Pathetic Pelosi... just PATHETIC....

[Cancel 2016.2]

Like The right and Muslims? Just nuke em all and let god sort them out.
Don't even dare to count how many muslim women and children we killed.

??? and the non-sequiter award goes to...... WHOMEVER! Congrats!

'the right' does not want to nuke all Muslims... though I am sure you could find some nuts who are on the right that do.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

If you want to get into semantics, fine. Let's just say the level of brain function, vis-à-vis supporting the body, is the determining factor. Damaged. Missing. Developing. Call it what you will.

The level of brain function does not determine whether or not someone is human. So I do hope that is not what you are suggesting.

 

[Whomever]

??? and the non-sequiter award goes to...... WHOMEVER! Congrats!

'the right' does not want to nuke all Muslims... though I am sure you could find some nuts who are on the right that do.

It was a common chant among the redneck Bush voters several years ago.
True I have not heard it in a few years.
Pretty much the same crowd that said " I won't vote for no ni###r last fall.
all seem to have NRA stickers on their bumpers too.

 

[christiefan915]

No idea what that last sentence is supposed to imply.

It means the fetus is dependent on the mother's circulatory system, digestive system, beating heart, functioning lungs, etc. in order to live.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

If you want to get into semantics, fine. Let's just say the level of brain function, vis-à-vis supporting the body, is the determining factor. Damaged. Missing. Developing. Call it what you will.

There's a substantive and meaningful difference between damaged and developing, you idiotic twatskank.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It was a common chant among the redneck Bush voters several years ago.
True I have not heard it in a few years.
Pretty much the same crowd that said " I won't vote for no ni###r last fall.
all seem to have NRA stickers on their bumpers too.

regardless, it was a complete diversionary tactic on your part. It had nothing to do with the issue being discussed.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It means the fetus is dependent on the mother's circulatory system, digestive system, beating heart, functioning lungs, etc. in order to live.

Ok... but none of the above changes the fact that the child is human and alive. Being dependent upon the mother does not alter the childs genetics.

 

[apple0154]

"They do not require the use of body parts while someone else is using them.

No idea what that last sentence is supposed to imply.

It is supposed to imply that human beings are not obliged to offer their body parts for someone elses use.

If the fetus is unique, a human being, an indivudual, fine. Remove it from the woman who does not want another unique, individual, human being using her body parts.

The reason abortions are performed is because the unique, individual, human being is none of the above.

Unique? Some people rant about DNA and proof fetuses are unique. Wrong! Some twins have identical DNA so that argument goes out the window.

Individual? The woman is definately not an individual if she has, what some people claim to be, another human being living inside her body. I mean, it borders on perversion.

Human being? Human beings do not live inside the body of another human being. Like the previous example to claim such is a human being with all the associated rights equal to the "host" is nothing short of perverted.

 

[apple0154]

Wow, you are indeed quite desperate to justify killing kids aren't you? Go read up on Hitler. He was quite adept at dehumanizing a group of people in order to justify killing them. Maybe one day you can grow up to be just like him.

Fetuses are not people anymore than a apple seed is an apple tree. Or an egg is Foghorn Leghorn.

 

[apple0154]

Like The right and Muslims? Just nuke em all and let god sort them out.
Don't even dare to count how many muslim women and children we killed.

Ain't that the truth. The Right will fight to classify something the size of a pin head as a human being while blowing arms and legs off of real human beings.

Maybe it's self-preservation. Pin heads protecting pin heads?

 

[apple0154]

There's a substantive and meaningful difference between damaged and developing, you idiotic twatskank.

Of course there is. There's always a difference when it comes to fetuses.

Iraq: Let's bomb people half way around the world so we can set woman free. How terrible they have to cover their face.

Home: Let's force women to carry pregnancies even if there is temporary damage to their body due to high blood sugar and elevated blood pressure (to name just two) and the possibility of unknown greater damage.

Let's force them to undergo labor but we want to see them smile.

Talk about sick fvcks.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

"It is supposed to imply that human beings are not obliged to offer their body parts for someone elses use. "

No, they are not obliged to offer their body parts... unless of course they choose to have unprotected sex and then become pregnant. Because then nature takes its course and like every other person alive today, the child grows within the womb.

"If the fetus is unique, a human being, an indivudual, fine. Remove it from the woman who does not want another unique, individual, human being using her body parts. "

If the technology existed to allow for that, I am fine with that. But until then, men and women are responsible for their actions. Period. You should not get to choose to end the life of the child because of convenience. Period.

"The reason abortions are performed is because the unique, individual, human being is none of the above. "

Again, the above is complete bullshit. Genetics PROVES you are wrong. If you want to argue whether the unborn should be entitled to basic human rights, that is a legitimate argument and can be debated. But proclaiming that the child is not a unique human life is moronic.

"Unique? Some people rant about DNA and proof fetuses are unique. Wrong! Some twins have identical DNA so that argument goes out the window. "

LMAO... the fact that identical twins exist does not mean that they are not unique you twit. Seriously, take a genetics intro class. Identical twins do have differences. Fingerprints for one are not the same. Other slight differences can exist..... such as one being male and the other female. Oops... there goes another of your moronic theories.

"Individual? The woman is definately not an individual if she has, what some people claim to be, another human being living inside her body. I mean, it borders on perversion."

The woman is still an individual. That does not change simply because she is pregnant. Your 'arguments' are quite pathetic and reek of your desperation to justify killing kids.

"Human being? Human beings do not live inside the body of another human being."

Actually, yes, they do. For approximately nine months on average. You did, I did, everyone on this board did. Again, to support your absurd theory, you would need to provide data as to when we 'become' human. When does this magic human fairy come along and turn us human? How does it occur?

"Like the previous example to claim such is a human being with all the associated rights equal to the "host" is nothing short of perverted.

ahh... finally you touch on the actual argument. Again you are an idiot to believe that the child is not human when genetics has proven you to be incorrect. The rights issue is the real issue. Should the child be entitled to basic human rights protections? THAT is the issue. That is debatable. Personally I think all humans are entitled to basic human rights protections. You obviously feel that unborn children should be dehumanized so that you can sleep better at night for supporting their widespread murder.

 

[apple0154]

Ok... but none of the above changes the fact that the child is human and alive. Being dependent upon the mother does not alter the childs genetics.

Fine. No one is saying kill the "human being". The woman, as is her right, is saying get it out of her body.

Human beings are individuals. Surely the most basic freedom is to have the right to not have another human being using our body. If that is not a basic right then what does freedom stand for?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Fetuses are not people anymore than a apple seed is an apple tree. Or an egg is Foghorn Leghorn.

The term 'people' is subjective. It is arbitrary. It was once stated that black people were only 3/5 of a 'person'. That should tell you how moronic it is to somehow proclaim that a child is not human because to you it is not a 'person'. It is the same type of justification Hitler used to kill Jewish people.

A fetus is a STAGE of development of whatever species you are talking about.

A Human fetus is human.

A Chicken fetus is chicken.

Your proclamation is no different than saying a teenager is not a person. Saying someone is not a person simply because of their stage of development is simply moronic.

 

[apple0154]

the fact that identical twins exist does not mean that they are not unique you twit. Seriously, take a genetics intro class. Identical twins do have differences. Fingerprints for one are not the same.

So what do you base your assertion on that a fetus is a human being if not on DNA? On fingerprints? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

How scientific of you.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Fine. No one is saying kill the "human being". The woman, as is her right, is saying get it out of her body.

Human beings are individuals. Surely the most basic freedom is to have the right to not have another human being using our body. If that is not a basic right then what does freedom stand for?

Actually, that is exactly what pro-abortionists are trying as hard as they can not to say. That is why they, like you, attempt to dehumanize the unborn child. They do so because they know what they are doing is murder but they seek to justify it by demeaning the childs life into some sub-human capacity.

No, it is a part of our natural life cycle. A woman has the right to choose whether to have sex or not. A woman who chooses to have sex has the right to use protection to prevent becoming pregnant. But in the event she becomes pregnant anyway, then she does not have the right to kill a child simply because she wants to shirk her responsibility for her actions.

Side note... ALL pro-life people state that they do not want you killing these kids... which are indeed human beings.

 

[apple0154]

The term 'people' is subjective. It is arbitrary. It was once stated that black people were only 3/5 of a 'person'. That should tell you how moronic it is to somehow proclaim that a child is not human because to you it is not a 'person'. It is the same type of justification Hitler used to kill Jewish people.

A fetus is a STAGE of development of whatever species you are talking about.

A Human fetus is human.

A Chicken fetus is chicken.

Your proclamation is no different than saying a teenager is not a person. Saying someone is not a person simply because of their stage of development is simply moronic.

As I said before, fine. Call it whatever you want. The point is in a free country, such as it is, to insist an individual be forced to share their body with something that is growing inside them is perverted.

That's the point.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

So what do you base your assertion on that a fetus is a human being if not on DNA? On fingerprints? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

How scientific of you.

As I stated you twit... it IS based on DNA. While identical twins start from the same embryo, after the embryo splits into two the twins no longer have the exact same development. When cells split, they do not do so perfectly. Thus after the division, they do not necessarily develop all of the same traits.

That is why fingerprints are different. That is why one may have health issues and the other doesn't.

They are still unique.... even though they are twins.

Again, take a basic genetics class... you clearly are lacking in that knowledge.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

As I said before, fine. Call it whatever you want. The point is in a free country, such as it is, to insist an individual be forced to share their body with something that is growing inside them is perverted.

That's the point.

Keep telling yourself whatever you need to to justify killing kids.


If you believe you should have the right to kill kids and that they should not be entitled to basic human rights, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

But again, to proclaim they are not human is moronic. THAT is the point.

 

[Socrtease]

God almighty did this really turn into an abortion rant? I am so glad there is a supreme court nomination that might kill the torture and abortion post. Probably not though.