The Question that Makes Cowards out of Leftists

Who is doing this "supposing"? Why are you somehow "supposed" to believe that? What I recommend you do is believe whatever the fugg you want to believe. That'll show whoever is "supposing" that he's not the boss of you! You go show'em, Tiger.

... but I'll clue you in on a little trick I learned when I was a kid. You can normally tell when someone doesn't know what something is when he asks what it is. It's a truly helpful technique, I've found.

You mad bro?
 
You are talking about DNA.
DNA establishes the species. A human fetus is human and not of any other species. A fetus is a life stage, just as infancy, adolescence, young adulthood, etc. are all life stages.

If there is a heartbeat then it is alive. A fetus with a heartbeat is undeniably a living human.

Again, "human being" means a HUMAN PERSON. "Being" means a sentient person with consciousness.
You have the right to your opinion ... but it is completely irrelevant to the question at hand.

My question involves living humans. Period. I am not taking mental state into account, nor emotional state, whether they are asleep or awake, etc ... Only the class of living humans, whether they have been convicted of some crime and whether they have expressed a desire to die. I apply the axiom that if there is a heartbeat then there is life.

You claim that certain living humans can be deprived of all rights if they happen to be at the wrong life stage. Wow. That is pretty shitty. That's the kind of mindset that justifies slavery, i.e. living humans of the wrong skin color.
 
DNA establishes the species. A human fetus is human and not of any other species. A fetus is a life stage, just as infancy, adolescence, young adulthood, etc. are all life stages.

If there is a heartbeat then it is alive. A fetus with a heartbeat is undeniably a living human.


You have the right to your opinion ... but it is completely irrelevant to the question at hand.

My question involves living humans. Period. I am not taking mental state into account, nor emotional state, whether they are asleep or awake, etc ... Only the class of living humans, whether they have been convicted of some crime and whether they have expressed a desire to die. I apply the axiom that if there is a heartbeat then there is life.

You claim that certain living humans can be deprived of all rights if they happen to be at the wrong life stage. Wow. That is pretty shitty. That's the kind of mindset that justifies slavery, i.e. living humans of the wrong skin color.

I understand your argument. It's pretty clear. And congratulations for finally bringing up slavery! That is a very old and tired analogy. Slaves are PEOPLE.

Question: if nobody's home, then how can they express any desire?
 
I see that you are unaware of racists here on this very forum. I can name them.
Please do. But I will first ask if what you actually intend to do is to list bigots and not racists because you don't know that those two words are not interchangeable?

Will you please stop twisting people's words?
I'm sorry but you are the one desperately trying to weasel-evade my question by changing the wording and by answering questions that I did not ask.

First you need to commit to a position: Do you think it should be legal to kill a living human who has committed no crime and who has not expressed any desire to die?

Once you establish either a "yes" or a "no" we can discuss why you picked your answer and how it applies to other things. You seem to be desperate to ensure the other things are discussed without having established your position on this fundamental question.
 
He isn't. It isn't puzzling what you are trying to do.
What I am "trying" to do is not puzzling because I explicitly state it in my posts. Anyone who can read should be able to figure out that I am soliciting answers to a two-part question. If you'll notice, I even included the two-part question that I am asking. No one gets any bonus points for "figuring all this out." All the points come from answering the question.

Sidenote: I was asking Guille his political leanings because if he is a conservative then I need to acknowledge that there are some extremely cognitively-challeneged dimwits on both sides of the political spectrum. I was previously implying that lack of intelligence pushes people to the left, but anyone would be able to point to Guille and totally destroy my line of reasoning. The best I can do now is to make a "statistical" case based on the available data.
 
What I am "trying" to do is not puzzling because I explicitly state it in my posts. Anyone who can read should be able to figure out that I am soliciting answers to a two-part question. If you'll notice, I even included the two-part question that I am asking. No one gets any bonus points for "figuring all this out." All the points come from answering the question.

Sidenote: I was asking Guille his political leanings because if he is a conservative then I need to acknowledge that there are some extremely cognitively-challeneged dimwits on both sides of the political spectrum. I was previously implying that lack of intelligence pushes people to the left, but anyone would be able to point to Guille and totally destroy my line of reasoning. The best I can do now is to make a "statistical" case based on the available data.

Point of Order, you did not ask me my political leaning. You poisoned the well which didn't surprise me.
 
What I am "trying" to do is not puzzling because I explicitly state it in my posts. Anyone who can read should be able to figure out that I am soliciting answers to a two-part question. If you'll notice, I even included the two-part question that I am asking. No one gets any bonus points for "figuring all this out." All the points come from answering the question.

Sidenote: I was asking Guille his political leanings because if he is a conservative then I need to acknowledge that there are some extremely cognitively-challeneged dimwits on both sides of the political spectrum. I was previously implying that lack of intelligence pushes people to the left, but anyone would be able to point to Guille and totally destroy my line of reasoning. The best I can do now is to make a "statistical" case based on the available data.

Don't be alarmed when someone on "the other side" disagrees with you. People are independent with their own opinions. I've disagreed with "leftists" many times.
 
Don't be alarmed when someone on "the other side" disagrees with you.
I can't possibly be alarmed that someone disagrees with me. I always have the correct answer. The bulk of humanity is usually mistaken and will therefore be in disagreement. Fortunately for me, reality is not established by consensus of opinion.

My concern is more fundamental. I would expect that people who are mistaken appreciate being handed the correct answer. What alarms me is the fierce stubbornness that compels the egregiously mistaken to cling to their petty mistakes. Warmizombies are the extreme examples of this; they would rather deny science and mathematics than to break free from their political slavemasters.


People are independent with their own opinions. I've disagreed with "leftists" many times.
You are a special case. You are not a total intellectual coward. You do not avoid discussing/confronting differing viewpoints. You are perfectly capable of discussing an issue. I should credit your account with five bonus points.

attachment.php


It's the cowards that are not very bright and who make Just Plain Politics a target-rich environment.
 

Attachments

  • Trophy_5_Bonus_Points_Small.jpg
    Trophy_5_Bonus_Points_Small.jpg
    16.6 KB · Views: 7
Point of Order, you did not ask me my political leaning. You poisoned the well which didn't surprise me.
Whatever. You are a dullard. At least you were able to learn how to log on and post, which is something I suppose.
 
Back
Top