Pro-Lifer Throws Incendiary Device at PP

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[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.[/quote]

Ok Mr. Biology, explain it again for me. How is a fetus NOT a parasite?

This is ridiculous by the fucking way…

42

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

“an animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another animal or plant); it obtains nourishment from the host without benefiting or killing the host”
[/quote]

  1. Considering the biological purpose of a living organism is to pass on their genes, the mother scientifically benefits from the child. The child is not a parasite.

  2. Your same argument can be said of on infant so, if you aren’t a hypocrite, you would have to be in favor of women having the choice to just leave infants to die.

  3. Abortion is not simply the removal of the baby. An abortion is specifically designed to kill the baby in the process. It isn’t collateral damage that the human dies, it is part of the intent.[/quote]

Let me quote that post for you since it is apparently too hard for you to use the back button.

Passing on genes is a benefit to the mother. That clearly makes it a symbiotic relationship in biology.

43

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

“an animal or plant that lives in or on a host (another animal or plant); it obtains nourishment from the host without benefiting or killing the host”
[/quote]

  1. Considering the biological purpose of a living organism is to pass on their genes, the mother scientifically benefits from the child. The child is not a parasite.

  2. Your same argument can be said of on infant so, if you aren’t a hypocrite, you would have to be in favor of women having the choice to just leave infants to die.

  3. Abortion is not simply the removal of the baby. An abortion is specifically designed to kill the baby in the process. It isn’t collateral damage that the human dies, it is part of the intent.[/quote]

Let me quote that post for you since it is apparently too hard for you to use the back button.[/quote]

You mean that wasn’t a joke? Not one of those points address a fetus being a parasite… Oh god this is fucking pathetic… I’m done here I made my points and the last remains of the argument is clinging to weather or not a fetus is a true “parasite” (as if the fucking word parasite matters). Define parasite for yourselves I really don’t give a fuck. Just expect to be ridiculed when you display that you do not in fact understand the concept of a parasitic biological relationship…

44

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Passing on genes is a benefit to the mother. That clearly makes it a symbiotic relationship in biology.[/quote]

Oh wow you snuck this in here now… You obviously do not understand parasitic and symbiotic relationships if you are arguing that the fetus-mother relationship is symbiotic in nature because she “benefits” by “passing on genes”… This is fucking pathetic… I’m done here.

45

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Passing on genes is a benefit to the mother. That clearly makes it a symbiotic relationship in biology.[/quote]

Oh wow you snuck this in here now… You obviously do not understand parasitic and symbiotic relationships if you are arguing that the fetus-mother relationship is symbiotic in nature because she “benefits” by “passing on genes”… This is fucking pathetic… I’m done here.[/quote]

I didn’t sneak it in. That was in the original post, I just restated it.

Biologically, “good” is defined as anything promoting the survival of genes. Increased fertility is a positive trait in evolution. Increased survival of young is positive. Survival of genes is the biological point of life. Literally everything about life revolves around it. This completely removes and invalidates the notion that an unborn child is a parasite.

That is a clear scientific factual point. Oh, but your retort of “this is fucking pathetic” really does disprove me. You sure showed me. Way to go there captain science.

46

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Passing on genes is a benefit to the mother. That clearly makes it a symbiotic relationship in biology.[/quote]

Oh wow you snuck this in here now… You obviously do not understand parasitic and symbiotic relationships if you are arguing that the fetus-mother relationship is symbiotic in nature because she “benefits” by “passing on genes”… This is fucking pathetic… I’m done here.[/quote]

Check out Wikipedia definition of parasite…

Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host.

Mother and baby are of the same species. You lose goof.

47

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Passing on genes is a benefit to the mother. That clearly makes it a symbiotic relationship in biology.[/quote]

Oh wow you snuck this in here now… You obviously do not understand parasitic and symbiotic relationships if you are arguing that the fetus-mother relationship is symbiotic in nature because she “benefits” by “passing on genes”… This is fucking pathetic… I’m done here.[/quote]

Check out Wikipedia definition of parasite…

Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the other, the host.

Mother and baby are of the same species. You lose goof. [/quote]

Obviously you don’t know biology and are pathetic.

48

[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]

The government regulates what women do with their bodies all the time. We can’t take illegal drugs, we can’t have sex for money, and we can’t commit suicide.

The choice is whether or not you have sex.

And the poster that mentioned that a woman has a right for economic reasons. Well, my 3 teenage boys and 12 year old daughter are costing me a fortune. Can I kill them too?

41% of all New York City pregnancies end in abortion
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local/new_york&id=7883827

Are the women in NYC so stupid that they don’t understand how you get pregnant? It is just sad. We are the culture of death.

And I am considered a terrorist if I pray the rosary outside a planned parenthood building.

49

DD,

My use of the definition was meant for him, not you. I agree with you. The definition supports your idea of symbiosis, it even says it literally.

50

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
DD,

My use of the definition was meant for him, not you. I agree with you. The definition supports your idea of symbiosis, it even says it literally. [/quote]

I was being sarcastic. I was reiterating the response I got from him when I noted that the mother biologically benefits from the relationship so it can’t be parasitic.

51

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[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.[/quote]

Ok Mr. Biology, explain it again for me. How is a fetus NOT a parasite?

This is ridiculous by the fucking way… [/quote]

So…first you want someone with a biology degree to tell you what you want to hear, and then when several of them don’t you ignore them. Classy argument there. Btw, I DO have a master’s degree. And he is right: substantively the biological definition of a parasite is different from that of an unborn organism, although yes there are similarities. That is all I care to say about the subject.

Secondly, you completely misunderstood my first post. I made zero mention of the word parasite itself, instead confining my reaponse to the substance of your attempted definition and why it is false. You roundly ignored the point I was making. Although, perhaps I did not write clearly enough. Please take a second look at my first post–i addressed the faulty foundation for the argument you were making, I did not address the issue of abortion as a whole.

52

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[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.[/quote]

Ok Mr. Biology, explain it again for me. How is a fetus NOT a parasite?

This is ridiculous by the fucking way… [/quote]

So…first you want someone with a biology degree to tell you what you want to hear, and then when several of them don’t you ignore them. Classy argument there. Btw, I DO have a master’s degree. And he is right: substantively the biological definition of a parasite is different from that of an unborn organism, although yes there are similarities. That is all I care to say about the subject.

Secondly, you completely misunderstood my first post. I made zero mention of the word parasite itself, instead confining my reaponse to the substance of your attempted definition and why it is false. You roundly ignored the point I was making. Although, perhaps I did not write clearly enough. Please take a second look at my first post–i addressed the faulty foundation for the argument you were making, I did not address the issue of abortion as a whole.[/quote]

… Okay you guys win the abortion argument due to the technicality of a fetus not being a true parasite because it is of the same species. Brilliant.

…Fucking morons…

…Maybe if your attention spans weren’t so painfully limited you would not get so caught up on a single word and let that detract from the substance of the argument… Fucking painful to sit through this shit with you people… Parasite or not it does not change a thing about my argument and I will continue to refer to the fetus as just that - I do not give a fuck if it is of the same species and if that technicality has it reclassified as something else… If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a fucking goddamn duck I’m going to call it a fucking duck(even if due to some ridiculous discrepancy people will argue that it is not a “true duck”).

53

Aragon,

I appreciate your well thought, intelligent, and articulate post. But also realize what kind of a person you are dealing with here. You are applying logic and rationale to someone who is very illogical. You are trying to square a circle with this guy.

54

INcidentally kneedragger, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said I did not care to get involved in these “debates”. They are not debates, they are childish arguments spattered with name-calling, “fuck” (hey there’s an erudite and eloquent solution to your arguments fallaciousness /sarcasm), and general COMPLETE LACK of anything resembling a substantive argument. Look at the last page–it’s pretty much all “fuck you” “no, fuck you!” “No FUCK YOU” back and forth.

Although, yes, as the thread currently stands the pro-life crowd is the only one that has made any substantial points in between name calling–deorum keeps complaining and throwing exasperation and profanity around but has yet to actually do anything else in response to the opposition’s stance.

55

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
INcidentally kneedragger, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said I did not care to get involved in these “debates”. They are not debates, they are childish arguments spattered with name-calling, “fuck” (hey there’s an erudite and eloquent solution to your arguments fallaciousness /sarcasm), and general COMPLETE LACK of anything resembling a substantive argument. Look at the last page–it’s pretty much all “fuck you” “no, fuck you!” “No FUCK YOU” back and forth.

Although, yes, as the thread currently stands the pro-life crowd is the only one that has made any substantial points in between name calling–deorum keeps complaining and throwing exasperation and profanity around but has yet to actually do anything else in response to the opposition’s stance.[/quote]

Are you insane? There is no opposition! There has only been the argument presented in my original few posts and then pages of what is a true parasite. Nobody has given me anything to respond to! LOL!

You have to be joking. You must be kidding. This is rich.

56

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[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.[/quote]

Ok Mr. Biology, explain it again for me. How is a fetus NOT a parasite?

This is ridiculous by the fucking way… [/quote]

So…first you want someone with a biology degree to tell you what you want to hear, and then when several of them don’t you ignore them. Classy argument there. Btw, I DO have a master’s degree. And he is right: substantively the biological definition of a parasite is different from that of an unborn organism, although yes there are similarities. That is all I care to say about the subject.

Secondly, you completely misunderstood my first post. I made zero mention of the word parasite itself, instead confining my reaponse to the substance of your attempted definition and why it is false. You roundly ignored the point I was making. Although, perhaps I did not write clearly enough. Please take a second look at my first post–i addressed the faulty foundation for the argument you were making, I did not address the issue of abortion as a whole.[/quote]

… Okay you guys win the abortion argument due to the technicality of a fetus not being a true parasite because it is of the same species. Brilliant.

…Fucking morons…

…Maybe if your attention spans weren’t so painfully limited you would not get so caught up on a single word and let that detract from the substance of the argument… Fucking painful to sit through this shit with you people… Parasite or not it does not change a thing about my argument and I will continue to refer to the fetus as just that - I do not give a fuck if it is of the same species and if that technicality has it reclassified as something else… If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a fucking goddamn duck I’m going to call it a fucking duck(even if due to some ridiculous discrepancy people will argue that it is not a “true duck”).[/quote]

Deorum, your ad hominem arguments are getting very old. Grow the fuck up. This isn’t fucking junior high boy. If you have something to say, say it. And say it civilly, like the adult you are biologically.

The crux of my criticism in the first post I made in this thread is NOT to argue whether or not the fetus is a “parasite” I tried to make that abundantly clear both in that original post and in the other response. It is your fault for ignoring my stated, and then restated, intentions. YOU ASKED for the definition from somebody with a biology background. IT IS NOT MY FUCKING FAULT you don’t like the answer an educated person in biology gave you.

If you feel that you have something intelligent and of value to say, say it. Lets even leave aside the argument over the “parasite” word. I never meant to argue that angle anyway.

Re-read my first post, if you have the intellectual balls (or ovaries, if you are a woman) and kindly comment on my real criticism. Incidentally, my first post was meant to HELP YOU argue your position more effectively by pointing out a potential problem. Sadly, you chose to ignore that and then attack me personally. A less vitriolic person might have taken the criticism seriously and then modified their approach to the issue in order to better counter their opponents. As you should have done.

And lest you ignore the last few times I tried to say this—I AM NOT ARGUING ABORTION WITH YOU.

Finally, if it should tickle your fancy to take part in these sorts of debates in the future, kindly note that ALL INTELLIGENT DEBATES, about all subjects, are technical in nature. What you have called “arguing semantics” here in this thread is not at all true semantics. You ignore that fact at your peril, and to the amusement of your opponents, whatever issue the debate may be on. You should make note that the definitions matter because they define the boundaries within which the debate happens. This is true of all subjects, political, religious, scientific and otherwise.

57

[quote]Deorum wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
INcidentally kneedragger, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said I did not care to get involved in these “debates”. They are not debates, they are childish arguments spattered with name-calling, “fuck” (hey there’s an erudite and eloquent solution to your arguments fallaciousness /sarcasm), and general COMPLETE LACK of anything resembling a substantive argument. Look at the last page–it’s pretty much all “fuck you” “no, fuck you!” “No FUCK YOU” back and forth.

Although, yes, as the thread currently stands the pro-life crowd is the only one that has made any substantial points in between name calling–deorum keeps complaining and throwing exasperation and profanity around but has yet to actually do anything else in response to the opposition’s stance.[/quote]

Are you insane? There is no opposition! There has only been the argument presented in my original few posts and then pages of what is a true parasite. Nobody has given me anything to respond to! LOL!

You have to be joking. You must be kidding. This is rich.[/quote]

There are always two sides in a debate or argument. Whether one is made cogently or not depends on its proponents. Currently, and from an objective observer, you are losing badly. Hell, even my “wacko-leftist-feminazi” friends, as they call themselves (tongue in cheek of course), are laughing at you. Although they are sort of cursing you too for making such a hash of their position.

58

Aragorn - I was not trying to get people all wound up, but to simply defend their position along with my own. The deorum character is just that, a character who makes me lol. I simply cannot believe he ‘thinks’ people don’t offer counter examples to his points. Obviously we can see his moronic ways. I will admit to childish name calling but it appeared from the very beginning that deorum would only understand that same language. My fault and I will step above his behavior now. I hope you did not take any of my slang towards you, my fault if you did :o ]

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
INcidentally kneedragger, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said I did not care to get involved in these “debates”. They are not debates, they are childish arguments spattered with name-calling, “fuck” (hey there’s an erudite and eloquent solution to your arguments fallaciousness /sarcasm), and general COMPLETE LACK of anything resembling a substantive argument. Look at the last page–it’s pretty much all “fuck you” “no, fuck you!” “No FUCK YOU” back and forth.

Although, yes, as the thread currently stands the pro-life crowd is the only one that has made any substantial points in between name calling–deorum keeps complaining and throwing exasperation and profanity around but has yet to actually do anything else in response to the opposition’s stance.[/quote]

59

[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Aragorn - I was not trying to get people all wound up, but to simply defend their position along with my own. The deorum character is just that, a character who makes me lol. I simply cannot believe he ‘thinks’ people don’t offer counter examples to his points. Obviously we can see his moronic ways. I will admit to childish name calling but it appeared from the very beginning that deorum would only understand that same language. My fault and I will step above his behavior now. I hope you did not take any of my slang towards you, my fault if you did :o ]

[quote]Aragorn wrote:
INcidentally kneedragger, this is exactly what I was talking about when I said I did not care to get involved in these “debates”. They are not debates, they are childish arguments spattered with name-calling, “fuck” (hey there’s an erudite and eloquent solution to your arguments fallaciousness /sarcasm), and general COMPLETE LACK of anything resembling a substantive argument. Look at the last page–it’s pretty much all “fuck you” “no, fuck you!” “No FUCK YOU” back and forth.

Although, yes, as the thread currently stands the pro-life crowd is the only one that has made any substantial points in between name calling–deorum keeps complaining and throwing exasperation and profanity around but has yet to actually do anything else in response to the opposition’s stance.[/quote]
[/quote]

No worries, I did not take it directed at me. I am as guilty as anyone here, both in the past and in this thread as my patience wore thin! Fine example I set haha :confused: .

But this is why I generally try to avoid these arguments now. There was a time not so long ago when I would have jumped into all of them–religious, political, and otherwise–with both feet. I like to think, I like to learn, and I like to have my views challenged. It either makes me change them or improve my rationale to adjust my current position.

However, I have too much stress in my life to want to get upset in an internet forum anymore. And besides that, I have found that there are few issues as divisive as religion and politics (or abortion!)…and I generally hate the devolvement into internet shouting wars that occurs with them. If there were a magical place where the threads stayed civil and well thought out, I would probably be a much heavier contributor.

In short, I am trying to preserve what little remains of my own sanity.

I do not recall, but I think you are a Christian from previous posts (incorrect?). In a nutshell, I am trying to follow their directive to “not argue for arguments sake” or " do not engage in fruitless arguments" more closely. I forget exactly what phrase was used but if I remember right it was probably Paul that said it, and probably somewhere in Proverbs too. It just doesn’t gain anyone anything and more often than not it makes you angry and less likely to be a good representative.

60

So, Deorum, what exactly is your argument again?