Source for the “stock atheist argument?” Can you prove the embryo does not have these traits? Something tells me, these are just claims to justify the choice to be selfish.
[quote]xspoonman wrote:
human embryos are human, but dont metabolize on their own, dont have souls, and have not developed the wiring in their brains to experience pain. <stock atheist argument, am I in the club yet? [/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Let people who have problems conceiving “adopt” the children and raise them. Better than wasting the embryo’s in a research that leads to a impenetrable brick wall.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
How should we do away with it? What should we do to the people who do it and what should be done with the millions of frozen embryos currently in existence?
http://www.pacificfertilitycenter.com/welcome/lab_freeze.php[/quote]
[/quote]
1st of all, there simply aren’t enough people to make this feasible. Secondly, many of the embryos are defective.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Carl Sagan the theoretical physicist, really?
Yeah, they pose the same bad arguments that you guys do…Why isn’t sperm considered human? Or flat out lies, such as ‘pro-lifers allow for cases of rape or incest’…Uh, no we don’t. Or the utter stupid argument that there is no such thing as a ‘Right to life’. Really? Go shoot a pregnant woman in the gut and see how many counts of murder you get charged with… The answer is 2. See Scott Peterson.
Just because you don’t want to call something what it is, doesn’t mean it isn’t. Scientifically speaking, the embryo at any stage of gestation is a human organism. Good luck disproving that fact.
Really, all you have left is the question ‘when is it ok to take human life’. Unmistakably the life you take is human and nothing else. [/quote]
Lol you didn’t read the link[/quote]
did too…
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.
…
It’s not the woman’s body I am concerned with. It’s her kids she see’s fit to kill because she’s an incompetent, lazy piece of shit and can’t be bothered to accept the consequences of her actions. It’s still murder.
If she wants to cut her arm off and shove it up her ass, I have no issues with that.[/quote]
It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.
[/quote]
Oh! Do please explain it to me.
[quote]
And that “lazy piece of shit” might be a rape victim, so how about you shut your fucking mouth? Consequences of her actions? We both know how horrible people can be, don’t you dare try and pull this bullshit.[/quote]
Could have been a girl you dated at one time to. Considering that rape is a fraction of all abortions and most abortions are done out of convenience. You may kindly shut your fucking mouth. If we get rid of all abortions save for the ones by women who have been raped, I will indeed shut the fuck up about it forever.[/quote]
Don’t sit there and imply that just because rape is “a fraction” of abortions that rape is somehow less important or a nonissue.[/quote]
I didn’t. I did say if that were the totality of all abortions I would shut the fuck up.
But you have failed to explain:
“It’s not a straw man. With the genetic similarity between humans and some apes, the line that you so desperately seek is pretty blurred. You keep crying “slippery slope” but refuse to see how that line of thought will pan out in full.”
“What’s the matter Colonel Sanders? Chicken?”
[quote]joebassin wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.
[/quote]
I’m not saying animals are people. I’m just asking you why do you think killing people is wrong but killing animals is right? Why do you give human a special status over animals? [/quote]
Because they are tasty. Besides the yummy ones, I do no harm to animals. We’re the head species in charge, until we fall in the pecking order, we rule them. That’s the secular take anyway.
Do you really believe you are on par or below an animal. So say I saw you and a hungry bear and I have a gun. Should I shoot the bear, or let him eat you? If your equal, then I figure the bear’s gotta eat sometime, so why not?
See, I’d shoot the bear in that case, but if it’s between a moose and a bear, I let nature take it’s course. If you posit that animals are our equal these scenarios cannot take place, I’d treat you like the moose. Tough shit.
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Source for the “stock atheist argument?” Can you prove the embryo does not have these traits? Something tells me, these are just claims to justify the choice to be selfish.
[quote]xspoonman wrote:
human embryos are human, but dont metabolize on their own, dont have souls, and have not developed the wiring in their brains to experience pain. <stock atheist argument, am I in the club yet? [/quote]
[/quote]
See this is the difference between pretty much every atheist on this board and Kamui. Yeah, they are both Athiests, but that’s where the similarity ends. These other atheists have to change their entire world paradigm to make it fit in with their atheism. Kamui does not do that, he sees the world as it is, but just does not believe in God. It begs the question, if you have to change the course and basis of everything to make it fit your point of view, shouldn’t that force you to give pause and think if it may not be exactly right?
So to not believe in God for these guys it’s morality is relative, science though flawed is not only a measure but authoritative, something can come from nothing and human life has not intrinsic value over anything else. Strange isn’t it?
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
You posted an article as to ‘why an embryo is not alive’ and I addressed one point in the article! Read the articles you post and supposedly agree with.
[quote]joebassin wrote:
What about you go read my post and stop talking to me about stupid crap I never said. [/quote]
[/quote]
I think you should read the article.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]joebassin wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
Animals are not people are they? PETA is on board with this line of reasoning, I sure as shit am not. It’s hard to build muscle as a vegan you know… You end fat, picking out curtains and crying during commercials. Human life is the only life we are concerned with here. Dogs, cats, deer, cows antelope, aren’t part of the conversation…If you want to abort a doggy fetus, be my guest. It’s mean and gross, but not human. <-This is a classic strawman.
[/quote]
I’m not saying animals are people. I’m just asking you why do you think killing people is wrong but killing animals is right? Why do you give human a special status over animals? [/quote]
Because they are tasty. Besides the yummy ones, I do no harm to animals. We’re the head species in charge, until we fall in the pecking order, we rule them. That’s the secular take anyway.
Do you really believe you are on par or below an animal. So say I saw you and a hungry bear and I have a gun. Should I shoot the bear, or let him eat you? If your equal, then I figure the bear’s gotta eat sometime, so why not?
See, I’d shoot the bear in that case, but if it’s between a moose and a bear, I let nature take it’s course. If you posit that animals are our equal these scenarios cannot take place, I’d treat you like the moose. Tough shit.[/quote]
And what is your answer to this simple question: Why do you give human a special status over animals?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
I can see JoeB’s been getting some continuing education credits from the RogueVampire Institute for Vegetarian Ethos.
In light of that, Joe, did you actually meet RV? Did he teach any of the classes? Is he really purple? Does he carry a locket with his countess’ picture in it?[/quote]
Seems like some people have serious reading comprehension problem.
[quote]xspoonman wrote:
human embryos are human, but dont metabolize on their own, dont have souls, and have not developed the wiring in their brains to experience pain. <stock atheist argument, am I in the club yet? [/quote]
No. It would be except you threw souls into the equation. Atheists don’t have souls, nor do they believe others do 
First, a source please. This is just a claim [aka straw-man] YOU are making!
Second, so you would like permission to use a “defective” embryo to purse a technology that will lead to a brick wall?
Please do not forget, Embryonic Stem Cell research has never helped a single person survive a terminal disease. What was the count of diseases cured with Adult Stem Cell research?
[quote]ironcross wrote:
1st of all, there simply aren’t enough people to make this feasible. Secondly, many of the embryos are defective. [/quote]
So is the point I addressed in the article or not?
[quote]joebassin wrote:
I think you should read the article.[/quote]
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
So is the point I addressed in the article or not?
[quote]joebassin wrote:
I think you should read the article.[/quote]
[/quote]
Read the article and you will see.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]ironcross wrote:
…Atheists don’t have souls, nor do they believe others do
[/quote]
…their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools…
[/quote]
So, given that most other religions say this about non-believers, how do you know you picked the right one? It seems some Gods have trouble seeing over mountaintops
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
First, a source please. This is just a claim [aka straw-man] YOU are making!
Second, so you would like permission to use a “defective” embryo to purse a technology that will lead to a brick wall?
Please do not forget, Embryonic Stem Cell research has never helped a single person survive a terminal disease. What was the count of diseases cured with Adult Stem Cell research?
[quote]ironcross wrote:
1st of all, there simply aren’t enough people to make this feasible. Secondly, many of the embryos are defective. [/quote]
[/quote]
I’m not advocating stem cell research; I’m pointing out that we have been freezing excess embryos for >10 years now. Also, the embryos which are injected have to pass a series of tests regarding growth rate and quality; those that don’t pass are discarded. Not very many even survive the freezing and thawing process. With this in mind, along with the idea that every embryo is a person, you should be adamantly against the freezing process. However, considering that every petri dish baby is one of many more embryos that died in the process of making the cut, every pro-lifer should be as if not more concerned with fertility clinics than abortion clinics.
Here joe, this is the portion I am referring to. “In some animals . . . . why isn’t it murder to destroy a sperm or an egg?” This was on the second page btw. Let me know when you can join in the conversation and defend the stance you are trying to argue for.
[quote]joebassin wrote:
I think you should read the article.[/quote]
So what is your point? I advocate for ALL in its different shapes and forms. Abortion is killing just one of the stages and sizes of life.
[quote]ironcross wrote:
I’m not advocating stem cell research; I’m pointing out that we have been freezing excess embryos for >10 years now. Also, the embryos which are injected have to pass a series of tests regarding growth rate and quality; those that don’t pass are discarded. Not very many even survive the freezing and thawing process. With this in mind, along with the idea that every embryo is a person, you should be adamantly against the freezing process. However, considering that every petri dish baby is one of many more embryos that died in the process of making the cut, every pro-lifer should be as if not more concerned with fertility clinics than abortion clinics.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9038/index1.html
[/quote]
[quote]ironcross wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
First, a source please. This is just a claim [aka straw-man] YOU are making!
Second, so you would like permission to use a “defective” embryo to purse a technology that will lead to a brick wall?
Please do not forget, Embryonic Stem Cell research has never helped a single person survive a terminal disease. What was the count of diseases cured with Adult Stem Cell research?
[quote]ironcross wrote:
1st of all, there simply aren’t enough people to make this feasible. Secondly, many of the embryos are defective. [/quote]
[/quote]
I’m not advocating stem cell research; I’m pointing out that we have been freezing excess embryos for >10 years now. Also, the embryos which are injected have to pass a series of tests regarding growth rate and quality; those that don’t pass are discarded. Not very many even survive the freezing and thawing process. With this in mind, along with the idea that every embryo is a person, you should be adamantly against the freezing process. However, considering that every petri dish baby is one of many more embryos that died in the process of making the cut, every pro-lifer should be as if not more concerned with fertility clinics than abortion clinics.
[/quote]
Because abortion is the lynchpin. The rest will follow. Congress need only define the life in the womb as a person. Section 5, 14th amendment.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]ironcross wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
First, a source please. This is just a claim [aka straw-man] YOU are making!
Second, so you would like permission to use a “defective” embryo to purse a technology that will lead to a brick wall?
Please do not forget, Embryonic Stem Cell research has never helped a single person survive a terminal disease. What was the count of diseases cured with Adult Stem Cell research?
[quote]ironcross wrote:
1st of all, there simply aren’t enough people to make this feasible. Secondly, many of the embryos are defective. [/quote]
[/quote]
I’m not advocating stem cell research; I’m pointing out that we have been freezing excess embryos for >10 years now. Also, the embryos which are injected have to pass a series of tests regarding growth rate and quality; those that don’t pass are discarded. Not very many even survive the freezing and thawing process. With this in mind, along with the idea that every embryo is a person, you should be adamantly against the freezing process. However, considering that every petri dish baby is one of many more embryos that died in the process of making the cut, every pro-lifer should be as if not more concerned with fertility clinics than abortion clinics.
[/quote]
Because abortion is the lynchpin. The rest will follow. Congress need only define the life in the womb as a person. Section 5, 14th amendment. [/quote]
Defining life in the womb as a person wont do much to address in vitro conception practices. If anything, you’d be reinforcing them by definition.
I have two guesses for why there aren’t any threads about fertility clinics. 1. Not many are informed about them. 2. Fertility clinics seem less about death than life given their name so it feels weird to say you’re pro-life while standing staunchly against a fertility clinic.
Perhaps the pro-lifers on here should change their name to “anti-little-human-deathers”. (If you don’t include the little, then you wouldn’t be able to justify killing anyone, which we know isn’t the point you’re trying to make)