@beans next time I will LULZ
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Sigh.
[/quote]
Please don’t sigh at me, if you feel you are wasting your time, please just ignore me. It is extremely disrespectful.
However, the mother child relationship does not end at birth. It will last as long as both parties are alive and both parties are benefited by this relationship. It can even come to a point where the mother relies as much on the child as the child relied on the mother in the womb.
Thank you for clarifying. There are a number of pro-abortionist in this very thread that have made it clear a fetus is a parasite thus devalued. I will try not to respond with that implication to you again.
Fair enough. I agree, that is how it is.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[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]
My position is until the point of viability . The fetus lacks the criteria to be complete . A human breaths , and eats . And it’s life is totally at the discretion of it’s host (MOM)
[/quote]
So explain how viability makes a fetus not a human being, vs. being viable does…
Don’t worry, I expect you to whoosh right by this and not answer. It’s a hard question and if you avoid them, then you are able to maintain your position.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]I do, however, make distinctions between what I’d like to be, what “should be”, and what is.
In other words, I call an egg an egg, and no matter how much I’d like it to be a chicken, I see the wisdom of not counting it as one before it’s hatched. [/quote]
A human females eggs are eggs. A man’s sperm, is well sperm. When combined you get a fetus, which is a _________?
If a chicken egg is fertilized and left alone, the majority of the time, you’ll get a_______?[/quote]
An unfertilized chicken egg is the same as an unfertilized human egg. Unless a rooster mates with a hen, fertilizing her eggs with his sperm, the eggs will not turn into chickens. If a man doesn’t fertilize a woman’s eggs with his sperm, they will not turn into people.
A fertilized egg is no longer “just” an egg, it is an embryo. The only difference is that it gestates outside of the mother’s body, whereas a human embryo gestates inside.
But if you eat fertilized eggs, you are in fact eating chicken abortions.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
viability in this case is it’s ability to function outside the womb, I am sorry I thought my point was clear . [/quote]
Again, so as long as the doctor slices the child’s head off the moment after birth and before it starts to scream you are okay with that then?
Again, an infant doesn’t “function” much. So you are okay with people shaking their crying infants to death?
Your point isn’t clear at all, and you dodge tough questions over and over. Why?[/quote]
Oh, come on. Don’t exaggerate. In most partial-birth abortions they don’t slice off the head. They suck out the brains. [/quote]
Sometimes they dismember the child from the bottom up.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
what fucking question . you made a statement [/quote]
You are dodging direct questions for the last couple pages, some that I’ve asked you several times.
Don’t play dumb.
Then how can you support abortion?
Great. I hope it helps you feel better, because you’ve been rationalizing the ending of human life for a couple pages, and I’m sure that is hard to deal with.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
But if you eat fertilized eggs, you are in fact eating chicken abortions. [/quote]
Do people actually eat fertilized chicken eggs?
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[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]
My position is until the point of viability . The fetus lacks the criteria to be complete . A human breaths , and eats . And it’s life is totally at the discretion of it’s host (MOM)
[/quote]
So explain how viability makes a fetus not a human being, vs. being viable does…
Don’t worry, I expect you to whoosh right by this and not answer. It’s a hard question and if you avoid them, then you are able to maintain your position.
[/quote]
I will have to reword my statement a nonviable fetus is a human being but it is not complete .
Kind of like a person kept on life support except one is natural and one is not
whoosh
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
what fucking question . you made a statement [/quote]
You are dodging direct questions for the last couple pages, some that I’ve asked you several times.
Don’t play dumb.
Then how can you support abortion?
Great. I hope it helps you feel better, because you’ve been rationalizing the ending of human life for a couple pages, and I’m sure that is hard to deal with. [/quote]
you have to be disingenuous . You cut off your statement and say I am avoiding a question . You made a statement
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
And based on the link I posted earlier, by week 12 the child’s body functions pretty damn well actually. So at week 20 I would imagine it functions damn well close enough to the same way it will once it is born. Why does being in the womb make it okay to murder, but being out of the womb not okay, Pittttttt?[/quote]
If the child is viable and the mother does not want it . It should be removed and taken care of . I am not in favor of killing any one or thing that does not need to be killed .
I am not in favor of partial birth abortions , if that is what you are getting at . [/quote]
You are in favor of killing babies, period. Let’s not get that confused. You just think because said baby is at “X” stage of development it doesn’t deserve the same protection as you, your son or daughter did. [/quote]
lol
[/quote]
Again, ignoring tough questions and presenting no rebuttal.
You don’t value human life unless it meets a certain criteria. How you can deny that by trying to post “lol” is beyond me, you’ve said it in plain English in this thread and others. [/quote]
what fucking question . you made a statement
I value all life
I am laughing at you [/quote]
No you don’t. You cannot be pro-abortion and at the same time ‘value all life’. If you are willing to take a life for any other reason than it’s a threat to another human life, you cannot hold the position that you value all life. That’s a huge non-sequitur.
Even if you are not 100% certain that a child in utero is not a human life, but you favor it’s destruction anyway, then you cannot legitimately say you value all life, because even being uncertain, you are will to take the risk and destroy the life.
So no, you don’t value all life.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
And based on the link I posted earlier, by week 12 the child’s body functions pretty damn well actually. So at week 20 I would imagine it functions damn well close enough to the same way it will once it is born. Why does being in the womb make it okay to murder, but being out of the womb not okay, Pittttttt?[/quote]
If the child is viable and the mother does not want it . It should be removed and taken care of . I am not in favor of killing any one or thing that does not need to be killed .
I am not in favor of partial birth abortions , if that is what you are getting at . [/quote]
You are in favor of killing babies, period. Let’s not get that confused. You just think because said baby is at “X” stage of development it doesn’t deserve the same protection as you, your son or daughter did. [/quote]
lol
[/quote]
Again, ignoring tough questions and presenting no rebuttal.
You don’t value human life unless it meets a certain criteria. How you can deny that by trying to post “lol” is beyond me, you’ve said it in plain English in this thread and others. [/quote]
what fucking question . you made a statement
I value all life
I am laughing at you [/quote]
bump
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[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]
My position is until the point of viability . The fetus lacks the criteria to be complete . A human breaths , and eats . And it’s life is totally at the discretion of it’s host (MOM)
[/quote]
So explain how viability makes a fetus not a human being, vs. being viable does…
Don’t worry, I expect you to whoosh right by this and not answer. It’s a hard question and if you avoid them, then you are able to maintain your position.
[/quote]
I will have to reword my statement a nonviable fetus is a human being but it is not complete .
Kind of like a person kept on life support except one is natural and one is not
whoosh
[/quote]
What in the ruddy hell is an ‘incomplete human being’? I have never heard that before, please elaborate.
[quote]pat wrote:
No you don’t. You cannot be pro-abortion and at the same time ‘value all life’.[/quote]
says you
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
a nonviable fetus is a human being but it is not complete .
[/quote]
But if you value all life, how can you condone the ending of human life in the certain particular instances you do?
I assume you do not condone when a protestor ends the life of a doctor, who is a human being. But you do condone that doctor ending the life of a human being. Why do you only care about the lives of certain humans and not others?
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
what fucking question . you made a statement [/quote]
You are dodging direct questions for the last couple pages, some that I’ve asked you several times.
Don’t play dumb.
Then how can you support abortion?
Great. I hope it helps you feel better, because you’ve been rationalizing the ending of human life for a couple pages, and I’m sure that is hard to deal with. [/quote]
you have to be disingenuous . You cut off your statement and say I am avoiding a question . You made a statement
[/quote]
Hey, right up there, in the quotes, is another tough question you are avoiding.
If you are going to pretend I’m not asking you question after question, best to do so without quoting a question you are avoiding.
[quote]pat wrote:
What in the ruddy hell is an ‘incomplete human being’? I have never heard that before, please elaborate.[/quote]
a ruddy colored baby that can not breath or digest food .
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
But if you value all life, how can you condone the ending of human life in the certain particular instances you do?]
[/quote]
because it is not the life of the child until viability . It’s life is at the will of the mother and not my decision
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
bump
[/quote]
hmmm
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ beans , it looks like viability is around 20 weeks [/quote]
And… So you think human life is only worth protecting after 20 weeks of development then?
Shit, that is better than the other nonsense you spouted. I’ll take it. [/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I mentioned in past posts to breath and eat . I know there are many other functions to live , I also said Dad or Aunt Susie can feed and change the diaper but the child has to function outside the womb to be viable [/quote]
I love how you can make up your own definitions to words now…
Up to 23 weeks listed here has a chance to survive. So abortion should be limited to 23 weeks then? Or just before it takes its first breath?
[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
And based on the link I posted earlier, by week 12 the child’s body functions pretty damn well actually. So at week 20 I would imagine it functions damn well close enough to the same way it will once it is born. Why does being in the womb make it okay to murder, but being out of the womb not okay, Pittttttt?[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
viability in this case is it’s ability to function outside the womb, I am sorry I thought my point was clear . [/quote]
Again, so as long as the doctor slices the child’s head off the moment after birth and before it starts to scream you are okay with that then?
Again, an infant doesn’t “function” much. So you are okay with people shaking their crying infants to death?
Your point isn’t clear at all, and you dodge tough questions over and over. Why?[/quote]
Swing and a miss Pitt, nice try though.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
No you don’t. You cannot be pro-abortion and at the same time ‘value all life’.[/quote]
says you [/quote]
says logic reason and fact.
Abortion ends human life. You support it. Therefor you support the ending of human life. Therefore you do not value all life.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
bump
[/quote]
hmmm
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@ beans , it looks like viability is around 20 weeks [/quote]
And… So you think human life is only worth protecting after 20 weeks of development then?
Shit, that is better than the other nonsense you spouted. I’ll take it. [/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I mentioned in past posts to breath and eat . I know there are many other functions to live , I also said Dad or Aunt Susie can feed and change the diaper but the child has to function outside the womb to be viable [/quote]
I love how you can make up your own definitions to words now…
Up to 23 weeks listed here has a chance to survive. So abortion should be limited to 23 weeks then? Or just before it takes its first breath?
[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
And based on the link I posted earlier, by week 12 the child’s body functions pretty damn well actually. So at week 20 I would imagine it functions damn well close enough to the same way it will once it is born. Why does being in the womb make it okay to murder, but being out of the womb not okay, Pittttttt?[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
viability in this case is it’s ability to function outside the womb, I am sorry I thought my point was clear . [/quote]
Again, so as long as the doctor slices the child’s head off the moment after birth and before it starts to scream you are okay with that then?
Again, an infant doesn’t “function” much. So you are okay with people shaking their crying infants to death?
Your point isn’t clear at all, and you dodge tough questions over and over. Why?[/quote]
Swing and a miss Pitt, nice try though. [/quote]
in this exchange deleate everthing that is NOT your question and I will answer it