied. However, according to one survey that included 18 abortion clinics that provide late term abortions 90% of these abortions were for "non-medical" reasons. An article about the survey further quotes one clinic worker as saying that most of these abortions are done on 10-18 year olds who were in total denial of the pregnancy.
http://www.shoutingitloud.com/2011/08/truth-about-late-term-abortions.html

Time for you to attack my source, since you have nothing else, certainly no morality, conscience or humanity.
 
The idea of personage has changed over the centuries. The religious use one definition and it varies according to the religion, and the legal system uses another. Tertulluon's notion didn't satisfy St. Augustine, Augustine's didn't satisfy others. This is a centuries old debate, postulated by some great minds.

I would think that if thre was a God with a definite opinion in this matter he old have been a little clearer on their definition of when life begins, instead of leaving it open oe human interpretation.

The debate is not about religion or personage (whatever you think that is)

Its is about science....its about does a human baby live within the mothers body for a time or are babys delivered by the stork........
 
http://www.shoutingitloud.com/2011/08/truth-about-late-term-abortions.html

Time for you to attack my source, since you have nothing else, certainly no morality, conscience or humanity.

I don't have to attack the source. Here's an excerpt from your source.

(Excerpt) ... most of these abortions are done on 10-18 year olds who were in total denial of the pregnancy. (End)

You talk about morality, conscience and humanity while insisting a 10 year old bear a child. There's only one word for that and that word is, "sick".

Here's a few sources regarding the outcome of births to such young girls.

Social Problems and Disadvantages – There is a connection between lower economic status and a higher rate of births by teen girls. This puts many babies at a disadvantage right away. Teen mothers are less likely to complete their education, including higher education that can help them get better paying jobs.
http://blogs.psychcentral.com/family/2010/11/dangers-of-teen-pregnancy/

A teenage mother is at greater risk than women over age 20 for pregnancy complications, such as premature labor, anemia and high blood pressure. These risks are even greater for teens who are under 15 years old.

Babies of teenage mothers are more likely to die in the first year of life than babies of women in their twenties and thirties. The risk is highest for babies of mothers under age 15. In 2005, 16.4 out of every 1,000 babies of women under age 15 died, compared to 6.8 per 1,000 for babies of women of all ages.

About 64 percent of children born to an unmarried teenage high-school dropout live in poverty, compared to 7 percent of children born to women over age 20 who are married and high school graduates
http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/medicalresources_teenpregnancy.html

Most of the people put a lot of thought and planning before they decide they want to have children, since raising a child is an extremely difficult task, which requires a lot of psychological, physical as well financial strength. The first and most important thing about teenage pregnancies is that teenage is a very tender age, and hence teenagers lack the physical as well as psychological maturity required for conceiving children.

Teenage pregnancies can very extremely difficult to deal with not only for the teen, but the entire family and might have an effect on the younger siblings of the teenager. Continuing education becomes very difficult for teenage mothers, which again leads to an unstable future without education and proper employment opportunities. This affects the quality of living of both the mother as well as the child.
The risks associated with childbirth are higher for girls under the age of fourteen. An underdeveloped pelvis often leads to complications during childbirth.
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/teenage-pregnancy-and-teen-abortions-statistics-and-facts.html

Earlier studies have found that adolescent mothers have high probabilities of raising their children in poverty and relying on welfare for support. More than 40 percent of teenage moms report living in poverty at age 27.
http://www.urban.org/pubs/khk/summary.html

This is what you call aborting for "convenience"; preventing a lifetime of poverty for both the pregnant girl and the potential baby, preventing a girl with an underdeveloped pelvis from bearing a child?

You have the gall to talk about morality, conscience and humanity. You don't even know the meaning of those words!
 
This is what you call aborting for "convenience"; preventing a lifetime of poverty for both the pregnant girl and the potential baby, preventing a girl with an underdeveloped pelvis from bearing a child?

Cesarian section. Adoption. Your argument is destroyed.

Why not just admit that you support 9 month partial birth abortion for any reason?
 
The moment it's born the birth is registered. It is then considered a person.

Have you not been following the Repub debates? There has been discussions about "anchor babies" in the news lately. Do you know to what I'm referring?

So before someone is "registered", they're not considered born!! :eek:

I guess we've got a lot of non-born people in the world; because not all births are "registered".

Do we now need a new designation for those that were never registered, or do their birthdays start from when they were finally registered??
 
Cesarian section. Adoption. Your argument is destroyed.

Why not just admit that you support 9 month partial birth abortion for any reason?

Why not just admit you have no idea what you're talking about? Adoption is out as the girl has an underdeveloped pelvis. Imaging the excruciating pain. As for Cesarian section the growth of the fetus interfers with the develpment of the child taking nutrients away from the child as well as putting an unnecessary strain on their young bodies. The pregnancy is the problem.

Í don't understand why you argue without doing any research. Google is so easy to use.
 
So before someone is "registered", they're not considered born!! :eek:

I guess we've got a lot of non-born people in the world; because not all births are "registered".

Do we now need a new designation for those that were never registered, or do their birthdays start from when they were finally registered??

Have you ever heard of an "anchor fetus"?
 
Have you ever heard of an "anchor fetus"?

Let's stay on this "registered" idea, shall we; seeing as how you are the one who presented it.

Using what passes for your logic, in your imagination; when someone is born, you're suggesting that they're not really born until the birth has been registered.
Is that basically what you're saying?
 
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles5/NeumayrNewEugenics.php

When the angel who shares my life was pregnant with our second son, somehow we were sent to a major Boston hospital for "genetic counciling".
We were told that some test or another revealed a "possibility" that our child could be afflicted with Down Syndrome and urged to abort.
We chose to ignore the "councilor" and our son is now a freshman in highschool, an intellegent charming individual who wants to be a
psychologist and likely will.
 
Let's stay on this "registered" idea, shall we; seeing as how you are the one who presented it.

Using what passes for your logic, in your imagination; when someone is born, you're suggesting that they're not really born until the birth has been registered.
Is that basically what you're saying?

You really do have difficulty with comprehension. I was speaking legally. Have you heard the term "illegal" alien"? It doesn't mean they're

220px-Alienigena.jpg


or like this

picture-of-reptilian-alien-thumb.jpg


Just so you have a clear understanding I'll repeat my abortion stance again. As long as the fertilized cell or zygote or embryo or fetus is inside a woman's body she has the right to have it removed. Do you understand?
 
You sound like someone who would call stealing, sharing.

Actually I'm someone who believes people should contribute their share with share being based on ability. In other words one would not expect a person who hasn't received any money for a year to owe the Federal Government tax money for that year.

It always amazes me that Repubs/Conservatives believe so strongly in family, the way families operate and function and how they're the foundation of society but are dead set against society operating in any semblance. Why is that?
 
Back
Top