I think that if you guys wanted to, you could continue arguing about which words to use indefinitely.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.[/quote]
Sperm is produced by the human body, bacteria is not. Poor analogy. Sperm is different from everything else a male body produces, at least at the stage when the master commands it to leave it’s home. It leaves the body and it has a purpose (or goal). But on the other hand is that much different from white cells, that have a purpose and goals, too. They don’t leave the body, though. Hmm.
E: and that brings up the point that pro-lifers bring. It’s basically a voluntary action and it is up to the master if it is to bring result or not. It’s a moral question. On a societal level it is moot, though. You have to take in consideration what we really are, all of us together. Not just the ones that are like minded and feel responsibility. On a societal level you have to think what works and brings the best compromise. Unless you are waiting for the rapture of course and you don’t give a fuck about anything else but a clean slate on your part.[/quote]
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.[/quote]
Sperm is produced by the human body, bacteria is not. Poor analogy. Sperm is different from everything else a male body produces, at least at the stage when the master commands it to leave it’s home. It leaves the body and it has a purpose (or goal). But on the other hand is that much different from white cells, that have a purpose and goals, too. They don’t leave the body, though. Hmm.
E: and that brings up the point that pro-lifers bring. It’s basically a voluntary action and it is up to the master if it is to bring result or not. It’s a moral question. On a societal level it is moot, though. You have to take in consideration what we really are, all of us together. Not just the ones that are like minded and feel responsibility. On a societal level you have to think what works and brings the best compromise. Unless you are waiting for the rapture of course and you don’t give a fuck about anything else but a clean slate on your part.[/quote]
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
I wish we had a DNA expert comment on your imagined DNA expertise
the way I understand the DNA soup situation is both the egg and the sperm are complete but the the combination will get 1/2 from each donor
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
OH , you are grasping at straws , digging a hole ,
Step back from the edge ,
You have to be smoking something better than pot 
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
My skin is dead and lacks purpose. It’s discarded. Sperm has some unique features and a definite purpose and it is ridiculous to compare it with shit.
The host is called a woman. The donor is a called a man And when they are happy about the mixing of their genes they say we are going to have a baby. They don’t say we have a baby. We are going to have a baby. It is a state of anticipation of something that is in the coming. Human yes, but not there yet.
You have a hell of a job to sell your interpretation to the majority. And if you do success you have the job that comes from equalizing the responsibility. And I don’t think you are going to succeed with that. It will lead to the situation where you have checked one trait that is common for the countries that prohibit abortion, inequality.
I’m not trying to turn your head. I’m just pointing out the problems that inevitably will rise with illegal abortion.
here is an option for all you men that want to regulate a woman’s hoo ha
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
here is an option for all you men that want to regulate a woman’s hoo ha [/quote]
Ya, that’s still a woman…
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
I’d love to have a 15 year old kid; I want to be a dad so bad I don’t know.[/quote]
It is amazing. Tough as hell, but that is what makes it so rewarding.
Good luck and enjoy the ride.
One word of advice, take every hug they are willing to give when they are willing to give them. Don’t even let one single one go by. There may come a day when they are older, and won’t want ot hug as much, but you’ll still want 20 a day, and kick yourself for passing up on even just one.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
here is an option for all you men that want to regulate a woman’s hoo ha [/quote]
Ya, that’s still a woman…[/quote]
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
My skin is dead and lacks purpose. It’s discarded. Sperm has some unique features and a definite purpose and it is ridiculous to compare it with shit.
The host is called a woman. The donor is a called a man And when they are happy about the mixing of their genes they say we are going to have a baby. They don’t say we have a baby. We are going to have a baby. It is a state of anticipation of something that is in the coming. Human yes, but not there yet.
You have a hell of a job to sell your interpretation to the majority. And if you do success you have the job that comes from equalizing the responsibility. And I don’t think you are going to succeed with that. It will lead to the situation where you have checked one trait that is common for the countries that prohibit abortion, inequality.
I’m not trying to turn your head. I’m just pointing out the problems that inevitably will rise with illegal abortion.[/quote]
I don’t have anything to sell. I just see the facts as they are, raw without any need to manipulate. The embryoblast, the zygote, the fetus are all stages of human developement. The thing that is developing is a human being. This is a scientific fact. You can argue with the hard science of embryology, but you will lose.
You may be all for killing a human being in the early stages of development, then you are for killing a human being, period.
I have nothing to sell and no need to sell it. You have to either prove that the human in early stages of development is either not human, not living, neither. OR you have to make a compelling argument as to why it’s ok to kill a living human being simply because it’s in early stages of development.
It does not matter if you agree with the facts or not, you have to prove them wrong, not simply disagree. I simply chose the side of the argument with which the facts agree. I don’t need fan-boys to validate them.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
My skin is dead and lacks purpose. It’s discarded. Sperm has some unique features and a definite purpose and it is ridiculous to compare it with shit.
The host is called a woman. The donor is a called a man And when they are happy about the mixing of their genes they say we are going to have a baby. They don’t say we have a baby. We are going to have a baby. It is a state of anticipation of something that is in the coming. Human yes, but not there yet.
You have a hell of a job to sell your interpretation to the majority. And if you do success you have the job that comes from equalizing the responsibility. And I don’t think you are going to succeed with that. It will lead to the situation where you have checked one trait that is common for the countries that prohibit abortion, inequality.
I’m not trying to turn your head. I’m just pointing out the problems that inevitably will rise with illegal abortion.[/quote]
BTW, you don’t only discard dead cells. You discard living cells all the time whether or not their purpose is complete. I have a difficult time believing you are seriously trying to argue against simple biological facts.
So your argument is: sperm is discarded all the time, because it’s purpose is to fertilize a female egg and eggs and sperm as discarded all the time, it’s ok to digard a human being because they are the result of the fertilization of an egg from sperm.
Sorry, that’s a stupid argument. It’s completely a non-sequitur. Because the base components of human fertilization are discarded all the time does not mean that you can terminate a human life because they are the result of things that are discarded all the time.
You are the result of a sperm and an egg, why can’t I terminate you?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
A human sperm is not a human life. The bacteria in your colon is alive, but it is not a human life. A sperm is not a human being, a fetus is. This is just poor rationalization on your part.[/quote]
Sperm is produced by the human body, bacteria is not. Poor analogy. Sperm is different from everything else a male body produces, at least at the stage when the master commands it to leave it’s home. It leaves the body and it has a purpose (or goal). But on the other hand is that much different from white cells, that have a purpose and goals, too. They don’t leave the body, though. Hmm.
E: and that brings up the point that pro-lifers bring. It’s basically a voluntary action and it is up to the master if it is to bring result or not. It’s a moral question. On a societal level it is moot, though. You have to take in consideration what we really are, all of us together. Not just the ones that are like minded and feel responsibility. On a societal level you have to think what works and brings the best compromise. Unless you are waiting for the rapture of course and you don’t give a fuck about anything else but a clean slate on your part.[/quote]
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
I wish we had a DNA expert comment on your imagined DNA expertise
[/quote]
Feel free to point out any errors I made with verifiable facts. This is high school level shit, you don’t need a DNA expert to know that a sperm carries 23 chromosomes. Hell, the ‘fish’ part of the sperm and the seman has more complete DNA structures than the contents of the sperm, yet it’s the contents, not the swimmy part, nor the semen that fertilizes the egg.
Further, not all sperm are ‘fertilizers’ There are different kinds of sperm.
Feel free, dig up the research that shows that a sperm is a human being. Or that a zygote is not. Like I said before, I won’t hold my breath. Just bring the facts. Prove a zygote is not a human being. Go ahead…waiting.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
here is an option for all you men that want to regulate a woman’s hoo ha [/quote]
Hey, go nuts. Go become a woman, get pregnant and have an abortion.
[quote]pat wrote:
I don’t have anything to sell. I just see the facts as they are, raw without any need to manipulate. The embryoblast, the zygote, the fetus are all stages of human developement. The thing that is developing is a human being. This is a scientific fact. You can argue with the hard science of embryology, but you will lose.
You may be all for killing a human being in the early stages of development, then you are for killing a human being, period.
I have nothing to sell and no need to sell it. You have to either prove that the human in early stages of development is either not human, not living, neither. OR you have to make a compelling argument as to why it’s ok to kill a living human being simply because it’s in early stages of development.
It does not matter if you agree with the facts or not, you have to prove them wrong, not simply disagree. I simply chose the side of the argument with which the facts agree. I don’t need fan-boys to validate them.[/quote]
The first sentence is a lie. No-one invests so much of their time and energy debating a subject without strong personal interest.
What comes to the second point, I have admitted already a year or two ago that it’s human from beginning to end and I told it to you, you just don’t remember it.
Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.
So you are selling the idea, that this appalling practice must stop. Ok. I point out that it wont happen without a price.
I don’t have to do any of those things you claim I have to do. E: forget the last sentence. I ditched it and just forgot to erase it.
[quote]pat wrote:
Feel free, dig up the research that shows that a sperm is a human being. Or that a zygote is not. Like I said before, I won’t hold my breath. Just bring the facts. Prove a zygote is not a human being. Go ahead…waiting.[/quote]
Is a sperm not a human being because it only carries half the chromosomes necessary to form a human?
But then that raises the question of how to qualify people who are born without having the necessary number of chromosomes to form a proper human? Are they still human?
If so, we just deviated from one definition of being human to another, and that is a logical no-no.
How do you qualify an embryo as human? The only way I can think of is because it is genetically human. There’s no other particular scientific reason to qualify it as such besides that.
I mean, any other definition of why a human embryo is human runs the risk of leading to a conclusion that a human embryo is, at least at that moment, not human.
This is word-play, like smh_23 said. It plays far too much into human emotions and cannot be qualified properly without running into strange and supposedly absurd ramifications.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh brother. Were you trying to be serious? You expel your own cells all the time. They are not complete separate beings from the source and neither is a sperm, however a fetus is. It’s a scientific fact.
A sperm is a tiny fish that contains partial human DNA. If anything the skin cells you shed constantly contain more complete DNA than a sperm. Shit and piss contain cells with more complete DNA information than a sperm.
The big difference is that those cells you expel contain your DNA, the fetus contains somebody elses, neither the host’s nor the sperm donors, but it’s own separate, but human DNA and if it weren’t for the fact that it’s a unique living being of it’s own genetic nature, then it would be fine to dispose of. But the being is both human and living and nobody has the right to kill it, even if the host considers it a squatter.[/quote]
My skin is dead and lacks purpose. It’s discarded. Sperm has some unique features and a definite purpose and it is ridiculous to compare it with shit.
The host is called a woman. The donor is a called a man And when they are happy about the mixing of their genes they say we are going to have a baby. They don’t say we have a baby. We are going to have a baby. It is a state of anticipation of something that is in the coming. Human yes, but not there yet.
You have a hell of a job to sell your interpretation to the majority. And if you do success you have the job that comes from equalizing the responsibility. And I don’t think you are going to succeed with that. It will lead to the situation where you have checked one trait that is common for the countries that prohibit abortion, inequality.
I’m not trying to turn your head. I’m just pointing out the problems that inevitably will rise with illegal abortion.[/quote]
BTW, you don’t only discard dead cells. You discard living cells all the time whether or not their purpose is complete. I have a difficult time believing you are seriously trying to argue against simple biological facts.
So your argument is: sperm is discarded all the time, because it’s purpose is to fertilize a female egg and eggs and sperm as discarded all the time, it’s ok to digard a human being because they are the result of the fertilization of an egg from sperm.
Sorry, that’s a stupid argument. It’s completely a non-sequitur. Because the base components of human fertilization are discarded all the time does not mean that you can terminate a human life because they are the result of things that are discarded all the time.
You are the result of a sperm and an egg, why can’t I terminate you?[/quote]
You can try and and if you are really determined you can succeed. Really, there is no universal law to prevent it. Most of us just don’t work that way, you probably included.
That’s a weird thought you present and makes me wonder how you read what I write. No, I was just thinking about what you said about sperm, that it is not human life. Well, that’s an area where usual categories will not serve us well, since every cell is a living thing.
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
I don’t have anything to sell. I just see the facts as they are, raw without any need to manipulate. The embryoblast, the zygote, the fetus are all stages of human developement. The thing that is developing is a human being. This is a scientific fact. You can argue with the hard science of embryology, but you will lose.
You may be all for killing a human being in the early stages of development, then you are for killing a human being, period.
I have nothing to sell and no need to sell it. You have to either prove that the human in early stages of development is either not human, not living, neither. OR you have to make a compelling argument as to why it’s ok to kill a living human being simply because it’s in early stages of development.
It does not matter if you agree with the facts or not, you have to prove them wrong, not simply disagree. I simply chose the side of the argument with which the facts agree. I don’t need fan-boys to validate them.[/quote]
The first sentence is a lie. No-one invests so much of their time and energy debating a subject without strong personal interest.
What comes to the second point, I have admitted already a year or two ago that it’s human from beginning to end and I told it to you, you just don’t remember it.
Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.
So you are selling the idea, that this appalling practice must stop. Ok. I point out that it wont happen without a price.
I don’t have to do any of those things you claim I have to do. [/quote]
I’ll just ignore the fact that you called me a liar without justification. The facts speak for themselves.
If you support this idea:
“Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.”
Then you better come up with some facts to support it, because you just stated it is a human being, but it’s stage of development affects it’s intrinsic value without supporting the claim.
How does the ‘temporal aspect’ affect it’s value? What else affects a human being’s value? Shape, size, intelligence? Yeah, you do have to back up what you say with something a little better than “'Cause I say so!”, because that doesn’t mean shit to me.
[quote]pat wrote:
I’ll just ignore the fact that you called me a liar without justification. The facts speak for themselves.
If you support this idea:
“Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.”
Then you better come up with some facts to support it, because you just stated it is a human being, but it’s stage of development affects it’s intrinsic value without supporting the claim.
How does the ‘temporal aspect’ affect it’s value? What else affects a human being’s value? Shape, size, intelligence? Yeah, you do have to back up what you say with something a little better than “'Cause I say so!”, because that doesn’t mean shit to me.[/quote]
“We are going to have a baby”, “we are going to become parents”, it’s right there. That’s the way people think, they are waiting. I don’t for a second entertain the thought that you see that as evidence of anything, but you could try. The point is, that what you present as self-evidently logical, is not so. It’s an abstract construction and the application of it directly in real life will give unwanted consequences.
The temporal aspect affects the value through ripeness and a human being is ripe when it is born. This is not a logical construction, it’s an observation.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]kaaleppi wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
I don’t have anything to sell. I just see the facts as they are, raw without any need to manipulate. The embryoblast, the zygote, the fetus are all stages of human developement. The thing that is developing is a human being. This is a scientific fact. You can argue with the hard science of embryology, but you will lose.
You may be all for killing a human being in the early stages of development, then you are for killing a human being, period.
I have nothing to sell and no need to sell it. You have to either prove that the human in early stages of development is either not human, not living, neither. OR you have to make a compelling argument as to why it’s ok to kill a living human being simply because it’s in early stages of development.
It does not matter if you agree with the facts or not, you have to prove them wrong, not simply disagree. I simply chose the side of the argument with which the facts agree. I don’t need fan-boys to validate them.[/quote]
The first sentence is a lie. No-one invests so much of their time and energy debating a subject without strong personal interest.
What comes to the second point, I have admitted already a year or two ago that it’s human from beginning to end and I told it to you, you just don’t remember it.
Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.
So you are selling the idea, that this appalling practice must stop. Ok. I point out that it wont happen without a price.
I don’t have to do any of those things you claim I have to do. [/quote]
I’ll just ignore the fact that you called me a liar without justification. The facts speak for themselves.
If you support this idea:
“Is it ok to kill an embyo or zygote? It depends, I wouldn’t do it, but it is not the same thing as killing a child. There is a temporal aspect that affects the “value” of the embryo. You may not like it and reject it, but it is there whatever you think about it.”
Then you better come up with some facts to support it, because you just stated it is a human being, but it’s stage of development affects it’s intrinsic value without supporting the claim.
How does the ‘temporal aspect’ affect it’s value? What else affects a human being’s value? Shape, size, intelligence? Yeah, you do have to back up what you say with something a little better than “'Cause I say so!”, because that doesn’t mean shit to me.[/quote]
Why does it matter his value is less than you think it should be? If someone doesn’t value something its not their responsibility to give a reason why, its purely a personal reference.