If an unborn baby is a disposable parasit, should i kill my students (and become a folk hero doing it) ?
some of my them are every bit as parasitic as fetuses. My killing spree would liberate and empower their family.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The only right I am concerned about for the living human being is the right to live. [/quote]
I tried to travel down this road, apparently this right doesn’t exist. [/quote]
the point not mentioned is it is living at the mothers expense and no one else’s
[/quote]
So is a 5 month old.
Edit: The mohter also helped put it there. 99.99% of the time with consent. [/quote]
A 5 year old can go live with Dad or aunt Susie or worse case the State
[/quote]
So can an unborn baby 7 months into gestation. [/quote]
FTR, most pro abortion people are only for the first trimester except for the obvious cases where the mothers life is in danger. This is assuming there was no legal reason preventing them doing it in that time period.[/quote]
I’m sure most do, I don’t think Pitt does. [/quote]
yeah Pitt is some evil savage
[quote]kamui wrote:
If an unborn baby is a disposable parasit, should i kill my students (and become a folk hero doing it) ?
some of my them are every bit as parasitic as fetuses. My killing spree would liberate and empower their family. [/quote]
I believe it is only permissible to kill one’s students during the first academic trimester, although second-trimester killings may be necessary in the case of an imminent threat to the teacher’s sanity.
Needless to say, third-trimester and partial-graduation killings are highly frowned upon, and may even be illegal in some municipalities.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The only right I am concerned about for the living human being is the right to live. [/quote]
I tried to travel down this road, apparently this right doesn’t exist. [/quote]
the point not mentioned is it is living at the mothers expense and no one else’s
[/quote]
So is a 5 month old.
Edit: The mohter also helped put it there. 99.99% of the time with consent. [/quote]
A 5 year old can go live with Dad or aunt Susie or worse case the State
[/quote]
So can an unborn baby 7 months into gestation. [/quote]
FTR, most pro abortion people are only for the first trimester except for the obvious cases where the mothers life is in danger. This is assuming there was no legal reason preventing them doing it in that time period.[/quote]
I’m sure most do, I don’t think Pitt does. [/quote]
yeah Pitt is some evil savage [/quote]
I didn’t say that Pitt. Is that not your position? I thought that was the entire point of the viability discussion from several days ago?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
A point to consider , I woman gets pregnant and knows after the baby is born she will not receive one dime from Dad. She is poor and uneducated and works at Walmart . The baby will live in poverty and unless the child is gifted way beyond the norm. it will remain in poverty .
There are some cases where there is no bright spot in life . I personally feel blessed that I am not in these predicaments but I am not so naive to believe that situations exist that make it nonviable to have a child
We have a portion of Government that wants to be punitive for any one that is not all about Jesus . [/quote]
So if a person is poor and miserable, by our perception, we have a right to kill it? Well that’s what you just said.
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]smh_23 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Are these correlated? Statistics give Apple vs S&P 500 perfectly correlated with a Beta of 1.0
Just because a chart does not look correlated does not mean it is not.
Now I am not smart enough to do the statistical analasis of the two charts to state whether they are correlated or not.
[/quote]
Yes you are smart enough. The amount of depth we’re looking for here can be got at with the eyeball. We’re not authoring research papers here. It is pretty damn clear that those two lines in the picture you posted could be linked by an inversely correlative relationship. And it is even clearer that the two lines in the two graphs that I proffered early on in this thread are moving with absolutely no regard for each other, i.e. that they are not correlated either directly or inversely in any way.[/quote]
The two lines were not inversely correlated. A beta of 1.0 is perfectly correlated. Inversely or negatively correlated is a -1.0 Beta.
[/quote]
Where are you getting that Apple had a beta of 1.0 from Nov. 2012 to Oct. 2013?
Edit: anyway, that graph means nothing to me. I can’t plot the points in a chart and there is an unmanageable number of them anyway. Beta is calculated retroactively, right? So what was it for those exact dates? That chart is hieroglyphs whereas the graphs on the first page is See Spot Run. Can correlation exist over the long term even when it appears not to in the short run? Yes, it can. But that isn’t the argument here. The argument here is inductive: do those two graphs imply a correlative relationship between the data they respectively represent? And the answer is absolutely not. This is not the same as saying that if you were to wait until the year 2400 and plot 450 years worth of this data, you would not see a correlative relationship. This is saying that none can be averred from what we’ve seen.[/quote]
Based on what you posted, they are correlative. Both trending downward over the same period of time is a correlation. It doesn’t speak to the nature of the correlation or how much correlation, just that one exists. It may be a minute correlation, but still it is one.[/quote]
Unfortunately for your argument, you’ve been making a causal argument that as the clinics close, the rates of abortion go down.
You’re par for the course of Christianity. No-one’s ever accused Christians of being capable of objectively looking at the available evidence and making a rational conclusion.
[/quote]
Well, obviously you can’t read. Your response has nothing to do with what I said. Your just making shit up based on preconceived notions about me. I wasn’t making a ‘causal argument’. I wasn’t even making an argument. The text bares this out.
If you are going to respond to something I wrote, at least read the words.
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What I do know is that if you use liberty as your argument for abortion, you must believe in unalienable rights, and if you believe in liberty as an unalienable right you must also believe in life. Thus ignoring the unalienable right to the life of an unborn child, while simultaneously using liberty as your defense of abortion, is inconsistent at best. [/quote]
Nope, that’s utter bullshit.
It’s not a child when it’s a blastoma. It’s not a child when it’s a foetus. It’s still a parasite, until the moment of birth.
Given that our own bodies can also act in a parasitic fashion against ourselves, only a fucking arsehole would try to enforce their own idiotic religious insecurities on other people.
Why is it that for the most part, anti-abortionist fuckwits seem to be ok with drone strikes and wars?
You’re only pro-life when you can use the argument to make yourselves feel superior to others.
The worst part is that the fucking christians who have been responsible for the most atrocious genocides and subjugations throughout history are claiming that abortion is somehow a genocide.
You’re fucking insincere cunts who have no right stealing my oxygen. Go kill youselves and find out if you’ve been good enough to go to your pathetic afterlife.[/quote]
Technically speaking, if it is a parasite before birth it is still a parasite after birth until some indeterminate age where it can find food for itself so youre wrong there. Also technically speaking the greatest genocidal casualty lists are owned by atheists in charge of gov’t, so youre wrong on the numbers there too.
But I’ll give you points for the epic rant.[/quote]
It’s going to depend on how you qualify the slaughter. If it’s a % of populace, or total number slain.
It’s not a parasite once born, as it can breathe and shit for itself. I’m not making an argument that it’s not dependent upon the parents for survival, but it’s no longer reliant on a single entity for survival.
[/quote]
It’s not a parasite period. It’s a human being. Show me where in the scientific literature in embryology that shows that in utero a child is not a human being but a parasite.
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What I do know is that if you use liberty as your argument for abortion, you must believe in unalienable rights, and if you believe in liberty as an unalienable right you must also believe in life. Thus ignoring the unalienable right to the life of an unborn child, while simultaneously using liberty as your defense of abortion, is inconsistent at best. [/quote]
Nope, that’s utter bullshit.
It’s not a child when it’s a blastoma. It’s not a child when it’s a foetus. It’s still a parasite, until the moment of birth.
Given that our own bodies can also act in a parasitic fashion against ourselves, only a fucking arsehole would try to enforce their own idiotic religious insecurities on other people.
Why is it that for the most part, anti-abortionist fuckwits seem to be ok with drone strikes and wars?
You’re only pro-life when you can use the argument to make yourselves feel superior to others.
The worst part is that the fucking christians who have been responsible for the most atrocious genocides and subjugations throughout history are claiming that abortion is somehow a genocide.
You’re fucking insincere cunts who have no right stealing my oxygen. Go kill youselves and find out if you’ve been good enough to go to your pathetic afterlife.[/quote]
-
It’s not a parasite at 3 days old?
-
I did not bring religion up. My arguments have all been based on Life & Liberty. Maybe they’re ooff or out right wrong, but they still have zero to do with religion.
-
War & Abortion are two different things.
-
You are a moron.[/quote]
Apparently I’m a moron who’s a lot smarter than you, these things happen often.
No, it’s not a parasite at 3 days old because it is able at the very least, to breathe for itself. It’s not fully independent, but it no longer fits the bill of being a parasite.
You’re making statements about organisms having a right to life, war and abortion are both dealing with the same idea. If you can’t connect the dots, you’re as retarded at Tiribulus, Pat and Maddox.
[/quote]
You’re so smart you don’t even know what a parasite is…Or a human, nor the difference.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The only right I am concerned about for the living human being is the right to live. [/quote]
I tried to travel down this road, apparently this right doesn’t exist. [/quote]
the point not mentioned is it is living at the mothers expense and no one else’s
[/quote]
So is a 5 month old.
Edit: The mohter also helped put it there. 99.99% of the time with consent. [/quote]
A 5 year old can go live with Dad or aunt Susie or worse case the State
[/quote]
So can an unborn baby 7 months into gestation. [/quote]
FTR, most pro abortion people are only for the first trimester except for the obvious cases where the mothers life is in danger. This is assuming there was no legal reason preventing them doing it in that time period.[/quote]
I’m sure most do, I don’t think Pitt does. [/quote]
yeah Pitt is some evil savage [/quote]
You are for the killing of innocent human lives. By definition there is something morally wrong with that. You have never denied that a fetal human is not a human, you just don’t think it has the right to live.
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
The only right I am concerned about for the living human being is the right to live. [/quote]
I tried to travel down this road, apparently this right doesn’t exist. [/quote]
the point not mentioned is it is living at the mothers expense and no one else’s
[/quote]
So is a 5 month old.
Edit: The mohter also helped put it there. 99.99% of the time with consent. [/quote]
A 5 year old can go live with Dad or aunt Susie or worse case the State
[/quote]
So can an unborn baby 7 months into gestation. [/quote]
FTR, most pro abortion people are only for the first trimester except for the obvious cases where the mothers life is in danger. This is assuming there was no legal reason preventing them doing it in that time period.[/quote]
What makes a 3rd 1rst trimester baby less human than a 2nd trimester baby?
[quote]kamui wrote:
If an unborn baby is a disposable parasit, should i kill my students (and become a folk hero doing it) ?
some of my them are every bit as parasitic as fetuses. My killing spree would liberate and empower their family. [/quote]
All children by that definition are parasites, so are co-dependant women, the handicapped, the sick, etc.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
If an unborn baby is a disposable parasit, should i kill my students (and become a folk hero doing it) ?
some of my them are every bit as parasitic as fetuses. My killing spree would liberate and empower their family. [/quote]
All children by that definition are parasites, so are co-dependant women, the handicapped, the sick, etc.[/quote]
No Pat, they can shit and breathe on their own, so they aren’t parasite’s. LOL…
par·a·site/ˈpærəˌsaɪt/ Show Spelled [par-uh-sahyt] Show IPA
noun
- an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
List of disease caused by parasites:
Do unborn babies cause any of these?
Another list:
Still not seeing unborn babies anywhere.
Hmmm interesting:
'Drawing on studies in biology, reproductive genetics, and epigenetics, Pincott outlined in her book what science has learned since the Stanford discovery.
?During pregnancy,? she wrote, ?cells sneak across the placenta in both directions. The fetus?s cells enter his mother, and the mother?s cells enter the fetus.?
Scientists have discovered, she said, that a baby?s fetal cells show up more often in a mother?s healthy breast tissue and less often in a woman who has breast cancer (43 versus 14 percent).
Pinctott pointed out that as the quantity of fetal cells in a mother?s body increase the activity of autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis decreases. She called the evidence ?tantalizing? that fetal cells may offer the mother increased resistance to certain diseases.’
“fe·tus noun ˈfē-təs\ : a human being or animal in the later stages of development before it is born
CloseStyle: MLA APA ChicagoFull Definition of FETUS
: an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind; specifically : a developing human from usually two months after conception to birth”
Still not seeing “parasite,” anywhere.
[quote]cryogen wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What I do know is that if you use liberty as your argument for abortion, you must believe in unalienable rights, and if you believe in liberty as an unalienable right you must also believe in life. Thus ignoring the unalienable right to the life of an unborn child, while simultaneously using liberty as your defense of abortion, is inconsistent at best. [/quote]
Nope, that’s utter bullshit.
It’s not a child when it’s a blastoma. It’s not a child when it’s a foetus. It’s still a parasite, until the moment of birth.
Given that our own bodies can also act in a parasitic fashion against ourselves, only a fucking arsehole would try to enforce their own idiotic religious insecurities on other people.
Why is it that for the most part, anti-abortionist fuckwits seem to be ok with drone strikes and wars?
You’re only pro-life when you can use the argument to make yourselves feel superior to others.
The worst part is that the fucking christians who have been responsible for the most atrocious genocides and subjugations throughout history are claiming that abortion is somehow a genocide.
You’re fucking insincere cunts who have no right stealing my oxygen. Go kill youselves and find out if you’ve been good enough to go to your pathetic afterlife.[/quote]
Wow, you swore a lot and called a child a parasite. You sure seem enlightened.
Please, use vulgarity and strawmen to further fail to prove any points or make logical rebuttals…
[quote]cryogen wrote:
What I do know is that the empowerment of women, both in terms of giving the members of our species the right to determine what is best for them, and making sure that they do truly exist on an equal footing relies almost exclusively on giving them the ability to control their own fertility.
[/quote]
So only males should be allowed to be aborted then?
I mean, how is vacuuming out the brains of unborn females “giving the member of our species (their) right(s)” or “making sure they do truly exist on equal footing”? How is being allowed to be slaughtered not to total opposite of “truly exist(ing) on equal footing”?
Plus, wouldn’t we have to allow the females to grow to puberty in order to give “them the ability to control their fertility”? Therefore wouldn’t chopping them up in the womb with cold surgical tools basically prevent them from having the ability to control their lives and take away their rights to choose what is best for them?
Or do you only champion these things for certain people and not others?
[quote]cryogen wrote:
It’s still a parasite, until the moment of birth.
[/quote]
What about the few moments after birth when the cord is still attached and the first breath has yet to be take, still a parasite?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]cryogen wrote:
What I do know is that the empowerment of women, both in terms of giving the members of our species the right to determine what is best for them, and making sure that they do truly exist on an equal footing relies almost exclusively on giving them the ability to control their own fertility.
[/quote]
So only males should be allowed to be aborted then?
I mean, how is vacuuming out the brains of unborn females “giving the member of our species (their) right(s)” or “making sure they do truly exist on equal footing”? How is being allowed to be slaughtered not to total opposite of “truly exist(ing) on equal footing”?
Plus, wouldn’t we have to allow the females to grow to puberty in order to give “them the ability to control their fertility”? Therefore wouldn’t chopping them up in the womb with cold surgical tools basically prevent them from having the ability to control their lives and take away their rights to choose what is best for them?
Or do you only champion these things for certain people and not others?[/quote]
How about women that live solely off government assistance, can we post birth abort them? If they aren’t parasites, I don’t know what is.
Or does passing through a Vagina magically metamorphosis you into a human worthy of life?
[quote]sufiandy wrote:
FTR, most pro abortion people are only for the first trimester except for the obvious cases where the mothers life is in danger. This is assuming there was no legal reason preventing them doing it in that time period.[/quote]
Okay, first trimester is 12 weeks, 3 months or about 85-90 days right?
Well the heart is beating and pumping blood by week 6…
Genitals form in week 11. Therefore for the “woman’s rights” camp to be consistent they have to limit abortions to less than 11 weeks, or only for males after week 11.
So why then do people like wendy Davis fight to NOT limit abortions to just 20 weeks? (20 weeks is 5 months, or more than half the pregnancy.)
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
What about the few moments after birth when the cord is still attached and the first breath has yet to be take[/quote]
This is one of the most amazing moments that life has to offer. Waiting for their little gray face to open up and start screaming is the most exciting and nerve stressing moments ever.
And then you spend the next 3-6 weeks treating them like they could break from the slightest bump or bruise, even though you watched them pass through hips and a hole way too small for them, lol.
How any reasonable person can call a child a parasite is beyond me. I would seriously consider the individual that referred to offspring in that manner to have some sort of emotional or mental under development that has adversely affected their being.