Court Clears Way for Egg Rights Showdown

[Bonestorm]

If someone else does it and it's considered murder, then the fetus must be worthy of protection from murder.

Your argument is that women have a unique right to murder their own children.

Typically, the consequences of crime remain constant regardless of the perpetrator. I think you don't see the idiocy of your demented scrawlings.

Keep in mind that I am not even making an argument here. I'm merely telling you what current law is. Current law is that a woman has the right to terminate her pregnancy but no one can terminate her pregnancy without her consent. That's all.

If you don't have anything to add other than that you think abortion is murder then this conversation is pretty much over.

Also, looking th bold above, you keep focusing on the fetus and not the right of the mother to choose whether to terminate her pregnancy. The fetus has no rights. The mother does.

 

[Litmus]

Keep in mind that I am not even making an argument here. I'm merely telling you what current law is. Current law is that a woman has the right to terminate her pregnancy but no one can terminate her pregnancy without her consent. That's all.

If you don't have anything to add other than that you think abortion is murder then this conversation is pretty much over.

So yes, you're saying women have a unique right to kill their children. It is killing, even if not murder.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Because in the entire course of human history, no society has ever deemed a fertilized egg, to be the equivalent of an actual person.

Your turn: If you think a fertilized egg is the legal equivalent of a human being, do you support murder charges, and prison sentences for women if they get an abortion? And if not, why not, since you consider eggs to be human beings?

Miscarriage is negligence. 20 year mandatory minimum.

 

[Litmus]

Miscarriage is negligence. 20 year mandatory minimum.

Nope. Accidental death. no charge. We've been over this already.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

LMAO---right--it's a hate crime for someone else to kill a mass of cells but a choice if the host mother chooses it to be killed by a doctor. That's like saying a nigger can say "nigger" but no one else can .

ZOMG we'ver murdered so many little people without brains!

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Nope. Accidental death. no charge. We've been over this already.

Negligence. She should've been able to keep her balance, instead of MURDERING the poor little child by falling over.

Think about it. That clump of muscle cells is just EXACTLY like a little person down there, secretly devising ways to become the next saint. We killed saints! ZOMG!

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Ignorant ELITIST fools. You will destroy our society for a clump of cells.

I say you're the murderers. Murderers against people with Alzheimer's, and destroyers of choice to support your ignorance.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Yes, the sperm and egg are both living cells prior to fertilization. However, it is upon fertilization that the DNA of the two cells combine to form a unique genetic code for a unique human.

Keep in mind, what do many of you say about those that deny global warming or evolution? That those that deny them are ignoring science? Yet when it comes to genetics you seem to do exactly what you accuse them of doing. A unique human life most certainly DOES begin at conception. Now that is not to say that an unborn child should or should not be entitled to basic human rights. That is debatable. But to say that the moment of creation of a unique life is arbitrary is ridiculous... genetics dictates that quite clearly.

Again, abortion can't be decided by science. Science isn't morals, science isn't ethics. That's imprecise and emotional, human inventions, and isn't science.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

You may as well say that laws against stealing were invented by science.

 

[Litmus]

Negligence. She should've been able to keep her balance, instead of MURDERING the poor little child by falling over.

Think about it. That clump of muscle cells is just EXACTLY like a little person down there, secretly devising ways to become the next saint. We killed saints! ZOMG!

That's your assinine argument, not mine. STRAWMAN, look it up, Potzy.

 

[Socrtease]

People do not see the unintended consequences for this. EVERY miscarriage will become an unattended death requiring an inquest to determine the cause of death for the zygote. Every mother that drinks or smokes or ingests anything harmfull will be subject to child abuse laws. This is CRAZY and those that want the zygote given FULL rights are nuts!

 

[Litmus]

People do not see the unintended consequences for this. EVERY miscarriage will become an unattended death requiring an inquest to determine the cause of death for the zygote. Every mother that drinks or smokes or ingests anything harmfull will be subject to child abuse laws. This is CRAZY and those that want the zygote given FULL rights are nuts!

This is for disembodied frozen embryos. Unless lab workers soak them in vodka, your issue is a mindless shibboloth.

 

[uscitizen]

People do not see the unintended consequences for this. EVERY miscarriage will become an unattended death requiring an inquest to determine the cause of death for the zygote. Every mother that drinks or smokes or ingests anything harmfull will be subject to child abuse laws. This is CRAZY and those that want the zygote given FULL rights are nuts!

And yet I expect that this is spearheaded by pretty much the same bunch that whine about "frivilous lawsuits"....
Dumbbutts.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

This is for disembodied frozen embryos. Unless lab workers soak them in vodka, your issue is a mindless shibboloth.

The eggs that they do stem cell research on were leftovers from in vitro fertilization.

Do you believe in vitro fertilization is wrong too? Do you want to condemn people to never having children because it feeds your ignorant elitist mind?

 

[Litmus]

The eggs that they do stem cell research on were leftovers from in vitro fertilization.

Do you believe in vitro fertilization is wrong too? Do you want to condemn people to never having children because it feeds your ignorant elitist mind?

No. I do not believe invitro is wrong. The popsicle children still have rights, regardless of how they got themselves into such a precarious position.

 

[Socrtease]

This is for disembodied frozen embryos. Unless lab workers soak them in vodka, your issue is a mindless shibboloth.

No this law would say that EVERY fertilized egg is a person whether they are in a lab in cryostasis or in the woman developing. AND if someone sets fire to a building that contains a lab with frozen embryos and the whole thing burns down and the embryos are destroyed it would be mass murder. The whole thing is ludicrous. The people who push the totalitarian biological imperative think they are ONLY protecting one class of the unborn but laws cannot make those distinctions. Just as you cannot make killing someone with blue eyes the ONLY type of murder you cannot protect only ONE set of fertilized eggs. Our legal system requires you protect all fertilized eggs the same. So my post above is right on point. Miscarriage does in fact equal unattended death if the law changes and EVERY state requires that EVERY unattended death be investigated.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

No. I do not believe invitro is wrong. The popsicle children still have rights, regardless of how they got themselves into such a precarious position.

A right to be thrown into the trash?

 

[Litmus]

A right to be thrown into the trash?

huh?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Again, abortion can't be decided by science. Science isn't morals, science isn't ethics. That's imprecise and emotional, human inventions, and isn't science.

READ.... Comprehend..... I did not say abortion could be decided by science. I said that science can most certainly dictate when a new life begins. THAT does not mean that new life should or should not be automatically entitled to basic rights.

Whether or not the progeny should be entitled to human rights is what will decide abortion.

 

[Bonestorm]

READ.... Comprehend..... I did not say abortion could be decided by science. I said that science can most certainly dictate when a new life begins. THAT does not mean that new life should or should not be automatically entitled to basic rights.

Whether or not the progeny should be entitled to human rights is what will decide abortion.

Sure, science can dictate when life begins. If I understand the point he is trying to make he is saying that the law should not recognize human life as existing at conception because doing so bestows the zygote with constitutional right.