As much as this thread is pissing me off, that is pretty funny. He thought POC was people of color, lol.
Hell, I did too at first, but it certainly didn’t square with ED’s personality. But this magical thing called “Google” addressed my confusion in exactly .032 milliseconds.
1 Like
Lol, ya, I’ve not seen the acronym either, but figured people of color didn’t fit our friend’s posting history.
1 Like
Jesus, people. Internet sarcasm…I was playing off of ED’s holier than thou internet persona.
1 Like
That was precisely my point.
Sorry, no, I don’t see the connection.
51.9M dead babies. A large percentage of them minorities.
Very, very few can fairly be characterized as ‘babies.’ It is deeply misleading to use that word.
From zygote to death the said being is a human being. You are hung up on the semantics of the word being, it’s asinine. You know damn well what that living thing is. To say it’s other than human is both wrong and intellectually dishonest and you know it.
I don’t have time for games. I’ve done it too many times to have any patience for it anymore.
It’s not a lizard, or a slug or a rabbit or a dog, in the uterus of a human being. The only possible off spring a human can carry is another human. It’s scientifically, philosophically, epsitomologically, materially, biogically impossible to be anything else. Waste not my time if you will not answer honestly. I will provide the info you need tomorrow. If you can provide a shred of evidence to the contrary, feel free to provide it.
1 Like
Mufasa -
Trying to be hateful, disrespectful or any equivalent has never and will never lead to authentic change. Whether the medium is here on T-Nation, anywhere or in real life.
Please bear with me as I tell a story. When I was in college last, I took a mammology class and the professor wasn’t outright arrogant but he never hid the fact he had two doctorates and he was proud of being highly educated. Let us call him Dan. After meeting Dan at the pool during one of my workouts, I voiced my frustration about a certain group of people. I phrased my remarks so it wasn’t blatantly obvious as to which group I was disappointed about. My intention was to not start a yelling match with strangers at the pool. Dan thought about what I was saying and he literally told me “Some people are just willfully ignorant.”
Let us now talk about a different sort, Jay is a mixed animal veterinarian and he is one of the most intelligent people I know. The amount of detailed information a veterinarian has to know for one species is humbling but to throw all domestic species in the pot together and to keep it all categorized, impressive to anyone with a little honesty.
But guess what? Jay can fix domestic animals, any day or any night, where location is of little importance. Yet he cannot rebuild a four-stroke engine. Is he arrogant when he makes mistakes outside of what he knows? Opposite, in fact he is crushingly humble. On the flip side of the coin, Dan supports abortion through all nine-and-a-half months of pregnancy and beyond. These two different sorts ring true of everyone I know.
I so vehemently defend the case for human life on these boards because from the moment of conception the unborn have five traits; 1) distinct 2) complete 3)whole 4) human 5) beings. Every single unborn person has these traits, the EXACT same traits as every person on earth! If someone supports open slaughter of people in general then I would understand someone’s support of killing the unborn through willful abortion. If they do not, then their stance is hypocritical.
All I need to prove the case for life is a high school level understanding of mammalian biology.
Yet if you don’t want to talk about life issues, I am saddened but accept your position. But to be honest your position about life is obvious, you just want to play your cards close to the chest for whatever reason.
I find it an unusual dichotomy, that adamant deniers of personhood for the preborn, are ardent sympathizers of any and all that appear to be persecuted unfairly.
(nicked the definition of bleeding heart)
It seems impossible to reconcile the two attitudes.
2 Likes
So if the POC are not human, what are they?
Yet many find it a dichotomy that adamant defenders of personhood are ardent sympathizers of the death penalty, pitching the three year old of an illegal immigrant back over the wall, and consider any public assistance-recipient to be a leech on society,
1 Like
The most ironic part of the liberal stance on infanticide: these “non-human” masses of tissue are unwanted right? That’s what gets them aborted. They are often minority or poor masses of tissue.
The liberals have murdered their base. Had those 51.9M masses of tissue been allowed to survive and become “human” this country would have moved from center-right all the way left. We’d be some sort of Sweden/Venezuela by now. Certainly no trump would have been elected. Ironic, and sad.
To the contrary: Regarding this subject, the semantics are very important. To apply the same term to each stage of the human life cycle creates a false equivalency among the phases. We don’t do this after birth; we all recognize that an infant is not a toddler is not a teen is not an adult. Further, we recognize that the differences among these stages are not simply semantic–expectations, rights and responsibilities vary enormously across them. The same holds true for those portions of the life cycle that occur pre-birth. A zygote is not a blastula is not a morula is not a fetus, etc.
To insist that humans at each stage of development be called human beings elides the enormous differences that exist across those stages.
Abortion = ‘infanticide.’
A textbook example of why semantics matter.
So according to that definition - a person in a coma has ceased to be a human being or perhaps one with advanced Alzheimer’s?
It is impossible, but the next 500 posts will be dedicated to Olympic level mental gymnastics anyway.
Supporting the innocent unborn’s right to life and supporting the death penalty for someone that purposefully commits a heinous act against are entirely different things.
The 1800s called, they’d like their logic back.
As fellow Christians, you and l probably have a definition that includes a non physical side (l knew you before l knit you in your mother’s womb… for example), but even the word “being” seems to be hijacked , in order to navel gaze.
Being - in a state of existence. That just seems simple to comprehend as a meaning.
It is the “Well, it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.” that boggle my admitedly finite reasoning facilities. Hope that doesn’t work against me for being a ‘being’ anytime soon.
1 Like
That’s pretty astounding, kneedragger, with something I choose to not discuss with anyone, public or private.
Even more reason to bow out of these “discussions”.