[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Meaning no disrespect USMC , I just believe you would argue with me if I said the sky is blue or the Ocean is deep or that Obama was the best president we have had since Clinton:)[/quote]
I wouldn’t argue with you if you were right or knew what you were talking about. [/quote]
It’s arbitrary and idiotic as a distinction anyway. There are millions of people walking around you every day that require constant medical intervention to remain alive. My wife and my dad do. My wife even has to have the intervention due to a missing organ. According to your logic she isn’t a person. Which might be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. What the hell difference does it make if a living human needs medical care to survive? If that disqualifies someone from personhood there are millions of intelligent walking and talking living “non-person” humans the world over. How the ever loving hell did you come to the idea that receiving medical care alters your status as a person? There is absolutely NO logical or factual evidence or semblance of a rationally based thought that could ever come to that ridiculous conclusion.
You’ve completely lost your ever loving mind when you start arguing that my wife and mother of my daughter isn’t a person because she lacks an organ she can’t live without and would be dead without life long medical assistance.
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point?
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point? [/quote]
yeah, your statement is false that these children do not have a brain. To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point? [/quote]
yeah, your statement is false that these children do not have a brain. To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
That’s a fancy straw man you built there. Read the thread…
You’re entitled to you opinion on whether that is torture, but that opinion has zero to do with whether that child is a person or not. You know, the current topic of discussion.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point? [/quote]
yeah, your statement is false that these children do not have a brain. To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
That’s a fancy straw man you built there. Read the thread…
You’re entitled to you opinion on whether that is torture, but that opinion has zero to do with whether that child is a person or not. You know, the current topic of discussion.
[/quote]
so you’re ignoring that your statement is false? because the discussion is based on these children being people while not having a brain. which is incorrect. they do.
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point? [/quote]
yeah, your statement is false that these children do not have a brain. To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
That’s a fancy straw man you built there. Read the thread…
You’re entitled to you opinion on whether that is torture, but that opinion has zero to do with whether that child is a person or not. You know, the current topic of discussion.
[/quote]
so you’re ignoring that your statement is false? because the discussion is based on these children being people while not having a brain. which is incorrect. they do.[/quote]
No, that is not what the discussion was about, but much like sufiandy, you just jumped right in the middle of it completely out of context. I’m well aware that each of these children was born with a brain stem. I doubt there has ever been a case where a child has been born without a brain stem alive, which makes your point moot. Feel free to provide an example.
Pitt is the one that said these children aren’t people because they weren’t born with a brain, argue with him about it.
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
We should certainly use this as a metric of whether or not we should execute people. What seems like torture…
Depressed? Death to you
Poor? Better off dead
Orphan? Shit son, to the vacuum for you
Diabetic? what is life were you can’t enjoy a Snickers?
Peanut Allergy? See ya!!!
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
We should certainly use this as a metric of whether or not we should execute people. What seems like torture…
Depressed? Death to you
Poor? Better off dead
Orphan? Shit son, to the vacuum for you
Diabetic? what is life were you can’t enjoy a Snickers?
Peanut Allergy? See ya!!!
[/quote]
But we should not execute a person if they torture, rape, and/or murder another person (at least in MD). Interesting world we live in.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
My question for usmccds, whats the minimal you can remove from a persons body to have them not considered a person?
For example
The premise of personhood is non-sense in my opinion. It semantics. If you find a left hand on the ground you say, “Oh shit, that’s a person’s hand.”
You aren’t going to convince me that the 12 year old I posted, who could breath on his own and his heart beat on it’s own, wasn’t a person because he didn’t have a brain. We might as well agree to disagree if you’re going to try. [/quote]
they have a brain stem
[/quote]
Yup[/quote]
so they do have part of a brain[/quote]
Do you have a point? [/quote]
yeah, your statement is false that these children do not have a brain. To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
That’s a fancy straw man you built there. Read the thread…
You’re entitled to you opinion on whether that is torture, but that opinion has zero to do with whether that child is a person or not. You know, the current topic of discussion.
[/quote]
I know it is hard to wrap your brainless 
head around this but it may look like a child but with out a brain it is dead lifeless . You (MAY ?) be able to force all the functions through mechanics and keep the corpse from decomposing but it is not alive
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
We should certainly use this as a metric of whether or not we should execute people. What seems like torture…
Depressed? Death to you
Poor? Better off dead
Orphan? Shit son, to the vacuum for you
Diabetic? what is life were you can’t enjoy a Snickers?
Peanut Allergy? See ya!!!
[/quote]
But we should not execute a person if they torture, rape, and/or murder another person (at least in MD). Interesting world we live in. [/quote]
Back on page 22 pitt said that it’s impossible for a human to live without a brain. You said that it is possible and give these children born with a brain stem as an example of being living without a brain. I think you’re the one that is confused.
[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]
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
I think you’re the one that is confused. [/quote]
Not really no. At this point you pro-aborts are turning the argument into semantics to distract from the fact science and logic proves abortion is the whole sale, and celebrated, slaughter of innocent people for convenience.
The single reason the “without a brain” conversation is being had is 100% a distraction. And you know it.
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
To me seems like torture to have have to live like that.
[/quote]
We should certainly use this as a metric of whether or not we should execute people. What seems like torture…
Depressed? Death to you
Poor? Better off dead
Orphan? Shit son, to the vacuum for you
Diabetic? what is life were you can’t enjoy a Snickers?
Peanut Allergy? See ya!!!
[/quote]
But we should not execute a person if they torture, rape, and/or murder another person (at least in MD). Interesting world we live in. [/quote]
Back on page 22 pitt said that it’s impossible for a human to live without a brain. You said that it is possible and give these children born with a brain stem as an example of being living without a brain. I think you’re the one that is confused. [/quote]
Nope, keep going back. Go back to when I first posted these stories.
@Pitt fuck off
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]hmm87 wrote:
I think you’re the one that is confused. [/quote]
Not really no. At this point you pro-aborts are turning the argument into semantics to distract from the fact science and logic proves abortion is the whole sale, and celebrated, slaughter of innocent people for convenience.
The single reason the “without a brain” conversation is being had is 100% a distraction. And you know it. [/quote]
Much like torture being brought up.