Pro-Lifer Throws Incendiary Device at PP

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you.

22

^^^ 2011 Humanitarian of the Year Award Candidate

23

These are the words deorum uses - “take care of [the child] once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own” Umm, so why do only YOU get to define when those points in time are?

Any you never defined the unborn. Please try again.

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

24

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
These are the words deorum uses - “take care of [the child] once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own” Umm, so why do only YOU get to define when those points in time are?

Any you never defined the unborn. Please try again.

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]
[/quote]

I’m. Not. Arguing. Semantics. With. You.

I do not get to define anything; define every and anything however the fuck you wish. I do not care. No argument that is so weak that it falls back on semantics will ever impact my thoughts and ideas anyway… Bring substance and I’ll continue this…

Now hypothetically if I was to humor your semantics I would probably say something like this:

For what its worth the state defines those points in question as the third trimester and the age of 18…

Unborn - An infant state of life that has not existed outside of its mother

There I defined that as well. Maybe your actually getting at something more worthwhile than the surface dictionary fights you have been clinging to? Probably not… Regardless I addressed everything this time, no?

25

An unborn child is a parasite now…I’ve heard it all.

One word RESPONSIBILITY. The parents of a “parasite” should have to live with the consequences of making said “parasite”

We can debate when/if there is a legitimate place for abortion, but when two consenting adults create a “parasite” they should be legally required to give that “parasite” the opportunity to live at which point they can put he/she up for adoption or whatever.

I still can’t believe this is an issue in 2011.

26

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

I don’t want to get embroiled in this thread. They serve no purpose and they only make people angry. I hate arguments like that, but I will say this: Deorum, your definition is flawed. There is no substantial difference between an unborn and an infant in terms of being able to survive without nourishment directly from the mother’s body, as you defined it. Before the advent of manufactured baby formula, breast milk was the only source of nourishment an infant could get. And if you want to argue natural rights (specifically in this case a woman’s “natural rights over her body”) then you need to base it on something else besides a historically novel manufacturing process. That, or you have to admit that legal permissability of infanticide should be recognized.

27

You speak with the English language, therefore there is no way to argue semantics unless you try and tell me what ‘parasite’ means. Oh wait! But that IS what YOU did! But then you gave up and conceded that portion of the debate by crying because you can NOT win through that route.

Now you are going to try and let the government define; when and what you can say and even think? My God, travel back in time before WWII and become a nazi. The third reich would have wet their tight little panties to have a mindless fuck stain like you!

So what pray tell is the life inside the mother? BTW you even define the child as a life separate from the mother.

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
These are the words deorum uses - “take care of [the child] once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own” Umm, so why do only YOU get to define when those points in time are?

Any you never defined the unborn. Please try again.

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]
[/quote]

I’m. Not. Arguing. Semantics. With. You.

I do not get to define anything; define every and anything however the fuck you wish. I do not care. No argument that is so weak that it falls back on semantics will ever impact my thoughts and ideas anyway… Bring substance and I’ll continue this…

Now hypothetically if I was to humor your semantics I would probably say something like this:

For what its worth the state defines those points in question as the third trimester and the age of 18…

Unborn - An infant state of life that has not existed outside of its mother

There I defined that as well. Maybe your actually getting at something more worthwhile than the surface dictionary fights you have been clinging to? Probably not… Regardless I addressed everything this time, no?[/quote]

28

[quote]Deorum wrote:

I’m. Not. Arguing. Semantics. With. You.

[/quote]

The entire abortion debate hinges on semantics. Whoever gets to define the terms wins. If you want to follow the ethical thread you’re tugging at, you are going to have to follow it logically to its unraveling.

In this case, that means you will have to show, at minimum, how the organism (parasite? child?) living inside the womb of it’s progenitor (host? mother?) is somehow magically transformed into an altogether different creature simply by passing the vaginal threshold.

So, what is it that changes, exactly? Do premature babies count? If a 24 week old childasite makes it out of womb, to be nourished by nurses and machines and kept alive with machines and incubators, does this creature somehow become more of a “real” child than the one that stays in it’s mother’s womb for 34 weeks? Is it “safe,” like the outside of the womb is homebase?

Perhaps you’d like to expound upon these confusing areas just a little bit.

29

Speak for yourself my man.

On the other hand I refuse to sit by and let idiots think they have the right to end any life they deem necessary, simply because they do NOT respect said life. If someone wants to earn a Darwin Award, by all means, that is their choice. Just do not let them make the choice for the life with no voice.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

I don’t want to get embroiled in this thread. They serve no purpose and they only make people angry. I hate arguments like that, but I will say this: Deorum, your definition is flawed. There is no substantial difference between an unborn and an infant in terms of being able to survive without nourishment directly from the mother’s body, as you defined it. Before the advent of manufactured baby formula, breast milk was the only source of nourishment an infant could get. And if you want to argue natural rights (specifically in this case a woman’s “natural rights over her body”) then you need to base it on something else besides a historically novel manufacturing process. That, or you have to admit that legal permissability of infanticide should be recognized.[/quote]

30

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

You are just a bad person. I mean truly a terrible person. You are what is wrong with the world today. You are why everything is slowly decaying. The world would honestly be a better place without you. Just thought you should know that.

31

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

You are just a bad person. I mean truly a terrible person. You are what is wrong with the world today. You are why everything is slowly decaying. The world would honestly be a better place without you. Just thought you should know that.[/quote]

You must be thinking out loud for me, because I was thinking something very similar. To sit there and call a fetus or an unborn baby a parasite, is something I cannot wrap my head around. I have been known to be somewhat brutal in some of my views, but that surpasses me by a quantum mile.

32

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

You are just a bad person. I mean truly a terrible person. You are what is wrong with the world today. You are why everything is slowly decaying. The world would honestly be a better place without you. Just thought you should know that.[/quote]

You must be thinking out loud for me, because I was thinking something very similar. To sit there and call a fetus or an unborn baby a parasite, is something I cannot wrap my head around. I have been known to be somewhat brutal in some of my views, but that surpasses me by a quantum mile. [/quote]

“If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck.”

Not caring about helpless abandoned children is about as low as you can get. That just about pegs out the “I’m-a-piece-of-shit-o-meter”.

33

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:

I will hold your hand because you lack the ability to form your own, individual thoughts. A child/embryo is unable to survive on their own for many, many years. Should mothers around the world be allowed to abandon children at any stage of development? The answer is a resounding NO. Why is it ok to kill a child during development, namely in the embryo stage?

Even with your definition it falls short because you ASSUME they speak of the same species. Interesting how you are an ass because of your thought process. Medicine tells you a parasite is a different species.

[/quote]

As far as your obsessing over “parasite” I really don’t care what you define a parasite as…

If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck… But from a legal stand point she should be held accountable to take care of it from once it can harbor life on its own until when it can survive on its own. A fetus however is much different, it’s life cannot exist without obtaining nourishment directly from the body of the mother. This is now a parasite. If the mother does not want this physiological burden on her body then that is her decision.

If the word parasite tickles your pickle so much to where it becomes the focus of your argument then ignore that word and use a substitute… I’m not arguing semantics with you. [/quote]

I don’t want to get embroiled in this thread. They serve no purpose and they only make people angry. I hate arguments like that, but I will say this: Deorum, your definition is flawed. There is no substantial difference between an unborn and an infant in terms of being able to survive without nourishment directly from the mother’s body, as you defined it. Before the advent of manufactured baby formula, breast milk was the only source of nourishment an infant could get. And if you want to argue natural rights (specifically in this case a woman’s “natural rights over her body”) then you need to base it on something else besides a historically novel manufacturing process. That, or you have to admit that legal permissability of infanticide should be recognized.[/quote]

If you take a 3 month old fetus out of a mother’s body it will not survive no matter what you do to it - give it all the formula you want Mr. Gerber. It is parasitic in nature and requires a parasitic relationship with the mother for survival. When it reaches a certain age the umbilical cord can be cut(along with the parasitic biological relationship) and the fetus can survive as an infant.

The uproar over the word parasite intrigues me… People crack me up lol.

34

[quote]Deorum wrote:

The uproar over the word parasite intrigues me… People crack me up lol.[/quote]

Especially how I explain very specifically that your use of the word is wrong and that a baby is indeed not a parasite.

35

And for what its worth I’m not some savage and I personally do not advocate aborting fetus’s… However to say a women does not have the right to remove an unwanted parasite from her body is insane… Do what the fuck you want with your body and perhaps even your woman’s body but stop trying to stick your noses up the worlds collective asshole.

36

[quote]Deorum wrote:
And for what its worth I’m not some savage and I personally do not advocate aborting fetus’s… However to say a women does not have the right to remove an unwanted parasite from her body is insane… Do what the fuck you want with your body and perhaps even your woman’s body but stop trying to stick your noses up the worlds collective asshole. [/quote]

“If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck.”

37

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

The uproar over the word parasite intrigues me… People crack me up lol.[/quote]

Especially how I explain very specifically that your use of the word is wrong and that a baby is indeed not a parasite.[/quote]

No matter what you say it is beyond clear that a fetus is a parasite… Jesus fucking Christ will somebody take a fucking biology course and get back to me? This is fucking painful…

38

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
And for what its worth I’m not some savage and I personally do not advocate aborting fetus’s… However to say a women does not have the right to remove an unwanted parasite from her body is insane… Do what the fuck you want with your body and perhaps even your woman’s body but stop trying to stick your noses up the worlds collective asshole. [/quote]

“If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck.” [/quote]

I don’t give a fuck and neither do you. The only difference is you lie to yourself. If you gave a fuck you would be out there spending your time and money to find and save orphans and doing other romanticized things. But judging from your actions(or in-actions) rather than your empty words I can see a much broader picture.

39

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:
And for what its worth I’m not some savage and I personally do not advocate aborting fetus’s… However to say a women does not have the right to remove an unwanted parasite from her body is insane… Do what the fuck you want with your body and perhaps even your woman’s body but stop trying to stick your noses up the worlds collective asshole. [/quote]

“If a mother wants to abandon her child I don’t give a fuck.” [/quote]

I don’t give a fuck and neither do you. The only difference is you lie to yourself. If you gave a fuck you would be out there spending your time and money to find and save orphans and doing other romanticized things. But judging from your actions(or in-actions) rather than your empty words I can see a much broader picture.[/quote]

Projecting much? You don’t know anything about me.

40

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

The uproar over the word parasite intrigues me… People crack me up lol.[/quote]

Especially how I explain very specifically that your use of the word is wrong and that a baby is indeed not a parasite.[/quote]

No matter what you say it is beyond clear that a fetus is a parasite… Jesus fucking Christ will somebody take a fucking biology course and get back to me? This is fucking painful… [/quote]

No, biology-wise it is not a parasite. That is exactly what I explained earlier.