forced sterilization, who supported it?

bravo said:
"Who would gamble on the off-chance science was wrong and insist on birthing a child with the following results. "The child becomes blind, deaf, and unable to swallow."???

I still can't figure out why your mama saw fit to let you see the light of day.....you may never be hungry or deaf or blind...but you'll always be fuckin' stupid.....
Click to expand...

A typical Bravo reply. I think the proper response is, "Poor Blabbo".
 
Alias said:
So ending their suffering before they are born in kinda like a humanitarian act. Would that be accurate or not?
Click to expand...

Not exactly. It's preventing the suffering. There would be no suffering as there would be no child. It's all about prevention.
 
apple0154 said:
Not exactly. It's preventing the suffering. There would be no suffering as there would be no child. It's all about prevention.
Click to expand...

I see. Do you want to kill senior citizens when they get old and start to suffer? How about anyone who has an accident or acquires a disease and suffers? Where do you draw the line?
 
Alias said:
I see. Do you want to kill senior citizens when they get old and start to suffer? How about anyone who has an accident or acquires a disease and suffers? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

You wrote, "I see", when you don't "see" at all.

I said, "It's preventing the suffering." Preventing. It's not killing someone when they suffer. In the case of genetic defects abortion prevents/stops a process that would result in a person coming into the world and having to suffer.

I've underlined the the words for emphasis to help you "see".
 
apple0154 said:
You wrote, "I see", when you don't "see" at all.

I said, "It's preventing the suffering." Preventing. It's not killing someone when they suffer. In the case of genetic defects abortion prevents/stops a process that would result in a person coming into the world and having to suffer.

I've underlined the the words for emphasis to help you "see".
Click to expand...

So when someone already starts with the suffering, you do nothing to prevent further suffering, is that it ?

And if someone contracts fatal, inoperable lung cancer, you just kill then right away before they start to suffer.....we get it ....

So a baby with, say only one arm....we kill him so he won't have to suffer being disabled and imperfect.....
or a real ugly kid.....kill her so she won't suffer the sure to be coming humiliation of being ugly....

Are you and Rana gonna get together to make these decisions or will we have Obama create a death panels to vote on it.....???
 
bravo said:
"Who would gamble on the off-chance science was wrong and insist on birthing a child with the following results. "The child becomes blind, deaf, and unable to swallow."???


I still can't figure out why your mama saw fit to let you see the light of day.....you may never be hungry or deaf or blind...but you'll always be fuckin' stupid.....
Click to expand...


Damn right....the last thing we need in this world is blind people or deaf people like Beethoven or Tildon......
 
bravo said:
So when someone already starts with the suffering, you do nothing to prevent further suffering, is that it ?

And if someone contracts fatal, inoperable lung cancer, you just kill then right away before they start to suffer.....we get it ....

So a baby with, say only one arm....we kill him so he won't have to suffer being disabled and imperfect.....
or a real ugly kid.....kill her so she won't suffer the sure to be coming humiliation of being ugly....

Are you and Rana gonna get together to make these decisions or will we have Obama create a death panels to vote on it.....???
Click to expand...


The only question you raise that's worth further discussion is if Rana wants to get together. :D

However, I'll humor you.

So when someone already starts with the suffering, you do nothing to prevent further suffering, is that it ?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Out comes the good stuff. You know, the pain meds. :)

So a baby with, say only one arm....we kill him so he won't have to suffer being disabled and imperfect.....
or a real ugly kid.....kill her so she won't suffer the sure to be coming humiliation of being ugly....
Click to expand...

Who has mentioned anything about killing babies?

As for Obama's death panels as I noted on another thread death panels are so "yesterday". With genetic advancements the discussion should be more along the lines of government medical and genetic experiments in government hospitals. More along the line of The Island of Dr. Moreau. I mean, if the goal is to instill fear about government medical you may as well make it good. Death panels pale compared to the possibility of the government messing around with our genes while hospitalized. While it may be somewhat humorous leaving the hospital with an unquenchable desire for bananas due to having received a derivative fashioned from ape genes the habit of scratching ones butt would be no laughing matter, would it?

Can't you hear a classy lady exclaiming to a friend, "I was chairing a meeting with half a dozen VPs from various companies and this uncontrollable urge came over me and I just stood up and started scratching my butt. I could have died!"

Of course, the VPs may have been looking for such a "do what you have to do, get the job done", type of gal. :dunno:
 
Alias said:
Oh, I don't expect an answer. We're just concerned about your well being. Lots of people get suicidal over the Holidays because of guilt and grief. Since you've admitted to carrying out guilt and grief, we're all naturally concerned about you blowing your bains out.

Of course, if you really honestly wanted to get back at me, you could always leave a note saying that "Alias" on the JPP forum drove you to it by internet bullying. That would really cook my goose. Of course, you would have to actually blow your brains out. Do you have the guts? That's the question. I don't think you do.
Click to expand...

Wow, you took something that made you appear human to painful in one post...

He'll be about 50 years old now if he was in college when his girlfriend aborted his progeny. The pain he feels is real, the humanity you feel is apparently short-lived.
 
apple0154 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Special diet, C-section. Your argument is destroyed, again.

Why not just admit that you support 9 month partial birth abortion for any reason?
 
DamnYankee said:
Special diet, C-section. Your argument is destroyed, again.

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

Special diet? The pregnancy is too hard on a developing girl of 10. Do some research instead of continuing to act like a fool.

You're getting nuttier every day.
 
apple0154 said:
Msg 205. :D
Click to expand...

Following your link, I find the following regarding this issue:
The risks associated with childbirth are higher for girls under the age of fourteen. An underdeveloped pelvis often leads to complications during childbirth.
Click to expand...
And the very next sentence reads:
The cesarean section option can be used for dealing with obstructed labor.
Click to expand...

Per post 251, your argument is destroyed, again.

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top