The Question that Makes Cowards out of Leftists

What point do you think could be (reasonably ) made by the O.P.?

What makes you think he is just trolling?

Please just do not say history as I do not know it. Give an actual point please.

Regards
DL

History. It doesn't matter whether YOU know it or not. That plus the questions are rhetorical.
 
Figured you had nothing to offer.

Regards
DL

Oh, did you? You come into a year old thread and demand that I explain to you why I accused the author of trolling, and then admit you knew nothing about him. And you tell me I have nothing to offer? ROTFLMFAO!! Ironic, don't you think? Sorry you didn't like my answer. I'll put you in the troll category as well.
 
How many leftists will own up to approving of the killing of a living human who has committed no crime and who has expressed no desire to die?

How many leftists will own up to approving of said killing if the justification is to make some third living human's life more convenient?

Have you ever heard a Fetus say that they have a desire to be born?

Do you honestly believe that Leftists are the only ones that want to protect a Women's right to choose?

I DARE THE MOSTLY TRUMP APPOINTED SUPREME COURT TO REVERSE ROE VS. WADE TO FIND OUT!

Why women will flock to the polls on both sides of the aisle, and in the middle, to vote to protect a Women's right to choose.

LOL!

Let me give you a piece of advice- WHEN IT COMES TO WOMEN'S ISSUES REGARDING THEIR SPECIFIC RIGHTS- IT'S BEST FOR YOU MEN TO LEAVE THESE DECISIONS UP TO WOMEN!

That way you Rightist cowards don't look like a bunch of PUSSY MEN women haters- LIKE YOU!

But you go ahead and BEDAPUSSYMAN
 
Last edited:
Why women will flock to the polls on both sides of the aisle,

This was my hope the last time Trump was elected, but too many held their noses publicly and still voted for party, right or wrong.

As a Canadian, I have no horse in your race, but you guys sure put, --- party over morals, --- on all sides.

This makes for garbage legislation, as shown by your see saw add hock policy making.

Regards
DL
 
What do you mean "just an opinion"?

That view of 'living human' is not based on opinion.

Of course it is an opinion. Some say life begins at conception. Some say when there's a heartbeat. Others say it begins when there's brain activity. Still others say that truly being alive means being able to live outside the mother's body aka viability.
 
Of course it is an opinion. Some say life begins at conception. Some say when there's a heartbeat. Others say it begins when there's brain activity. Still others say that truly being alive means being able to live outside the mother's body aka viability.
Some people accept biology (specifically the stages of human development) while other people deny it.

That doesn't change any biological truths with regard to human development. That does not change the fact that, from the very moment of fertilization ("conception"), the resulting human zygote is ever-striving to continue through all the stages of human development (this 'striving' can only occur while life is present... no life? no further development occurs). I will reference what Wikipedia lists as 'stages of human development' (from the moment of fertilization):

Zygote
Embryo
Fetus
Infant
Toddler
Child
Preadolescent
Adolescent
Emerging/Early Adulthood
Young Adult
Middle Adult
Old Adult
Dying

A 'toddler' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'child' stage of human development. A 'young adult' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'old adult' stage of human development. A 'fetus' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'infant' stage of human development.

To kill an 'old adult' is to kill a living human. Likewise, to kill an 'embryo' is to kill a living human. From the moment of fertilization (formation of a zygote), the resulting zygote contains all genetic material necessary to develop through every single stage of human life. (zygote --> embryo --> fetus --> newborn, ... ... ... elderly adult)

Those are all biological truths. You can either accept them (be rational) or deny them (be irrational).
 
Some people accept biology (specifically the stages of human development) while other people deny it.

That doesn't change any biological truths with regard to human development. That does not change the fact that, from the very moment of fertilization ("conception"), the resulting human zygote is ever-striving to continue through all the stages of human development (this 'striving' can only occur while life is present... no life? no further development occurs). I will reference what Wikipedia lists as 'stages of human development' (from the moment of fertilization):

Zygote
Embryo
Fetus
Infant
Toddler
Child
Preadolescent
Adolescent
Emerging/Early Adulthood
Young Adult
Middle Adult
Old Adult
Dying

A 'toddler' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'child' stage of human development. A 'young adult' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'old adult' stage of human development. A 'fetus' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'infant' stage of human development.

To kill an 'old adult' is to kill a living human. Likewise, to kill an 'embryo' is to kill a living human. From the moment of fertilization (formation of a zygote), the resulting zygote contains all genetic material necessary to develop through every single stage of human life. (zygote --> embryo --> fetus --> newborn, ... ... ... elderly adult)

Those are all biological truths. You can either accept them (be rational) or deny them (be irrational).

The fact that something is developing isn't the same as saying it's alive. The way cells are dividing and multiplying, immediately following conception and before organs start to develop, is no different than cells dividing and multiplying in a cancerous tumor.
 
Some people accept biology (specifically the stages of human development) while other people deny it.

That doesn't change any biological truths with regard to human development. That does not change the fact that, from the very moment of fertilization ("conception"), the resulting human zygote is ever-striving to continue through all the stages of human development (this 'striving' can only occur while life is present... no life? no further development occurs). I will reference what Wikipedia lists as 'stages of human development' (from the moment of fertilization):

Zygote
Embryo
Fetus
Infant
Toddler
Child
Preadolescent
Adolescent
Emerging/Early Adulthood
Young Adult
Middle Adult
Old Adult
Dying

A 'toddler' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'child' stage of human development. A 'young adult' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'old adult' stage of human development. A 'fetus' that lacks life is no longer striving to reach the 'infant' stage of human development.

To kill an 'old adult' is to kill a living human. Likewise, to kill an 'embryo' is to kill a living human. From the moment of fertilization (formation of a zygote), the resulting zygote contains all genetic material necessary to develop through every single stage of human life. (zygote --> embryo --> fetus --> newborn, ... ... ... elderly adult)

Those are all biological truths. You can either accept them (be rational) or deny them (be irrational).

If it looks more like a lizard than a human- NIP THAT THANG IN THE BUD!
 
Of course it is an opinion. Some say life begins at conception. Some say when there's a heartbeat. Others say it begins when there's brain activity. Still others say that truly being alive means being able to live outside the mother's body aka viability.

science can easily identify when cells are alive......
 
The fact that something is developing isn't the same as saying it's alive. The way cells are dividing and multiplying, immediately following conception and before organs start to develop, is no different than cells dividing and multiplying in a cancerous tumor.

dude.......if cells are dividing and multiplying it is life......
 
really?......if the fetus isn't alive, why do you want the courts to let you kill it?........

It's not killing anything if it isn't alive. Hence the question of where "life" begins. Is life the automated, unconscious process of cells dividing and multiplying? Do you consider cancerous tumors or cancerous moles to be alive?
 
Looks like another one of those inane posts over when human life begins? Now when a human being dies does he go to an after life or is that just it?

Interesting since Roe v Wade was based upon privacy rights and yet every "conversation" now has little to nothing to do with the actual legalities involved in the 1973 decision
 
Alive in a way that warrants constitutional/legal protection?

no fuckwit.....alive....as opposed to dead......a living human being.........and every human being warrants protection.....its just that you idiots want the right to kill them.......so you've denied them protection.....
 
Back
Top