Planned Parenthood

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
481

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

In my opinion that was no person , I can not believe it was a live it probably had a machine fill in for all the functions of the brain , it couldn’t have had a thought . It had no life
[/quote]

With this thought process, how long until advocate euthanizing handicapped people of all types?
[/quote]

I’m going to go with as soon as it’s socially and politically convenient for him to go full blown collectivist. So roughly January 2017 when Bernie takes office.

482

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Alrightmiami19c wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

In my opinion that was no person , I can not believe it was a live it probably had a machine fill in for all the functions of the brain , it couldn’t have had a thought . It had no life
[/quote]

With this thought process, how long until advocate euthanizing handicapped people of all types?
[/quote]

I’m going to go with as soon as it’s socially and politically convenient for him to go full blown collectivist. So roughly January 2017 when Bernie takes office. [/quote]

I know a simple answer is probably out of the question but are you two saying this child should have kept alive ?

483

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Boy born without a brain lives to be 12 years old, dies peacefully
http://q13fox.com/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-lives-to-be-12-years-old-dies-peacefully/[/quote]

Is this good? [/quote]
No, but it illustrates a point.

Ya, that’s exactly why I posted it. I think it was Bismark that brought up brain wave function as the means test for personhood, this 12 year old is clearly a person. So are the others. [/quote]

In my opinion that was no person , I can not believe it was a live it probably had a machine fill in for all the functions of the brain , it couldn’t have had a thought . It had no life
[/quote]

Here’s your gold medal for mental gymnastics. [/quote]

I think the gymnastics is trying to understand the motivation of the post , I personally think to keep some one alive that should be dead could be torture
. There would be no way to convince me that this is some how a good thing. And if that is your’s , bean’s and alrighty’s then I understand , I just want to know your opinion

484

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Boy born without a brain lives to be 12 years old, dies peacefully
http://q13fox.com/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-lives-to-be-12-years-old-dies-peacefully/[/quote]

Is this good? [/quote]
No, but it illustrates a point.

Ya, that’s exactly why I posted it. I think it was Bismark that brought up brain wave function as the means test for personhood, this 12 year old is clearly a person. So are the others. [/quote]

In my opinion that was no person , I can not believe it was a live it probably had a machine fill in for all the functions of the brain , it couldn’t have had a thought . It had no life
[/quote]

Here’s your gold medal for mental gymnastics. [/quote]

I think the gymnastics is trying to understand the motivation of the post , I personally think to keep some one alive that should be dead could be torture
. There would be no way to convince me that this is some how a good thing. And if that is your’s , bean’s and alrighty’s then I understand , I just want to know your opinion
[/quote]
Um a minute ago you said they weren’t alive. According to you, they aren’t kept alive and can’t die. Though that opinion is entirely contrary to everything we know about biology, it was what you said.

What you seem to fail to get is that the people you are opposing aren’t using their opinion. They are following scientific reasoning and basic biology. It is biology vs pits claim to “just know” what should or shouldn’t count as human based on political notions.

485

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Boy born without a brain lives to be 12 years old, dies peacefully
http://q13fox.com/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-lives-to-be-12-years-old-dies-peacefully/[/quote]

Is this good? [/quote]
No, but it illustrates a point.

Ya, that’s exactly why I posted it. I think it was Bismark that brought up brain wave function as the means test for personhood, this 12 year old is clearly a person. So are the others. [/quote]

In my opinion that was no person , I can not believe it was a live it probably had a machine fill in for all the functions of the brain , it couldn’t have had a thought . It had no life
[/quote]

Here’s your gold medal for mental gymnastics. [/quote]

I think the gymnastics is trying to understand the motivation of the post , I personally think to keep some one alive that should be dead could be torture
. There would be no way to convince me that this is some how a good thing. And if that is your’s , bean’s and alrighty’s then I understand , I just want to know your opinion
[/quote]

It’s not gymnastics it’s just following the thread…

[quote]Bismark wrote:
The human brain should be the standard. After all, it is when brain function ceases that a person is declared clinically deceased. When a fetus has developed a brain that can support its basic biological functions, probably at around six months of life, it can be reasonably argued that personhood has begun. Abortions at this point should be illegal. [/quote]

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Brain dead patients hearts may beat, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t clinically dead. The brain is the self. If it isn’t alive, neither is a person. It isn’t until 25 weeks that fetal brain activity begins to exhibit regular wave patterns.

A rudimentary nervous system. The definition of death is not disputed, and is considered the time when electroencephalography (EEG) activity ceases. It isn’t unreasonable to hold the opposite as the beginning of personhood. It’s pretty conservative of me to draw the line there. In Jewish Talmudic Law, life doesn’t begin until childbirth. [/quote]

486

Development is something we all undergo throughout [i]ALL[/i] of our natural lives.

Where is the magic line that allows for a child to be protected from open slaughter?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
What EXACTLY is it missing pb?

[/quote]

If I get your question right it is development
[/quote]

487

You missed this post so I will provide it until you address my points.

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
The only times you refer to are when a woman is raped. No arguments there. However you can [i]NOT[/i] argue the case for all of abortions when rape accounts for such a small number.

Where is your source showing that the “glob of goo gradually becomes a person?”

What is YOUR definition for viability?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
If you try and tell me that the woman?s body is her own and the child does not have a right to be there, we have two things to reply; nature determines the location of the developing child and second, the woman took part in the activity known to create life. And finally, what is the exact moment when a person comes into existence?[/quote]

There are cases that a woman may not have participated willingly. In my opinion that glob of goo gradually becomes a person . I believe at the time of viability does that child own his own life , before that it’s life is at the will of the mother [/quote]
[/quote]

488

we are debating a non point . But my point stands if a child’s life would be better off dead , I opt to let the child die rather than torture it with force feeding

489

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Development is something we all undergo throughout [i]ALL[/i] of our natural lives.

Where is the magic line that allows for a child to be protected from open slaughter?

[quote]

True we develop until we return to dust and probably beyond. But when that child has the ability to live on it’s own , I know it can’t feed it’s self but a surrogate could , I personally could understand the point if we had no such thing as an orphanage

490

@ the Circle Jerk Society, you have to realize I am not alone , I am not sure whether your point or my point is the most accepted point of view . But my side has the law on it’s side at this time .

491

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
my side has the law on it’s side at this time .
[/quote]

Slave traders had the law on their side once too.

492

I debated whether to put this here or in the stupid thread…

493

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

we are debating a non point . But my point stands if a child’s life would be better off dead , I opt to let the child die rather than torture it with force feeding[/quote]

By your definition Stephen Hawking would be better off dead.

494

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
But my point stands if a child’s life would be better off dead , I opt to let the child die [/quote]

Glad you’re the all knowing and wonderful Master of the Universe and KNOW if someone would be better off dead.

Who the fuck are you to make that determination? Oh right… You aren’t fit to, ever.

495

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
my side has the law on it’s side at this time .
[/quote]

Slave traders had the law on their side once too. [/quote]

And Jim Crow too.

Just so happens his democrat party supported all three. Interesting.

498

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:

Fetus. It isn’t a baby until birth.[/quote]

Does that make you feel better about genocide? Calling babies a technical name?

[quote] So? Brain dead patients hearts may beat, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t clinically dead. The brain is the self. If it isn’t alive, neither is a person. It isn’t until 25 weeks that fetal brain activity begins to exhibit regular wave patterns.

A rudimentary nervous system. The definition of death is not disputed, and is considered the time when electroencephalography (EEG) activity ceases. It isn’t unreasonable to hold the opposite as the beginning of personhood.[/quote]

One, personhood is utter bullshit. There is no “moment of personhood” beyond the moment of conception. A person is either a person from start to finish, or they are not. Pretty sure we’ve had this discussion before using skin color and religious affiliation, and have come to the conclusion that people are people after all.

Two, the consideration of when someone is dead certainly depends on the future, not just the present. Your trying to apply this to early stages of development is ignoring the future.

Yeah in the “black people aren’t people and neither are jews” sort of conserving tradition.

Fucks given about Jewish law here? Zero.
[/quote]

Genocide? You’re really being overly emotive. There exists no overarching authority that carries out abortion by force. The numbers you cite are a sum of many individual choices.

499

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Boy born without a brain lives to be 12 years old, dies peacefully
http://q13fox.com/2014/08/31/boy-born-without-a-brain-lives-to-be-12-years-old-dies-peacefully/[/quote]

A non sentient human shell kept “alive” only though extensive external support is a pretty low bar for personhood. A chimpanzee is more human than a lobotomite.

500

[quote]pushharder wrote:
The slavery comparison is such an apt one:

1861 “They’re better off in bondage.”

2015 “They’re better off dead.”[/quote]

Slaverly was an institution protected by law. Abortion is an individual medical decision protected by law.