Once Again Baxter is a fake libertarian

Darla said:
Uh-oh. He's employed Angry Random Capitalization.

This thread could last a while...
Click to expand...

Funny how you always associate anger with caps. Why is that?

I have told you a 1000 times, it is simply easier than bolding the words. It is simply emphasis. You should stop projecting your emotions onto words on a screen.
 
Superfreak said:
Clearly made? Myers simply rambled on in your nonsensical fashion, making absurd comments. Not shocking that you found that enlightening.
Click to expand...


No, he was very clear. You just can't follow because you don't understand the basics and filter all things through your ideology. You are not trying to understand, you are looking for something you can take out of context, twist and or attack.

Science has determined that development is a process of epigenesis; that is, that it involves a progressive unfolding and emergence of new attributes, not present at conception, that manifest gradually by interactions within the field of developing cells and with the external environment. The conceptus is not equal to the adult. It is not a preformed human requiring only time and growth to adulthood; developmental biologists are entirely aware of the distinction between proliferation and growth, and differentiation. So science actually says the opposite of what Kruszelnicki claims. It says that the fetus is distinct from the adult.

If that is not crystal clear to you then I don't what to say.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
No, he was very clear. You just can't follow because you don't understand the basics and filter all things through your ideology. You are not trying to understand, you are looking for something you can take out of context, twist and or attack.

Science has determined that development is a process of epigenesis; that is, that it involves a progressive unfolding and emergence of new attributes, not present at conception, that manifest gradually by interactions within the field of developing cells and with the external environment. The conceptus is not equal to the adult. It is not a preformed human requiring only time and growth to adulthood; developmental biologists are entirely aware of the distinction between proliferation and growth, and differentiation. So science actually says the opposite of what Kruszelnicki claims. It says that the fetus is distinct from the adult.

If that is not crystal clear to you then I don't what to say.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... yes... thanks for sharing again the portion that shows Myers is an idiot like you. Again moron... no one is saying it is equal to an adult. NO ONE. Saying the fetus is distinct from an adult is no different than saying a toddler is distinct from an adult. The fact that you think the above supports your case simply highlights your ignorance on the topic.

At conception the DNA of a unique human life begins to form. At conception. Once the formation is complete, the complete genetic mapping of a completely unique human life form is in place.
 
Myers point and mine is that the zygote is not just a little or young human. It is fundamentally different, just as the sperm/egg is. It does not possess anything approaching the attributes that are necessary for human life. It is but a single cell, after all, and we possess many and varied cells that might not be genetically distinct but are certainly distinct (i.e., liver and skin).

What are the necessary attributes and when are they present? There is certainly no bright red line. But viability outside of the womb is a fairly definite and objective way of measuring. Your, sf's, position is not based on science. It's based on an ignorance of biology, genetics and, mostly, bad philosophy.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Myers point and mine is that the zygote is not just a little or young human. It is fundamentally different, just as the sperm/egg is.
Click to expand...

Which is your opinion, it is not based on genetics. It is completely different than the individual sperm or egg cells. That is genetic fact.

It does not possess anything approaching the attributes that are necessary for human life. It is but a single cell, after all, and we possess many and varied cells that might not be genetically distinct but are certainly distinct (i.e., liver and skin).
Click to expand...

Again, you roam into viability. Genetically, it is human, it has a unique DNA sequence separate from that of the parents.

What are the necessary attributes and when are they present? There is certainly no bright red line. But viability outside of the womb is a fairly definite and objective way of measuring. Your, sf's, position is not based on science. It's based on an ignorance of biology, genetics and, mostly, bad philosophy.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO... no moron, viability is a SUBJECTIVE definition of life. It doesn't magically turn into a human when it reached viability.

http://www.westchesterinstitute.net/images/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf
 
“Human development begins at fertilization . . . . This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual” (Keith L. Moore and T.V.N. Persaud); “Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote) . . . . The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual” (Bruce M. Carlson); “Although life is a continuous process, fertilization is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new, genetically distinct human organism is thereby formed . . . . The embryo now exists as a genetic unity” (Ronan O’Rahilly and Faiola Muller).
Click to expand...

hmmm...
 
From its first moment, supplied with its complete set of chromosomes, each new zygote directs its own integral functioning and development. It proceeds, unless death intervenes, through every stage of human development until one day it reaches the adult stage. It will grow and it will develop and it will change its appearance, but it will never undergo a change in its basic nature. It will never grow up to be a cow or a fish. It is a human being from the first moment of its existence. As Paul Ramsey has noted, “The embryo’s subsequent development may be described as a process of becoming what he already is from the moment of conception.”
Click to expand...

yep
 
Superfreak said:
ROFLMAO... yes... thanks for sharing again the portion that shows Myers is an idiot like you. Again moron... no one is saying it is equal to an adult. NO ONE. Saying the fetus is distinct from an adult is no different than saying a toddler is distinct from an adult. The fact that you think the above supports your case simply highlights your ignorance on the topic.

At conception the DNA of a unique human life begins to form. At conception. Once the formation is complete, the complete genetic mapping of a completely unique human life form is in place.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it. Yes it is very different than saying a toddler is not an adult. Again, it is more than just time and growth. A zygote is fundamentally different than a fully formed human and does not possess anywhere close to the minimum attributes needed to survive as a human. It never will either, if separated from the mother.

Once again, you reject the science and attack the many scientists I have sourced that disagree with your silly philosophical views.

Again, your skin cell "contains all the information needed to form an organism." It would be unique. Not genetically unique, but again, so what? Genetic uniqueness is not the defining characteristic of human life. I have no idea why you insist that this is key. It is neither a trait unique nor necessary to human life.
 
Superfreak said:
Actually I have... and you continually ignore it. A skin cell has the DNA of the person that skin cell belongs to. It cannot be anything other than a skin cell. A fertilized egg cell has the unique genetic code of a NEW human life. You tried and failed to argue 'cloning'. Because you understand that as well as you do basic genetics and we know that understanding is similar to a two year olds.
Click to expand...


No, you have not. You were absolutely wrong about the cloning. The skin cell would be used.

Again, genetic uniqueness is not relevant. Twins are human life.
 
I suppose this might be interesting if I gave a shit about the outcome. I do not.

Get this: Women own their own bodies. Anthropologically speaking women have always been most oppressed and poorest when their reproductive rights were most limited, and even non-existent. We aren't going back. Men, and your female collaborators, are not taking ownership of us ever again.

Learn to live with it. Or don't. It's irrelevant. It is and will remain ever so.

Don't like it? Too bad.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
You still don't get it. Yes it is very different than saying a toddler is not an adult. Again, it is more than just time and growth. A zygote is fundamentally different than a fully formed human and does not possess anywhere close to the minimum attributes needed to survive as a human. It never will either, if separated from the mother.
Click to expand...

and a toddler is fundamentally different than a fully formed adult.

LOL... yes, if you take it off its life support mechanism, it will die. Again you roam off into viability. Viability does not determine humanity. There is no magical moment where it BECOMES human at viability. It has and always will be human.

Once again, you reject the science and attack the many scientists I have sourced that disagree with your silly philosophical views.
Click to expand...

LMAO... the above is full of irony.

Again, your skin cell "contains all the information needed to form an organism." It would be unique. Not genetically unique, but again, so what? Genetic uniqueness is not the defining characteristic of human life. I have no idea why you insist that this is key. It is neither a trait unique nor necessary to human life.
Click to expand...

The skin cell contains the genetic makeup of the individual it is a part of. It does not have the genetic makeup for IT to become a new life. For cloning, the DNA is REMOVED from the skin cell. The skin cell is thereby DESTROYED. It does not become a new life.
 
Superfreak said:
Which is your opinion, it is not based on genetics. It is completely different than the individual sperm or egg cells. That is genetic fact.

Again, you roam into viability. Genetically, it is human, it has a unique DNA sequence separate from that of the parents.

ROFLMAO... no moron, viability is a SUBJECTIVE definition of life. It doesn't magically turn into a human when it reached viability.

http://www.westchesterinstitute.net/images/wi_whitepaper_life_print.pdf
Click to expand...


It is not opinion. It is scientific fact that the zygote is fundamentally different from a fully formed human. Obviously, the zygote is but one cell and we contain many and varied cells.

We have already been over the fact that viability or the ability to sustain existence is a part of the definition of life.
 
Superfreak said:
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2007/01/embryology-inconvenient-facts
Click to expand...

LOL... So your go to source for science is AMERICA'S MOST INFLUENTIAL JOURNAL OF RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE.

http://www.aul.org/william-saunders/

William L. Saunders, Jr. is Senior Vice President for Legal Affairs and Senior Counsel at Americans United for Life (AUL). He directs AUL’s international project and writes and speaks on a wide-range of life-related and human rights topics.


Before joining AUL, he served for ten years as Senior Fellow in Bioethics and Human Rights Counsel at the Family Research Council. Mr. Saunders was featured in Harvard’s first Guide to Conservative Public Interest Law in 2003 and again in the 2008 edition. He served on Harvard’s Advisory Committee for its 2008 celebration of public interest law. A member of the Supreme Court bar, he has authored numerous legal briefs in state, federal, foreign, and international courts.

...

Mr. Saunders attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on a Morehead scholarship. He obtained his degree in law from the Harvard Law School. Mr. Saunders practiced law with the D.C. firm of Covington and Burling, and taught law at the Catholic University of America.
 
Superfreak said:
and a toddler is fundamentally different than a fully formed adult.

LOL... yes, if you take it off its life support mechanism, it will die. Again you roam off into viability. Viability does not determine humanity. There is no magical moment where it BECOMES human at viability. It has and always will be human.

LMAO... the above is full of irony.

The skin cell contains the genetic makeup of the individual it is a part of. It does not have the genetic makeup for IT to become a new life. For cloning, the DNA is REMOVED from the skin cell. The skin cell is thereby DESTROYED. It does not become a new life.
Click to expand...

Again, dumbass, the point is that there is far more than just time and growth that separates a zygote from a fully formed HUMAN. There is not much separating a toddler from an adult but time and growth.

Again, dumbass, it is more than just life support. The zygote depends on the mother to develop the many traits and attributes that we associate with humans. Someone in a coma does not depend on a ventilator to develop anything but merely to sustain them until they recover.

Again, dumbass, the skin cell would have its nucleus removed and that portion would continue and become a new life.
 
Last edited:
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
LOL... So your go to source for science is AMERICA'S MOST INFLUENTIAL JOURNAL OF RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE.

http://www.aul.org/william-saunders/

William L. Saunders, Jr. is Senior Vice President for Legal Affairs and Senior Counsel at Americans United for Life (AUL). He directs AUL’s international project and writes and speaks on a wide-range of life-related and human rights topics.


Before joining AUL, he served for ten years as Senior Fellow in Bioethics and Human Rights Counsel at the Family Research Council. Mr. Saunders was featured in Harvard’s first Guide to Conservative Public Interest Law in 2003 and again in the 2008 edition. He served on Harvard’s Advisory Committee for its 2008 celebration of public interest law. A member of the Supreme Court bar, he has authored numerous legal briefs in state, federal, foreign, and international courts.

...

Mr. Saunders attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on a Morehead scholarship. He obtained his degree in law from the Harvard Law School. Mr. Saunders practiced law with the D.C. firm of Covington and Burling, and taught law at the Catholic University of America.
Click to expand...

Not shocking you try to attack the source rather than refute the content. Typical atheistic moron.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Again, dumbass, the point is that there is far more than just time and growth that separates a zygote from a fully formed HUMAN. There is not much separating a toddler from an adult but time and growth.
Click to expand...

LMAO... tell me moron, you keep SAYING there is far more than growth and time. Describe for us what the 'FAR MORE' encompasses. Tell us how the genetics of that human change.

Again, dumbass, it is more than just life support. The zygote depends on the mother to develop the many traits and attributes that we associate with humans. Someone in a coma does not depend on a ventilator to develop anything but merely to sustain them until they recover.
Click to expand...

LMAO... what traits and attributes does it depend on the mother for?

Again, dumbass, the skin cell would have its nucleus removed and that portion would continue and become a new life.
Click to expand...

LMAO... so the skin cell would do what? Oh yeah... DIE. You are seriously delusional to keep pretending a skin cell is the same as a fertilized egg.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
LOL... So your go to source for science is AMERICA'S MOST INFLUENTIAL JOURNAL OF RELIGION AND PUBLIC LIFE.

http://www.aul.org/william-saunders/

William L. Saunders, Jr. is Senior Vice President for Legal Affairs and Senior Counsel at Americans United for Life (AUL). He directs AUL’s international project and writes and speaks on a wide-range of life-related and human rights topics.


Before joining AUL, he served for ten years as Senior Fellow in Bioethics and Human Rights Counsel at the Family Research Council. Mr. Saunders was featured in Harvard’s first Guide to Conservative Public Interest Law in 2003 and again in the 2008 edition. He served on Harvard’s Advisory Committee for its 2008 celebration of public interest law. A member of the Supreme Court bar, he has authored numerous legal briefs in state, federal, foreign, and international courts.

...

Mr. Saunders attended the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on a Morehead scholarship. He obtained his degree in law from the Harvard Law School. Mr. Saunders practiced law with the D.C. firm of Covington and Burling, and taught law at the Catholic University of America.
Click to expand...

and your Myers... is an atheist... Not shocking he shares the same anti-religion bullshit faith that you do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top