Home - List All Discussions

Vote Here!

Pro Aborts are Not PERSONS

by: nancyu

Only Citizens are eligible to vote, and only persons can be citizens, so if you're pro abort you can't participate in this poll.

reply from: fetalisa

May 'persons' such as utterly mindless embryos and fetuses vote in this poll?

reply from: fetalisa

It kind of makes sense when you think about it. You have completely mindless embryos and fetuses, incapable of a single rational thought, being protected by the utterly mindless prolife, who are also incapable of a single rational thought.

reply from: nancyu

Someone was being kind.

reply from: nancyu

Vexing, there is a poll, can't you see it? Maybe because you're one of those not allowed to vote??

reply from: nancyu

Do you favor this amendment to the US Constitution: The Term "person" or "persons" shall NOT apply to Pro aborts. (Total Votes: 5)
Yes. I favor this amendment, pro aborts are wads of tissue

2 votes 40.00 (%)
No. They are as human as an unborn child, no more no less. Age and likability have no bearing on one's humanity.

3 votes 60.00 (%)
They are persons, but not in the "whole" sense

0 votes 0.00 (%)

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Do you favor this amendment to the US Constitution: The Term "person" or "persons" shall NOT apply to Pro aborts. (Total Votes: 5)
Yes. I favor this amendment, pro aborts are wads of tissue
2 votes 40.00 (%)
No. They are as human as an unborn child, no more no less. Age and likability have no bearing on one's humanity.
3 votes 60.00 (%)
They are persons, but not in the "whole" sense
0 votes 0.00 (%)
Let's clarify the spacing there. So far, 3 people say pro-aborts are people just like the unborn are. 2, whom I assume were just being dramatic, decided that pro-aborts are not people, and no one at all has voted for the third option.

reply from: 4given

Hey I voted #3. No being without issue could/would spend time argueing against the life of another being- a blameless pure child. Nor could any human attempt to justify the destruction of other innocent human beings, unless they were damaged. So yeah- they are humans just not in the "whole" sense. All have a conscience, it is corruption that helps the pro-abortion/choicers justify such evil. As I have stated previously- ask a child if it is okay to kill another person for whatever reason mom deems acceptable. I have yet to meet one that wasn't appalled by the idea.

reply from: SRUW4I5

There should have been more options like "Unborn children are more human than pro-aborts" or "Pro-Aborts are more human than unborn children" or "Neither unborn children or pro-aborts are human"

reply from: nancyu

Good answer, but I still say they're wads of tissue.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I'm just fascinated by your apparent belief that unborn fetuses and even embryos are "persons" but born people who have lived for many years might NOT be "persons" simply because they disagree with you.
Could you explain?

reply from: ProInformed

Wow your ignorance is showing.
Most abortions kill fetuses - not embryos.
Pro-aborts who keep talking about zygotes and ambryos are just trying to divert attention away from reality.
Doctors, scientisists, AND those humans who don't have an agenda for ignoring the facts have known for decades that unborn babies do have minds and learn quite a LOT before birth. For example it is now known that babies who are born deaf already are very different than hearing babies at birth because hearing babies have already categorized human speech sounds by birth - have sorted them out in their minds - STARTING the language development that their minds continue to develop over the next few years of their lives. Newborn babies each have their own unique response to all human speech sounds and these responses can still be detected in adult humans (although the adult responses are no longer detected by vicual observation - only detectable as slight muscular tension).
Unborn babies DO have minds and learn a LOT before birth.
The brains of babies, born and unborn, are designed to be VERY GOOD at rapid learning. This rapid learning capability is what allows them to sort out and integrate so many new sensory experiences into a system they amazingly gain enough mastery over in just such a short time to be able to walk and talk! At NO OTHER POINT in the human lifespan is the ability to learn as great as in the beginning of human life. That is WHY it is now widely acknowledged that trying to teach a student a foreign langauge is BEST accomplished by teaching it when they are babies/toddlers!
IF the ability to learn were THE determining factor in the right to life, once humans became older than the fetus/baby/toddler stage, THEN our right to life would be in the most danger!
Your refusal to acknowledge the FACT that babies have minds that they use to learn before birth reveals your OWN inability and/or failure to use YOUR brain to learn anything that might cause you to question your selfish and irresponsible lifestyle - your MINDLESS devotion to the cults of 'free sex' and 'aboriton rights'.

reply from: ProInformed

Oh please, as IF your reason for wanting to kill unborn babies was even based on anythign other than your desire to engage in MINDLESS animalistic, selfish, irresponsible, promsicusous sex LOL
We know darn well what you really think is the measure of a human's right to life...
their usefullness as sex partners.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

"Unborn babies DO have minds and learn a LOT before birth."
This is SOOOOOOOOOOO not true!! The unborn are incapable of any "thought" - they are only capable of reflexive response.
How silly!

reply from: BossMomma

Actually that has not been proven, studies have even toyed with the idea that a late stage fetus can dream. Thought process really can't be determined as you can not ask a fetus what's on it's mind and expect an answer.

reply from: nancyu

Explain? To whom? To you? A non sentient wad of tissue? No, I guess I couldn't.

reply from: nancyu

Pro aborts are incapable of any "thought" - they are only capable of reflexive response.

reply from: ProInformed

Hmmm, let's teast the ability of pro-aborts to LEARN LOL:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Growth/HowUnbornBabiesThink.htm

reply from: ProInformed

Nope - you are uninformed... or maybe YOU are ONLY capable of reflexive reaction when you are presented with new info, instead of being able to THINK and LEARN? LOL
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/176232/the_brain_activity_of_unborn_babies.html?cat=52

reply from: ProInformed

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Miraculous-World-of-Your-Unborn-Baby/Nikki-Bradford/e/9780809229284

Hmmm one of the popular pro-abort excuses for killing unborn babies is that the babies are helpess and not capable of trying to defend themselves?
Well if it's been observed that unborn babies actually try to attack the amnioscentesis needle, then they ARE capable of recognizing a possible danger and trying to defend themselves aren't they?!

reply from: ProInformed

"Your baby is yet to be born... but she's listening, learning, and aware of the outside world! Traditionally, the world of an as-yet-unborn baby was thought to be an isolated and silent one. It was assumed that, asleep and growing in its mother's womb, the developing baby was incapable of experiencing sight, sound, thought, or emotion. In fact, the truth is very different, as bestselling author Nikki Bradford reveals here. Drawing on the latest research by leading authorities in the field, the author explains how the unborn baby's awareness of the outside world develops rapidly from very early in pregnancy. Did you know that unborn babies respond to sound, and duck away from strong light, as early as 16 weeks? That they have been observed shying away from-and even attacking--an amniocentesis needle at around the same time? That babies follow moving light sources with their hands by 20 weeks? Or that they recognize music and nursery rhymes from 33 weeks? The Miraculous World of Your Unborn Baby not only offers mothers-to-be unique insights into their child's remarkable mental and physical developments in the womb, but also provides wide-ranging information on pregnancy and childbirth for the mother. This information is featured in comprehensive sections on:
How babies grow, week-by-week: Stunning color photographs enable mothers-to-be to follow the physical development of their baby. Did you know that the first heartbeat can be detected at about five weeks, and that fingernails appear by ten weeks?
Your pregnancy and birth: Just how does the mother's body cope with it all? Advice and information are provided on every stage of pregnancy.
What babies can do in the womb: The latest research findings about unborn babies' emotional awareness and learning abilities; the evidence of communication (and telepathy) between babies and mothers.
What unborn babies know: What babies hear, sense, experience, dream-and remember-about being born and being in the womb. Looks at babies' emotional development, including reactions to their mothers' various moods. Nikki Bradford has written The Miraculous World of Your Unborn Baby in consultation with leading experts in the field: San Diego-based Dr. David B. Chamberlain, President of the International Association for Pre- and Perinatal Psychology and Health, and arguably the world authority on prenatal psychology; Professor Geoffrey Chamberlain, past President of the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in the United Kingdom; and Dr. Sammy Lee, an acclaimed London-based consultant embryologist."
But hey, pro-abort chanters must know more about it than embryological researchers do, eh? ...right... LOL

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Everything that has been quoted to try to "teach" me the "intelligence" of the unborn does not make sense. All the movements can be attributed to reflexive movement, and nobody can prove that the unborn "think" because they cannot be tested for thought.
Nice try, though.

reply from: ChristianLott2

Further, someone who cannot understand what intelligence entails, let alone what humanity is should not be allowed to voice their unintelligible opinions let alone join our human race. Maybe we should deport them

reply from: ChristianLott2

It would be better than what they've allowed for us - live dismemberment.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<~
I want whatever PI has been smoking...
Me, too.
I still don't understand why people don't understand the difference between THINKING and REFLEXIVELY REACTING to stimuli. It's not that difficult.

reply from: nancyu

All pro choice movements can be attributed to reflexive movement, and nobody can prove that pro aborts "think" because they cannot be tested for thought.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

It has been proven through many different kinds of experiments. Children can identify songs that were played to them when they were in the womb. They also show a preference for specific foods the mothers eat during the pregnancy (the specific study involved liccorich I believe). They have their mother's voice already memorized and will turn towards her preferentially over any other voice, though they do show they can identify their father's voice or that of any other person who spent a lot of time around the mother during the pregnancy.

reply from: nancyu

Alright who's voting for the pro aborts, they're not supposed to vote! Recount!

reply from: ChristianLott2

Deport the pro aborts!

reply from: yoda

Some studies have shown that a baby can recognize a voice it has heard while still in the womb. Reflex? Nah, not really.

reply from: yoda

Hmmm, let's teast the ability of pro-aborts to LEARN LOL:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Growth/HowUnbornBabiesThink.htm
Hey, she can't learn..... she's just a proabort wad of tissue!

reply from: yoda

Where to? Where did they come from, the moon?

reply from: scopia19822

I read that in one of my pregnancy books. When my son was born he reconized my husbands voice when my husband held him and talked to him.

reply from: BossMomma

Some studies have shown that a baby can recognize a voice it has heard while still in the womb. Reflex? Nah, not really.
Indeed, a fetus in late stage gestation gains cognitive thinking and responds to hot and cold and even responds to outside stimuli. I was watching my belly this morning, Isabelle was kicking up a storm (sometimes I think she's a future kick boxer) when finally she extended a leg outward so that I could see a foot print on my belly. I poked her foot and she instantly jerked it away, but then moments later I saw the foot print again as she pressed her foot upward against my belly, as though she were seeing if she'd feel the poke again. I do research of my own with my unborn baby, testing her responses and she is aware of herself and changes in surrounding.

reply from: BossMomma

Hmmm, let's teast the ability of pro-aborts to LEARN LOL:
http://www.abortiontv.com/Growth/HowUnbornBabiesThink.htm
Hey, she can't learn..... she's just a proabort wad of tissue!
Funny how in hatred of one's enemy one becomes what he hates.

reply from: ChristianLott2

You didn't see the silent scream video where the child is seen through ultrasound attempting to dodge the forceps?
From those who've had abortions here - did you feel your child's fear? Did you feel your child's death throws? Did you feel the child's reaction to it's violent betrayal?

reply from: ChristianLott2

Where to? Where did they come from, the moon?

reply from: BossMomma

You didn't see the silent scream video where the child is seen through ultrasound attempting to dodge the forceps?
From those who've had abortions here - did you feel your child's fear? Did you feel your child's death throws? Did you feel the child's reaction to it's violent betrayal?
I've seen the silent scream and it was proven to be a hoax. I don't buy into pro-life or pro-choice websites because both are biased and often full of lies. I do unbiased research before entering a debate so that my argument is not swayed by emotional, religious or, purely uneducated rhetoric.

reply from: nancyu

Where to? Where did they come from, the moon?
Sounds good to me

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I am going to read up on the subject of the unborn "thinking" rather than "reacting" and am willing to change my opinion based on my research. I will let you know if I find anything SCIENTIFIC that changes my mind.
Oh, I forgot, I can't think because I'm wobbling between prochoice and prolife. Darn.

reply from: yoda

I don't know about the "wobbling", but there is no place between prolife and prochoice..... it's one or the other. Even "apathy" belongs in the prochoice category.

reply from: BossMomma

Heh, if you like I can send you some links to various studies.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

In regards to the unborn responding to music:
""We have shown that they can hear in the womb at late gestation," said Dr Gowland.
"The question is whether that is habituation. People can read what they want into it. If they wish to start playing music {to the foetus} that is up to them. But learning is not the same as consciousness. All we are seeing are changes in the blood-oxygen levels in the brain," she said."
source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n14242804

"using a new technique they were able to detect a striking increase in brain activity, when music was played to babies in the womb."
source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/425176.stm

Everything I can find from SCIENTIFIC websites (no Wiki or non-scientific sites) about brain activity in unborn fetuses shows RESPONSES to stimuli, not actual thought processes. Sorry.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Good info on fetal development - from a PL website:
http://www.womenforlifeintl.com/reproductive.html

Some interesting notes for the confused:
10 weeks - The embryo becomes a FETUS
22 weeks - Reflexes are present
26 weeks - The central nervous system is developed enough to control some body functions
28 weeks - Brain-wave patterns resemble those of a full term baby
30 weeks - The central nervous system has increased control over body functions
32 weeks - The connections between the nerve cells in the brain have increased
Sorry, folks, but I cannot find evidence that the unborn are capable of actual THOUGHT. If you can provide any REAL evidence (not anecdotal) I would appreciate it very much.

reply from: BossMomma

It could be that it is impossible to tell whether the unborn can think, we can respond verbally when asked a question, a fetus can't so it's one of those gray areas.

reply from: yoda

Could that possibly be because there is no scientific instrument or test that will actually detect a though? Ya think?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I fail to see how thought has anything to do with this debate. I'm not thinking when I'm asleep. Doesn't give you the right to kill me.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Then why do they get recognition after the baby is born? It clearly encoded the music into its memory.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Of course you can think, and you can definitely be a wobbler; I was myself! It's a frustrating place to be. I found it helpful to log my current feelings on abortion every now and then so I could see how much I had really changed my mind. It also helped me clarify and realise my own opinions and thoughts. Sometimes you end up working through something logically that you just hadn't really considered or were confused on, and it suddenly makes sense.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Some studies have shown that a baby can recognize a voice it has heard while still in the womb. Reflex? Nah, not really.
Indeed, a fetus in late stage gestation gains cognitive thinking and responds to hot and cold and even responds to outside stimuli. I was watching my belly this morning, Isabelle was kicking up a storm (sometimes I think she's a future kick boxer) when finally she extended a leg outward so that I could see a foot print on my belly. I poked her foot and she instantly jerked it away, but then moments later I saw the foot print again as she pressed her foot upward against my belly, as though she were seeing if she'd feel the poke again. I do research of my own with my unborn baby, testing her responses and she is aware of herself and changes in surrounding.
Aww!! I saw a video on YouTube once of a woman with a baby in her belly and wow! I hadn't realised how much you can see!!

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Of course you can think, and you can definitely be a wobbler; I was myself! It's a frustrating place to be. I found it helpful to log my current feelings on abortion every now and then so I could see how much I had really changed my mind. It also helped me clarify and realise my own opinions and thoughts. Sometimes you end up working through something logically that you just hadn't really considered or were confused on, and it suddenly makes sense.
Every stupid and/or insulting post here forces me to the PC side. Every well-written, logical post pushes me toward the PL side. Yes, it is a difficult place to be, because I do not want to be a NancyU or a Yodavater or a GL4UTL or a Faithman. I therefore pay a LOT of attention to you, BossMomma and other moderates who obviously have more than little intelligence, experience and common sense and who lack a religious agenda.
Thanks to all of you.

reply from: CharlesD

Some people aren't thinking when they're awake. We shouldn't kill them either.

reply from: RiverMoonLady

I have no opinion. I am a wad of tissue, not a person.

reply from: CharlesD

People aren't thinking when they're having sex. They're just responding to stimuli. Apparently they're not persons.

reply from: BossMomma

Well, you're a very nice and respectable wad of tissue.

reply from: BossMomma

Of course you can think, and you can definitely be a wobbler; I was myself! It's a frustrating place to be. I found it helpful to log my current feelings on abortion every now and then so I could see how much I had really changed my mind. It also helped me clarify and realise my own opinions and thoughts. Sometimes you end up working through something logically that you just hadn't really considered or were confused on, and it suddenly makes sense.
Every stupid and/or insulting post here forces me to the PC side. Every well-written, logical post pushes me toward the PL side. Yes, it is a difficult place to be, because I do not want to be a NancyU or a Yodavater or a GL4UTL or a Faithman. I therefore pay a LOT of attention to you, BossMomma and other moderates who obviously have more than little intelligence, experience and common sense and who lack a religious agenda.
Thanks to all of you.
Well, education always helps in a subject like this. Too many times people hear a rumor and instead of seeking factual info they just go with what they hear. The pastor at my church thought a partial birth abortion involved delivering a child feet first then cutting it's throat. He actually got mad at me for correcting him and giving him the run down on what the procedure actually does and gave me that whole "women should not teach men" BS. I still go to the church for grief counciling but lost a lot of respect for the pastor.
People are easily influenced and so one has to be truthful about the message they want delivered to others. Extremists care only about their agenda and often have no empathy for anything or anyone else and they band together because they lack the conviction to stand alone. I'm a loner by nature and so whether or not anyone likes my opinion is irrelevant.

reply from: nancyu

Have there been any similar studies done on pro aborts, I wonder? It seems some of them can type, but does that mean they are "persons" necessarily?

reply from: nancyu

Sorry, folks, but I cannot find evidence that the pro aborts are capable of actual THOUGHT. If you can provide any REAL evidence (not anecdotal) I would appreciate it very much.

reply from: ProInformed

I've noticed the same thing: pro-aborts while they are capable of parroting abortion industry slogans and lies, don't really seem capable of thinking for themselves. I've also noticed they seem much more prone to mindless and promiscuous sexual practices, causing an epidemic problem with STD's, and openly shun adult responsible behavior like sexual self-control and caring for their own offspring. The dangers and problems they pose for society far outweigh any positive contributions they might make. Just think of how many filthy diseased condoms they are littering our planet with because they insist in behaving like animals instead of mature and responsible humans when it comes to sex...

reply from: LiberalChiRo

I wasn't wantonly promiscuous when I was pro-choice. I've noticed pro-lifers are capable of hateful high-brow judgments.

reply from: Nulono

OMG! I'd sig this, but my siggy is full.

reply from: ProInformed

OMG! I'd sig this, but my siggy is full.
Yup - they can chant a slogan they've heard, and repeat lies provided to them by the abortion industry... but do they provide any evidence of an ability to learn and think? Nope. My observation of a couple of decades is that they are more like mindless zombies than intelligent humans:
http://stblogustine.blogspot.com/2008/11/this-helps-assuage-sting.html

reply from: RiverMoonLady

What slogan? What lies? I apparently missed that indoctrination session.

reply from: Nulono

You didn't see the silent scream video where the child is seen through ultrasound attempting to dodge the forceps?
From those who've had abortions here - did you feel your child's fear? Did you feel your child's death throws? Did you feel the child's reaction to it's violent betrayal?
1. It's "its".
2. As the unborn child is a person, the proper thing to say is "his or her".
Also, and this is for everyone, not this post, learn the difference between a comma and a semicolon for crying out loud!

reply from: Nulono

Thinking versus reacting is the basis for behavioralism. Basically, it's a method of psychology where one observes how a subject reacts, as one cannot currently observe thoughts.

reply from: Nulono

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioralism

reply from: nancyu

You didn't see the silent scream video where the child is seen through ultrasound attempting to dodge the forceps?
From those who've had abortions here - did you feel your child's fear? Did you feel your child's death throws? Did you feel the child's reaction to it's violent betrayal?
I've seen BossMomma, and she was proven to be a hoax. She is often biased and full of lies. I have done unbaised research before making this post. And I'm not swayed by her emotional, religious and purely uneducated rhetoric.
I just watched "The Silent Scream" Watch it and decide for yourselves: is it, or is BossMomma full of lies?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjNo_0cW-ek&feature=related

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Me too! But I think the big one they're talking about is "the unborn is not a person".

reply from: yoda

Me too! But I think the big one they're talking about is "the unborn is not a person".
That's a big one, all right. For while the word "person" has a separate, different meaning in legalese than it does in ordinary language, to say "is not" infers that NEITHER legalese NOR the vernacular allows for that usage, which is patently absurd.
per·son (plural peo·ple per·sons (formal)) noun 1. human being: an individual human being 2. human's body: a human being's body, often including the clothing
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861725217/person.html

per.son Pronunciation: (pûr'sun),-n. 2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing. 6. the body of a living human being, sometimes including the clothes being worn: He had no money on his person. http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0584644.html

Main Entry: per·son 1 : HUMAN: 4 a archaic : bodily appearance b : the body of a human being; http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=person&x=16&y=16

Person: Pronunciation puhr sEn Definition 1. a human being. Definition 2. the body of a human being. Example the clothes on his person. http://www.wordsmyth.net/live/home.php?script=search&matchent=person&matchtype=exact

Definition person noun [C] plural people or FORMAL OR LAW persons
1 a man, woman or child:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=59039&dict=CALD

reply from: RiverMoonLady

Me too! But I think the big one they're talking about is "the unborn is not a person".
We all know that unborn people are human, just not LEGALLY persons.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Me too! But I think the big one they're talking about is "the unborn is not a person".
We all know that unborn people are human, just not LEGALLY persons.
I don't think "person" is a legal term, personally. I think it's an inherent quality that all human beings have.

reply from: nancyu

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.

reply from: JRH

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.
One legally becomes a person at birth in the USA.

reply from: nancyu

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.
One legally becomes a person at birth in the USA.
False.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

One legally becomes a citizen at birth. The Constitution does not have any information declaring when humans "become" people. It doesn't need that information, since it is only logical that humans are people, period.

reply from: kayluvzchoice

Have you ever been in a psych ward?

reply from: nancyu

Have you ever been in a psych ward?
As a matter of fact I have. Have you?

reply from: nancyu

They certainly may, though I'm afraid they are unable. (That might explain the loss in Colorado)
Isn't it great that we can vote and be assured that those opposed to us cannot?

reply from: JRH

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.

reply from: ProInformed

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.
Actually there are many persons in the U.S. who are not U.S. citizens:
visitors here on vacation, immigrants (with temporary Visas, working towards citizenship, or here illegally).
Although they may not be guaranteed all the rights of U.S. citizens (like being able to legally vote or to be a candidate in U.S. elections), they ARE considered persons protected by U.S. laws against murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc.

reply from: JRH

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.
Actually there are many persons in the U.S. who are not U.S. citizens:
visitors here on vacation, immigrants (with temporary Visas, working towards citizenship, or here illegally).
Although they may not be guaranteed all the rights of U.S. citizens (like being able to legally vote or to be a candidate in U.S. elections), they ARE considered persons protected by U.S. laws against murder, rape, robbery, assault, etc.
Person OF the USA. A fetus would qualify for citizenship if it was a person because its mother got pregnant with it here.

reply from: BossMomma

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.
One legally becomes a person at birth in the USA.
False.
Actually that's true, Legally and Morally are two very different concepts.

reply from: nancyu

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.
One legally becomes a person at birth in the USA.
False.
Actually that's true, Legally and Morally are two very different concepts.
False.

reply from: BossMomma

WHaaaaaat?? the heck is that supposed to mean? Is anyone falling for this line of garbage? How does one become "legally" a person? Do tell. Educate us please RiverMoonLady. No, don't.
An unborn child is a person. There is no "legally" about it.
One legally becomes a person at birth in the USA.
False.
Actually that's true, Legally and Morally are two very different concepts.
False.
@@

reply from: jujujellybean

No. Don't you realize that most of them are at the mercy of their mother and could be at an appointment right now? to DIE??????

reply from: yoda

And the vernacular and legalese are two very different language sets.
We are all "people" in the vernacular, no matter what our age or stage of development.

reply from: yoda

Thank you.
And in fact, that's what dictionaries say, also.
Human being = person.

reply from: BossMomma

And the vernacular and legalese are two very different language sets.
We are all "people" in the vernacular, no matter what our age or stage of development.
Ok, let me rephrase. A fetus is a person by dictionary definition, not by legal definition. Legally personhood is attained at birth.

reply from: yoda

Correct.
And since we are almost always speaking in the vernacular here on this forum, the dictionary definition of "person" applies here, not the legal one.

reply from: nancyu

Would someone kindly show me where it is written that personhood is legally established at birth.
Is there a link to a specific law? Is it in Roe Vs Wade?

reply from: LiberalChiRo

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.
Funnily enough, the Texas Supreme Court disagrees with you. We already went over the fact that you do not need to be a citizen to be declared a "person". Corporations are certainly NOT citizens.

reply from: LiberalChiRo

And the vernacular and legalese are two very different language sets.
We are all "people" in the vernacular, no matter what our age or stage of development.
Ok, let me rephrase. A fetus is a person by dictionary definition, not by legal definition. Legally personhood is attained at birth.
Citizenship is attained at birth, but I have yet to see a law that declares someone a person at birth. The Texas supreme court defines "person" as ANY human being, even unborn.

reply from: ProInformed

EXPLANATION:
When a society allows one group of humans to start killing another group of humans,
because the humans doing the killing define their victims as somehow being sub-human (dehumanization - a common rationalization employed by those who inflict fatal abuse on others),
that society sets a precedence for other groups of humans to start rationalizing their own genocidal agendas, based on their own definitions of what constitutes proof of human development sufficient to secure the right to life.
The specific excuses employed in the dehumanization rationalizations don't really matter as much as the general fact that dehumanization facilitates killing;
those who choose to dehumanize and kill others have come up with a variety of excuses throughout history: size, location, gender, skin color, religion, degree of 'perfection'... whatever those who want to kill decide.
Pro-lifers sometimes get death threats from pro-aborts.
Obviously in the minds of some pro-aborts killing a pro-lifer is justified simply because pro-lifers might interfere with them being able to have 'free sex' plus abortion-on-demand... or might interfere with abortion industry profits...
Those who set the precedence have no valid, logical argument to prevent others from applying the same sort of justification in order to dehumanize and get rid of those THEY deem not worthy of life, do they?

reply from: ProInformed

You don't get to vote - because it has been decided that the term 'person' doesn't apply to you, based on their criteria.
Hey, but at least you can try to speak up to defend yourself - unlike the innocent babies you kill for no better reason than wanting to have animalistic sex (physical sex minus any human emotions like love and concern).
Hey, if rutting like pigs is SO important to pro-aborts, then why should any mature, responsible humans pretend you're anything more than an animal?
YOU pro-aborts don't live like mature responsible humans, do you?
You just want to "do it" with other animals like yourself.

reply from: ProInformed

BTW I also don't think anyone who hasn't even botherd to LEARN what the current legal status of abortion is, exactly how abortions are done, and is too cowardly to even look at the victims of abortion, should have any say in the legal status of abortion.
LEARNING about the issues you are advocating about is what responsible mature citizens do. Voting is an ADULT right and responsibility. The naive and childish choicists aren't that developed and mature yet.

reply from: yoda

There is a passage in Roe that states that the unborn do not fit the term "person" as used in the 14th amendment. That one statement alone is the basis for legal dictionaries redefining the term "person" to exclude all unborn human beings.

reply from: JRH

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.
Funnily enough, the Texas Supreme Court disagrees with you. We already went over the fact that you do not need to be a citizen to be declared a "person". Corporations are certainly NOT citizens.
The Texas Supreme Court ruled in a way that goes against the Roe decision, which says that a fetus is not a person as the term is used in the 14th amendment. SCOTUS will likely overturn the decision because it ignores the idea of stare decisis, which says judges must rule based on the way that judges have ruled in the past.

reply from: nancyu

Wrong. A person of the USA is a citizen. If a fetus was a person it would be a citizen already.
Funnily enough, the Texas Supreme Court disagrees with you. We already went over the fact that you do not need to be a citizen to be declared a "person". Corporations are certainly NOT citizens.
The Texas Supreme Court ruled in a way that goes against the Roe decision, which says that a fetus is not a person as the term is used in the 14th amendment. SCOTUS will likely overturn the decision because it ignores the idea of stare decisis, which says judges must rule based on the way that judges have ruled in the past.
Wow. Is the law really so stuck in the mud that it can't admit when it has made so obvious a mistake and somehow correct itself?

reply from: Nulono

Wow, lots of zombie threads recently...

reply from: nancyu

What's a zombie thread? One that won't die? Sorry, I don't want to let this one go yet.
Do you favor this amendment to the US Constitution: The Term "person" or "persons" shall NOT apply to Pro aborts. (Total Votes: 23)
Yes. I favor this amendment. Pro aborts are wads of tissue

8 votes 34.78 (%)
No. They are as human as an unborn child; no more, no less. Age and likability have no bearing on one's humanity.

13 votes 56.52 (%)
They are persons, but not in the "whole" sense

2 votes 8.70 (%)
Come on where are the true pro lifers? Have a backbone will ya? They can be people after they quit being pro aborts, not before!

reply from: BossMomma

What's a zombie thread? One that won't die? Sorry, I don't want to let this one go yet.
Do you favor this amendment to the US Constitution: The Term "person" or "persons" shall NOT apply to Pro aborts. (Total Votes: 23)
Yes. I favor this amendment. Pro aborts are wads of tissue

8 votes 34.78 (%)
No. They are as human as an unborn child; no more, no less. Age and likability have no bearing on one's humanity.

13 votes 56.52 (%)
They are persons, but not in the "whole" sense

2 votes 8.70 (%)
Come on where are the true pro lifers? Have a backbone will ya? They can be people after they quit being pro aborts, not before!
I must wonder, in light of this ridiculous little poll, if a prenatal test was devised that could tell whether an unborn child would be pro-life or pro-choice would you support aborting pro-choice fetuses? Why not? After all, they aren't people right?

reply from: yoda

Sure, but I always try to be kind to animals, too, so I try to be kind to them anyway.

reply from: nancyu

Chocolate Cake with Buttercream frosting.

reply from: nancyu

Sugar Cookies with frosting and sprinkles.

reply from: yoda

One order of doughnuts with frosting and sprinkles coming up!

reply from: nancyu

And tea and chocolate for those who vote the right way.

reply from: yoda

Yes, even tea and chocolates....... if Sheriff Weenie says it's okay......

reply from: Shenanigans

No.
Because they will get amniotic fluid on the key board.

reply from: nancyu

This just in! We've found one honest pro abort who admits that she is not a PERSON!
http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6349&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=3

reply from: Yuuki

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6349&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=3
This just in! Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!

reply from: nancyu

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6349&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=3
This just in! Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!
Wow!!! That was sarcasm?

reply from: Yuuki

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6349&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=3
This just in! Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!
Wow!!! That was sarcasm?
This: "No, of course, I don't live in the "real world" Yoda, I live in a holographic projector" was sarcasm.
This: "Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!" was dead serious.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.prolifeamerica.com/fusetalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=7&threadid=6349&enterthread=y&STARTPAGE=3
This just in! Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!
Wow!!! That was sarcasm?
This: "No, of course, I don't live in the "real world" Yoda, I live in a holographic projector" was sarcasm.
This: "Nancyu is incapable of understanding sarcasm!" was dead serious.
It was?

reply from: Kat

Are you pro-life you dont sound like it.

reply from: Kat

and to you, you sound like one of those people who say people who have abortions should die they're worth nothing...on and on and on, If you dont belive that even those people are "PERSONS" then your not pro-life after all. The reason people are pro-life is to protect human life, not just its earliest stages in the womb.
Im not saying anything more on wheater or not someone seems pro-life or not cause you people are worse than politians when it comes to your argumenative child like fights.

reply from: yoda

Being prolife means that you oppose the legal status of elective abortion, and that's about all it means.
pro-life adjective against open access to abortion: in favor of bringing the human fetus to full term, especially by campaigning against open access to abortion and against experimentation on embryos http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861736610

pro-life adjective opposed to the belief that a pregnant woman should have the freedom to choose an abortion if she does not want to have a baby
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=63328&dict=CALD

pro-life -adj.
opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life http://www.infoplease.com/dictionary/pro-life

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) -
pro-life -adjective opposed to legalized abortion; right-to-life. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pro-life&r=66

pro-life adjective supporting the belief that it is immoral for a pregnant woman to have the freedom to choose to have an abortion (= an operation to end a pregnancy) if she does not want to have a baby http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=prolife*1+0&dict=A

Main Entry: pro - life Function: adjective
: opposed to abortion http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pro-life

reply from: nancyu

Since proaborts think abortion is okay, and legal, and acceptable, and moral, and great, we can abort proaborts.
I think this would be a great way to compromise. What do you think proaborts?
Think about it: "abortion isn't murder" "no one dies in an abortion" "abortion is legal" ...right?

reply from: Yuuki

Abortion is the ending of a pregnancy. Pro-choicers are not fetuses. You can't abort them.

reply from: nancyu

Really, so giving birth to a living healthy child is an abortion? Here's a more accurate definition (you accidentally left out the part where the baby is killed):
Definition of the word "abort"
It only seems right to me that people shouldn't support something being done to someone else, that they wouldn't be willing to have done to themselves.
Pro aborts tend to disregard that Golden Rule. I guess I can understand why.

reply from: Yuuki

Really, so giving birth to a living healthy child is an abortion? Here's a more accurate definition (you accidentally left out the part where the baby is killed):
The one time I leave off the OBVIOUS fact that the child is killed in the process you jump down my throat. I figured it went without saying, considering the content of this board. Secondly, the only important fact in what I stated was that you can't abort ANYONE who is already born, because abortion (in context to the debate) applies only to an established pregnancy.
I don't ever want to be hung from a ceiling by metal hooks through my skin, but some people love doing it:
http://images.onset.freedom.com/monitortx/1175201991-suspension.jpg
and
http://www.photobret.com/images/20090330105433_2p1i3866.jpg
((warning, may be graphic in your opinion))
Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspension_(body_modification)

And I support their right to do it. I'd never ever do it myself though, and would consider it torture and a violation of my personal rights if it was forced on me.
Yeah, there's a lot in life I wouldn't do TO someone or ever want done TO me, but that I approve of when its self-inflicted.

reply from: ProInformed

What former Nazi SS officer put his wartime skills to use by becoming
an abortionist for Kaiser Permanente in Ohio and Hawaii?

reply from: Yuuki

What former Hitler Youth became our Pope?

reply from: ProInformed

What former Hitler Youth became our Pope?
"our Pope?"
I'm not Catholic so I don't have a Pope.
Check your stereotypes yuuki.
BTW it has been noted that once again you've chosen to lash back in retaliation when a real pro-lifer has exposed one of the abortion industry's dirty secrets.

reply from: Rosalie

I'm personally very interested in how you propose to abort us.
From whose body are you going to extract us?
In any case, thank you for perfectly demonstrating your IQ and disposition of so many of you 'pro-life' people. This entire topic speaks for itself, I think.
I'm eagerly awaiting your answer to my question.

reply from: Yuuki

What former Hitler Youth became our Pope?
"our Pope?"
I'm not Catholic so I don't have a Pope.
Check your stereotypes yuuki.
BTW it has been noted that once again you've chosen to lash back in retaliation when a real pro-lifer has exposed one of the abortion industry's dirty secrets.
"The" pope. Whatever. I'm not catholic either, but he is the only pope the human race has right now, so he's technically "ours".

reply from: yoda

Sounds like common sense to me.

reply from: yoda

But not to other people, without their permission.
Abortion isn't self-inflicted (by the victim, the baby).

reply from: nancyu

But not to other people, without their permission.
Abortion isn't self-inflicted (by the victim, the baby).
She seems to keep forgetting that. Maybe if I could [forget that abortion kills the baby] her arguments would make more sense to me.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, that's typical of us to "forget" that.
If you hire a hit man to kill your spouse, you're "self-inflicting" the act of murder on yourself, aren't you?
But where does the victim come in? Shouldn't the victim who is killed get some recognition here?
Is the perpetrator of the violence the only one you care about?

reply from: Yuuki

Yoda, please look at the original quote for a moment:
I do NOT support the idea of myself being hung from the ceiling by hooks. However, other people CHOOSE to have this DONE TO them. I understand the concept of the Golden Rule, but the above quote is not a proper interpretation of it, or at the very best a rather convoluted version of it.
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
In other words, do to others what you would like them to do to you. This includes being polite btw. You don't want people acting rude and insulting you? Maybe you should stop doing it to them. The quote however, adds in a secondary relationship which really destroys the whole concept of the direct relationship between your actions towards others and their actions towards you.
I don't support aborting babies, and I wouldn't want to have been aborted. I also wouldn't want any future children I may have to be aborted forcefully by an outside party. And I'm sure the baby doesn't want to be aborted. Savvy?

reply from: nancyu

Surely, this can NOT be a person:
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h219/pjcomix/blog/nancy_pelosi.jpg
(It looks like her face is melting)
edit:
WARNING!!! HORRIBLE AND FRIGHTENING IMAGE!!

reply from: faithman

You need to warn a person!!!!! That is frightening.

reply from: nancyu

OOps! (sorry about that!)
I fixed it.

reply from: nancyu

Isn't it amazing how a little (or a lot) of makeup can make
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/news_images/2006/sebelius.jpg look http://www.siteselection.com/features/2008/nov/Kansas/images/Kathleen-Sebelius.jpg a person!
Eeewww....pro aborts almost kissing pictures.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef011570100106970c-300wi
http://unitedstatesvicepresident.com/images/Sebelius.jpg

reply from: nancyu

http://wwwimage.cbsnews.com/images/2009/09/13/image5307076g.jpg

reply from: fetalisa

That's the precise reason the fetal fetishists can never be allowed to take the reins of government in this country.

reply from: faithman

That's the precise reason the fetal fetishists can never be allowed to take the reins of government in this country.
Bad news for you is that we will one way or another.

reply from: yoda

Maybe you should stop sucking up to the proaborts long enough to use your few brain cells. You've been more rude more often than any other poster on this forum, and you're chastising me? Take the beam out of your own eye...
"An outside party"? What the hell does that mean? That you want to reservwe the right to abort your own baby yourself???????

reply from: yoda

People like yourself with tiny brains and big mouths don't recognize satire when they see it, do they?

reply from: nancyu

That's the precise reason the fetal fetishists can never be allowed to take the reins of government in this country.
You don't have to agree with me to be a person, you only have to agree that unborn children are people too. Either ALL human beings are persons, or NO human beings are persons.
You can't make a single argument against the personhood of an unborn child that you can't also make against the personhood of any human being.
Even RiverMoonLady came to her senses enough to realize that unborn children ARE people. I'm afraid I don't hold out much hope for you though, fetalisa. I'll keep you in my prayers just the same, because you never know.

reply from: nancyu

Do you favor this amendment to the US Constitution: The Term "person" or "persons" shall NOT apply to Pro aborts. (Total Votes: 34)
Yes. I favor this amendment. Pro aborts are wads of tissue

10 votes 29.41 (%)
No. They are as human as an unborn child; no more, no less. Age and likability have no bearing on one's humanity.

21 votes 61.76 (%)
They are persons, but not in the "whole" sense

3 votes 8.82 (%)

reply from: nancyu

http://www.tvpredictions.com/dan.jpg

reply from: ProInformed

I don't remember where I found this poem - had it saved as an e-mail draft.
"Human beings are members of a whole,
In creation of one essence and soul.
If one member is afflicted with pain,
Other members uneasy will remain.
If you have no sympathy for human pain,
The name of human you cannot retain."
- Saadi
pro-aborts who commit and condone the killing of innocent preborn human babies are inhumane and inhuman.

reply from: nancyu

That is Excellent. Glad your back ProInformed.

reply from: nancyu

http://iamdrtiller.com/
Dr Tiller wannabes.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2i7gTTR09Y&feature=related
hmm wonder why "comments have been disabled for this video"... Can't imagine...

reply from: Banned Member

Interesting; I'm probably one of the few people here who has actually experienced being completely dehumanised.
Nancy Uhde, you have no idea what you're talking about.

reply from: Shenanigans

Today I saw someone who looked exactly like Tiller.
It was kinda creepy.

reply from: nancyu

Vexie, I'm sorry on behalf of the world's population that you and others like you have been dehumanized. As far as I know it is still illegal for them to kill you. You are one step ahead of unborn children.
And you're right, I have no idea what I'm talking about half the time. Just like you, alot of what I post is to kill time. But there is one thing that I am absolutely positively certain of:
I know that that is a living little person in mommy's womb. And if that little person is killed before he is born, he will be just as dead as if he had been killed after.

reply from: Banned Member

No, unborn children don't suffer.

reply from: nancyu

No, unborn children don't suffer.
You cannot prove that any more than you can prove that you do.

reply from: Banned Member

Oh, well, if you're going to play the subjective reality game...
You can't prove that abortions really happen. This could all be a dream.

reply from: nancyu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzu3Ihyq50c
I just like this song...

reply from: Banned Member

My name is Daman Lazar I am the owner of Ambulatory Surgery Center of Brooklyn at 313 43rd Street in Brooklyn, NY. Ofc # 718-878-4462 Toll Free # 877-842-7430. Cell # 516-680-9416.
The main function of my clinic is abortion. I like it.
Call me and tell me what you think about it. I love to talk about it on the phone.

reply from: nancyu

Thank you.
And in fact, that's what dictionaries say, also.
Human being = person.

reply from: Gaufre

WTF? Get a life nancy. I have never heard of pro-abortion people. Pro-abortion is anti-choice.

reply from: Tam

Now that's funny. "Pro-abortion is anti-choice." True, but I'm sure it's a truth you didn't intend to state. Abortion is intended to do one thing: end someone's life, and prevent that person from making ANY choices, ever. Talk about anti-choice! Well put!


2017 ~ LifeDiscussions.org ~ Discussions on Life, Abortion, and the Surrounding Politics