Planned Parenthood

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
521

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

No science may tell you it is a human life at the point of conception but it never tells you when it is a person .

[/quote]

Human life can’t be anything other than a person dipshit. It isn’t a dog, tree rock or magic fairy dust.

Like I said, with the rest of your drivel, you’d have made a get asset to the slave owning community.

I’m done with you’re shit here. Carry on being this stupid and down right evil, it’s on you to sleep at night. [/quote]

human life can be a sperm , if it is a human sperm and it is alive then it is a human life , person-hood is when a developed gob of goo takes form and has every characteristic of a functioning person , eats , sleeps , breaths [/quote]

Are your retarded? Honest question. Do you have a developmental learning disability? We’ve been over this. A sperm is not a unique human being, an embryo is.

And no, “personhood” doesn’t fucking begin when politically convenient for you. It begins at conception. [/quote]

In your opinion person-hood begins at conception . I on the other hand have a differing opinion . Get it ?
[/quote]

Person-hood is irrelevant to the discussion. It’s a semantic that literally means nothing. You cannot go around killing human beings simply because you do not believe they have acquired the properties that makes that human being a person.

522

[quote]Bismark wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Bismark wrote:
Many embryos that result from conception - indeed, the majority of them - lack the capacity to become living human beings. Are those human embryos people, or not? Biology would suggest the latter.

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]

You can “hear” a babies heart beat around 6-8 weeks gestation. Shit I think by 8 it’s fully formed into chambers.

So, what makes that heart beat? Is it the mother’s brain? [/quote]

Fetus. It isn’t a baby until birth. 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. It’s pretty conservative of me to draw the line there. In Jewish Talmudic Law, life doesn’t begin until childbirth. [/quote]

There are people here who do not display neural activity, you can’t go around killing them.
You don’t get to set the rules as to when life begins. You do not simply get to determine that it’s ok to kill a human being simply because they do not meet some arbitrary criteria you determined. Zygote, embryo, fetus are stages of human development, they are not separate things as being human.

524

[quote]pushharder wrote:
I actually love to watch the pro-abortion crowd jump through their hoops. Like I said in my last post, it’s entertaining. Still abhorrent but entertaining to watch seemingly intelligent folks (Peatbullllll not included, of course) play Gumby.[/quote]

I just think it’s weird. Because to broach the subject with any kind of rational thought can lead only to the conclusion we have drawn. It’s deductively and empirically sound and the counter claims are purely emotional.
Personally, I think that most people who are for it, want to justify it in case they themselves need a backup plan. Of course that’s pure conjecture on my part.

525

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Zygote, embryo, fetus are stages of human development, they are not separate things as being human.[/quote]

Spot on.

I would, however, amend your statement to:

Zygote, embryo, fetus, baby, toddler, young child, teenager, adult, octogenarian, etc. are stages of human development, they are not separate things as being human.[/quote]

100% true.

526

[quote]pat wrote:
I think that most people who are for it, want to justify it in case they themselves need a backup plan. Of course that’s pure conjecture on my part.[/quote]

I think it’s a matter of social acceptance. They have been told we’re the freaks, we’re wrong, and we’re the ones taking away “rights”. The pro-abortion side has projected their own faults on the pro-life side and most people have fallen for it, because “a majority of people polled” said for so long.

I honestly think an awful lot of people are pro-abortion simply because they think it’s the winning team, and if you could wipe away that affect, the “winning team” would be the side NOT slicing up and vacuuming the remains living human beings.

527

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

I honestly think an awful lot of people are pro-abortion simply because they think it’s the winning team, and if you could wipe away that affect, the “winning team” would be the side NOT slicing up and vacuuming the remains living human beings. [/quote]

where are those gold bars:)TRUE BRILLIANCE

528

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

A complete, whole, living, human being is present at the moment of conception.
[/quote]

Not true , it may have all it’d chromosomes but it is not complete until it is completely developed
[/quote]

So, something like 20 years old then?[/quote]

No I would say around 6 months in utero
[/quote]

So long long long long before fully developed then? make up your mind Pit. You aren’t even marginally biologically fully developed until reproductive abilities are there.[/quote]

Shit, I grew up until 23/24 years old. [/quote]

you still haven’t grew up
[/quote]

So, by your reasoning, it’s totally okay to kill him.[/quote]

absolutely not , but if you listen to them I am a Nazi slave trader ?murderer

529

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

you do know respiration , heart beat and many other functions are controlled by the brain ? don’t you???

530

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

Must be true , I read it on the internet :slight_smile: LOLOLO that is some funny shit

531

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

you do know respiration , heart beat and many other functions are controlled by the brain ? don’t you???
[/quote]
I posted several cases where a person did not have a brain and their heart beat on it’s own. Just ignore that though…

I guess you’re going to keep ignoring the Stephen Hawking conundrum.

532

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

Must be true , I read it on the internet :slight_smile: LOLOLO that is some funny shit
[/quote]

You are a moron.

533

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

Must be true , I read it on the internet :slight_smile: LOLOLO that is some funny shit
[/quote]

You are a moron.
[/quote]

I guess you are living proof a man can live with out a brain:)

534

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
I think that most people who are for it, want to justify it in case they themselves need a backup plan. Of course that’s pure conjecture on my part.[/quote]

I think it’s a matter of social acceptance. They have been told we’re the freaks, we’re wrong, and we’re the ones taking away “rights”. The pro-abortion side has projected their own faults on the pro-life side and most people have fallen for it, because “a majority of people polled” said for so long.

I honestly think an awful lot of people are pro-abortion simply because they think it’s the winning team, and if you could wipe away that affect, the “winning team” would be the side NOT slicing up and vacuuming the remains living human beings. [/quote]

You could be right, I don’t really know. It’s hard to understand, in the face of so much contrary information and data, why pick that ‘side’? I cannot imagine one would want to preserve such a barbaric act, unless you have some skin in the game. Or at least potentially have some.

535

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

you do know respiration , heart beat and many other functions are controlled by the brain ? don’t you???
[/quote]
I posted several cases where a person did not have a brain and their heart beat on it’s own. Just ignore that though…

I guess you’re going to keep ignoring the Stephen Hawking conundrum. [/quote]

I know if it is on the internet it must be true, Hawking’s has anything but an absence of brain .

It is feasible to keep the body alive via machines that breath and pump the heart , but that is no person , it has no feelings , no memory , doesn’t feel pain . It is just a mass of flesh and it probably could have all the genes .

BUT IT IS NOT A PERSON .

please post your posts again , I hope you did notice your original post was FAUX News :slight_smile:

536

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

you do know respiration , heart beat and many other functions are controlled by the brain ? don’t you???
[/quote]
I posted several cases where a person did not have a brain and their heart beat on it’s own. Just ignore that though…

I guess you’re going to keep ignoring the Stephen Hawking conundrum. [/quote]

I know if it is on the internet it must be true, Hawking’s has anything but an absence of brain . [/quote]

I know a person in real life whose son was suppose to die within days because of his condition (Anencephaly) and he’s now 3.

Hawking can’t live without his machines. He needs life support to survive.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Pretty easy to make shit up , Keeping alive a mass because you have scientific ability is not humane it is torture.
[/quote][quote]pittbulll wrote:
I personally think to keep some one alive that should be dead could be torture.
[/quote]

[quote]
It is feasible to keep the body alive via machines that breath and pump the heart , but that is no person , it has no feelings , no memory , doesn’t feel pain . It is just a mass of flesh and it probably could have all the genes . [/quote]

Derp duh derp, the kid didn’t need machines to breath or for his heart to pump. He reacted to outside stimulus.

[quote]
BUT IT IS NOT A PERSON. [/quote]

THEN WHAT THE FUCK IS IT?

[quote]
please post your posts again , I hope you did notice your original post was FAUX News :)[/quote]

So the fuck what?

537

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[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. [/quote]

Speaking of “better off dead,” I got to thinking…if some innocent children “would be better off dead” where might that leave us with with a guilty adult who incessantly wishes death on those children…?
[/quote]

The whole issue is a non issue . It is impossible to human live with out a brain, You may keep a mass of flesh from decomposing but that is it
[/quote]

Except it isn’t impossible. [/quote]

you do know respiration , heart beat and many other functions are controlled by the brain ? don’t you???
[/quote]
I posted several cases where a person did not have a brain and their heart beat on it’s own. Just ignore that though…

I guess you’re going to keep ignoring the Stephen Hawking conundrum. [/quote]

I know if it is on the internet it must be true, Hawking’s has anything but an absence of brain .

It is feasible to keep the body alive via machines that breath and pump the heart , but that is no person , it has no feelings , no memory , doesn’t feel pain . It is just a mass of flesh and it probably could have all the genes .

BUT IT IS NOT A PERSON .

please post your posts again , I hope you did notice your original post was FAUX News :slight_smile:

[/quote]

Like you if you were in a comma or under general anesthesia, or even in a dream-less sleep. Wow, I didn’t know you stopped being a person pretty often.

538

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

A complete, whole, living, human being is present at the moment of conception.
[/quote]

Not true , it may have all it’d chromosomes but it is not complete until it is completely developed
[/quote]

So, something like 20 years old then?[/quote]

No I would say around 6 months in utero
[/quote]

So long long long long before fully developed then? make up your mind Pit. You aren’t even marginally biologically fully developed until reproductive abilities are there.[/quote]

Shit, I grew up until 23/24 years old. [/quote]

you still haven’t grew up
[/quote]

So, by your reasoning, it’s totally okay to kill him.[/quote]

absolutely not , but if you listen to them I am a Nazi slave trader ?murderer
[/quote]

You say not, but you fail to logically distinguish between the 2 in your reasoning.

539


I am not sure I get this right , but do I have 2 morons that are claiming a human can survive with out a brain , As far a a debate there is no information to substantiate a claim as such .

I must admit you 2 are a frightening duo

540

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I am not sure I get this right , but do I have 2 morons that are claiming a human can survive with out a brain , As far a a debate there is no information to substantiate a claim as such .

I must admit you 2 are a frightening duo [/quote]

You are clear evidence a person can survive without a brain.