Home - List All Discussions

4choice4all says the term "human being is the crux of the matter

So how are we not members of our species BEFORE birth, 4C4A???????

by: yoda

Do we invite posters to submit their own interpretation of that term, and take a poll?
Do we throw darts at a dartboard to see how pure chance defines that word?
Do we embrace the principle of "If I'm not sure what it is, that makes it okay for me to kill it"....... and keep on pretending we're "not sure" what a human being is?
OR...... do we consult the ONLY recognized authorities on the meaning of terms of the vernacular..... the dictionary?
Gee, what a tough decision..... one the one hand, we can take the word of people who want to justify killing human babies by refusing to acknowledge their actual biological classification...... OR...... on the other hand, we could actually face up to the truth? (Yes, "human being" IS our biological classification, in the vernacular, whereas "Homo sapiens" is it in scientific terminology)......... TOUGH CALL!!
One well known actress was quoted as saying "I keep shutting the door on reality, but it just keeps coming in the window". That's a pretty apt description of the situation of the proabort revisionists. They keep telling us that words and phrases don't really mean what they mean, and they keep making fools of themselves.
Such a DILEMMA! Such a QUANDARY! What to do? ........ well, let's start by cracking open that great big book with all the dust on it....
Information Please: http://www.infoplease.com/ipd/A0481706.html / hu'man be'ing 1. any individual of the genus Homo, esp. a member of the species
MSN Encarta Dictionary http://dictionary.msn.com/ hu·man be·ing (plural hu·man be·ings) noun 1. member of the human species: a member of the species to which men and women belong. Latin name Homo sapiens
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000. http://www.bartleby.com/61/79/H0317900.html %20human
human being: NOUN: human
Meriam-Webster Online http://www.m-w.com Main Entry: human being Function: noun : HUMAN

reply from: CharlesD

How dare you confuse the issue with simple facts.

reply from: yoda

I know, I'm a terrible person. Maybe I can watch the proaborts and learn how to be a horrible one?

reply from: sander

Nah...you haven't got it in you to be dishonest enough to twist and contort the meaning of words to suit your agenda.
You'll never be a terrible person, never mind a horrible one...that title is reserved for the likes of those who would kill helpless babies.
The word games these people play is nothing new, they've learned from masters like the nazis who had to first de-humanize the Jews before they could sweep them away to death camps with the citizens standing idly by.
But, we have to continue to counter their efforts, it's starting to pay off......

reply from: yoda

Bump for 4c4a................

reply from: yoda

Bump for 4c4a.........

reply from: faithman

The kind people who have given us this free forum, have poured their very lives, and treasure into a powerful documentary called MAAFA 21. I believe the cost is going to be $20. Please seriously consider buying a copy, as well as sending what you can for copies to others. Life talk had several clips from it, and from just what I saw, It will be one of the most powerful projects in pro-life history. Do what you can. We owe MC3 so much, and could never hope to repay his kindness and suport for IAAP. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE consider this request, and do what you can for this project.

reply from: iCelebr8Life

Human life begins at conception, abortion kills that life. Even the littlest zygote is fully alive and human. He or she is a fully alive human being. A human being is a person.
Denying personhood to the unborn may look like an easy out, but it doesn't work. Living human beings are persons.

reply from: faithman

Quit being so logical. You might hurt some borthead's feelings.

reply from: Shenanigans

The child in the womb is a human being, because they're being human. A child outside the womb is a human doing, unless they're asleep.

reply from: sk1bianca

how can the offspring of a human being be anything else but a human being?
how very non-scientific...

reply from: galen

she left with Fara...

reply from: sander

Oh happy day...for us.

reply from: ProInformed

I'm going to have to go with it's an undisputed FACT of science/biology that individual human life begins at coneption.
Now I do realize that there are some folks who haven't learned the facts of life yet...
and other folks who've been brainwashed into believing something other than the facts...
or who choose to reject reality for their own made-up beliefs...
and folks that employ the same dehumanization mindset that slaveowners, Nazis, and murderers rely on for justification...
and sociopaths who redefine anything they choose to do as OK, their desire to do whatever they want even trumping the right to life of their victims...
But I prefer to not be like those folks.
I think citizens in civilized societies have both a right and a responsibility to base their POV's and actions on facts, not the other way around, writing their own version of 'reality' based on their POV and what they want to do does not exactly lead to sane intelligent societies.

reply from: yoda

Oh no! We're losing two giant minds at the same time???

reply from: faithman

The "useful idiots" [like the bortheads on this forum] are not the real problem. We have secular humanist elitist that have taken it upon themselves to rule the world. LDI's just released documentary, MAAFA 21, documents the major players in this plan. Everyone should get this work of historical review. It dots the I's, and crosses the T's. I have never viewed a more powerful work than this, that tells us who our enemy is. The babies perish for the lack of knowlage. This project clears that problem absolutly. Please, please, please buy a copy, and send enough so they can send a copy to others. Buy this for your church to watch. Buy it for your local library. Plan a public viewing for it. This will change the whole face of our struggle. This is a major step to the end of the slaughter. Many thanks to the folks at LDI for investing the blood swet and tears, as well as your hard to come by treasure, in giving this most important gift to the pro-life comunity of America.

reply from: yoda

bump for 4c4a............

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Biological life may begin at conception but personhood rights are bestowed at birth. This is what Roe has given us and we should be thankful for it.
You fundies can go bang your bibles now.

reply from: faithman

SSSSOOOOO if they be silly gooses, Does that make thisa a goose BUMP

reply from: yoda

Yeah, that's right. But 4c4a says the term "human being" is not applicable to the unborn....... do you agree?

reply from: yoda

That would be slanderous to geese everywhere.....

reply from: faithman

That would be slanderous to geese everywhere.....
HONK HONK!!!

reply from: ProInformed

4choice4all is afraid to even take a simple quiz to show us how well-informed she is, and too cowardly to even look up the answers online, so her POV is obviously based on ignorance and fear of learning the truth.
Just another know -nothing, and too scared to learn anything,
chanting choicist cultist sheeple - yawn...

reply from: sander

chanting choicist cultist sheeple
Very apt description of the proaborts that post here...they must have all come off the same assembly line; namely CCCS school of dupes.

reply from: 4choice4all

Prouninformed, still crying that no one will play her games with her.

reply from: faithman

http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm

reply from: yoda

What about that "human being" thing, 4c?
Still claiming it's what makes it okay to kill unborn babies?

reply from: faithman

http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm

reply from: prochoiceinNY

I'm not interested in what word you use to describe the POC or even if that word is right. My belief is that the POC are not persons until birth, until it is out of the mother,, once out of the mother the POC is then a recognised human person. Until birth its fate is the legally protected choice of its mother.

reply from: 4choice4all

Human, yes. Being, no.

reply from: Shenanigans

So the unborn isn't being human, or is it being human at a different stage of development, so if it's being human then we can simply say its a human being...
Anyway, word flippage aside, what does the unborn have to do to satisfy this need of yours to class it as a being?

reply from: Shenanigans

Which then leads back to do your support late term abortion, where there is no foetal defect or risk to the mother?

reply from: 4given

All fun and games until someone loses an eye.. right?! Curious as to why you are afraid of the facts? Is it indifference?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

So, a "being" is an entity that has been born? It's as simple as that? And being a being gives that entity the right not to be killed?
Doesn't matter what you call it. Its not born so it gets no rights. End of story.

reply from: Teresa18

Explain to me what this life is and how it can be a nonperson one moment and a moment later after sliding out of the birth canal, be a person.
May I remind you that the Supreme Court is not always right. The Supreme Court gave us slavery. They ruled that blacks were only 3/5 persons. Do you believe that blacks were 3/5 persons without the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness during slavery times?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Its just how on one day its illegal for you to vote, drink etc and the next you can!
And its not up to me to explain it, you guys want rights for those blobs, its up to YOU to prove they deserve it.
Birth is the decider, you can draw some line in the middle of pregnancy or at some nonsense point, but it will never please everyone and there will always be something or someone who disputes that. So, the decider is something we can all agree, and that decider is birth.
Nothing magical, just legal.
Again, the blacks were born.
If the black was POC they are not a person. The white POC not a person. POC NOT A PERSON!
As soon as the POC are born, its a person.

reply from: Faramir

So, a "being" is an entity that has been born? It's as simple as that? And being a being gives that entity the right not to be killed?
Doesn't matter what you call it. Its not born so it gets no rights. End of story.
You believe the woman owns the fetus 100% until birth, correct?
If she and the fetus were 100% healthy, you would have no problems with a decision to destroy and remove the fetus, late term, even a week before it was to be born?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

I wouldn't have problems if it was removed a minute before birth. Because until birth its just the POC and POC have no rights.

reply from: Faramir

I wouldn't have problems if it was removed a minute before birth. Because until birth its just the POC and POC have no rights.
Just to make sure I understand 100%--many prochoicers would say at this point if she were to abort, it would be a live delivery. But as you see it, it seems, and I have seen this argument before, the woman owns the fetus 100% and the state should have no right to interefere whatseover with a part of her body, so she should be able to have it destroyed first, and deliver a dead baby. Right?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Dead POC don't cost anything.
My partner's sister was married for five years, with an amazing husband, two incomes and three very much wanted children. Her husband and her planned their fourth child and the pregnancy was healthy with no concerns. So, she quit her job and they were able to manage on the Steve's income. Then Steve died in a car accident. It was after his death that we discovered the truth about Steve, he was a gambler who owed a lot of money to a lot of people, he had debts and credit cards maxed out everywhere. She had to sell up everything and move in with her very elderly parents - her dad had dementia and her mom was blind. She made the choice to end the pregnancy, she was only three weeks off delivery.
Sure, the POC were healthy, she was healthy, but the family would have been put into turmoil if the POC were born alive. No one else in the extended family could adopt that thing, and she knew what the foster care and outwards adoption agencies were like. So she aborted.
Does she get all weepy about it? No! She just looks at the faces of her born children and sees them thriving and healthy. She had to get back into work to try and bring in some income to help her parents and her children, this wouldnt have happened if she was home with some baby.
She made the right choice that was right for her and her family! The POC aren't worth more then born children and born adults, no matter what age the POC are!

reply from: sk1bianca

do you realize your whole argumentation is based on social conventions (rights, laws) which could change any moment? are you simply going with the flow? if the majority decided to afford rights to the unborn, would you be ok with that?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

No, because the majority isn't going to be looking after the woman and her POC when its born!
I dont care if 99.99% of people are anti-choice, those .01% of people still have the right to have an abortion if they choose and they will still get one even if is illegal - there are all kinds of herbs and meds you can get from the shop that can assist in expelling POC. My grammy told me how they used to do it in her day, her wisdom will stay with me and I pass it on to my sisters so they'll know what to do if choice is knocked from the law!!

reply from: sk1bianca

that goes for rapists as well. the vast majority of people is against rape. the rest of them, the rapists, should still have the right to commit rape and they still do it even if it's illegal.

reply from: sander

What we have here with pro ny is an attention whore of the highest order.
This one is best ignored, trolls like this dry up and go away if you don't feed them.

reply from: Faramir

No, because the majority isn't going to be looking after the woman and her POC when its born!
I dont care if 99.99% of people are anti-choice, those .01% of people still have the right to have an abortion if they choose and they will still get one even if is illegal - there are all kinds of herbs and meds you can get from the shop that can assist in expelling POC. My grammy told me how they used to do it in her day, her wisdom will stay with me and I pass it on to my sisters so they'll know what to do if choice is knocked from the law!!
If you and your granny can do abortions on your own with herbs and spices, then why even care about abortion being legal?

reply from: faithman

No, because the majority isn't going to be looking after the woman and her POC when its born!
I dont care if 99.99% of people are anti-choice, those .01% of people still have the right to have an abortion if they choose and they will still get one even if is illegal - there are all kinds of herbs and meds you can get from the shop that can assist in expelling POC. My grammy told me how they used to do it in her day, her wisdom will stay with me and I pass it on to my sisters so they'll know what to do if choice is knocked from the law!!
If you and your granny can do abortions on your own with herbs and spices, then why even care about abortion being legal?
Because they want to feel good about killing babies. Just like you feel good about defending them

reply from: 4choice4all

They are not mere semantics...your refusal to acknowledge that doesn't make it a universal truth. You argue that the difference between me and a fertilized egg is semantics...and you can't sell that to anyone outside of the biggest prolife zealots.

reply from: faithman

Click blue text to view a 7 week from conception "blob". This is the stage that most women find out they are pregnant. SSSSSOOOOO most abortions happen after this point. Not just a fertilized egg.

reply from: 4choice4all

It's not the word....it's what the word means. ....it's the rights implied by using the word. Clearly semantic TO YOU does not mean it is truly CLEARLY SEMANTIC. It is not. I've also been very clear on when a human becomes a human being deserving of a full protection of rights...birth. It's very tangible. Feel free to disagree. I find it very arbitrary to declare a fertilized egg a person just because it has human dna and is living. It doesn't meet my definition of personhood by any stretch.
Yes...I believe that is the crux of the debate. I also believe that declaring fertilized eggs "people" will never be mainstream so you have a losing battle on your hands. Convince the world that IVF is murder, Birth control pills and iuds are tools of murder and that they have no rights to make decisions during their pregnancy because another person is involved that has equal rights....good luck with that. That's why abortion has remained legal for 36 years.....you can't convince the vast majority that it's murder.

reply from: 4choice4all

First...I have been clear on when I believe the law should recognize personhood...and the gives pause is my personal reflection and the acknowledgment that the state "might' have the right to offer protection when the only thing preventing personhood from being realized is location(meaning post viability when a woman could be induced to delivery instead of abortion). I have also elaborated on why birth is important. So again, personhood ...a birth theologically I recognize the importance of first breathe...like when God formed Adam but then breathed life into Adam. From a biological and scientific pov there are inherent biological changes that take place upon birth and the first breath when our respiratory and cardiac functions undergo change. From a philosophical pov there is no longer dependence on a person's biology to live...anyone can care for the baby at that point. Legally we grant a birth or death certificate and file for SS# and bestow citizenship according to place of birth. That,imo, is NOT semantic.
No...I see personhood and abortion as a debate that goes beyond science, medicine, theology, philosophy and legality.....YOU keep insisting it's a simple issue, "it's a person". I disagree and point out that if it were that simple...we wouldn't be here.

reply from: 4choice4all

Every woman has a right to rid her body of a pregnancy....absolutely I stand by that. Born children can live independently of their biological mother.

reply from: sander

Every woman has a right to kill her very own sons and daughters, that's what you've said, moron.
Do you think that comes as any newsflash to anyone?
We all know what a low life, coward you are.

reply from: sander

If only it penetrated your puny mind.

reply from: yoda

And yet, I'm sure you will go on in the next sentence and make a semantic argument against the use of the term "person" for the unborn, won't you?
AH YES....... I knew you WOULD do that!
Your "belief"? Is this a religious matter to you? Do you have some spiritual conviction that you hold above the authority of dictionaries?
And by what lying logic do you claim that?
Or, by what psychotic authority do you claim to be more reliable than dictionaries?
Do you not feel any shame at appearing so stupid?

reply from: yoda

Now you're throwing in the term "deserving of a full protection of rights"?
What happened to your use of the simple term "human being"?
Did you get cold feet and bail out on that one?
What a craven coward....

reply from: prochoiceinNY

You're like a broken record, playing the same rubbish argument over and over.
The rapist is hurting a BORN person who has RIGHTS. The POC has NO rights!!

reply from: prochoiceinNY

And? Of course its going to LOOK human, its mom and dad are human, but while it might human, it is still only POC and still not born and still not worthy or given legal rights.

reply from: yoda

Well at least you've reduced your slander to calling the unborn "not worthy", and no longer make the claim that they are not human beings. That's progress, I guess.

reply from: 4choice4all

Is the dictionary the end all of the debate? Then stop calling it murder...because if we are going by the dictionary that means the UNLAWFUL killing...and abortion is legal.

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Well at least you've reduced your slander to calling the unborn "not worthy", and no longer make the claim that they are not human beings. That's progress, I guess.
I'll clarify for you then:
The POC may look human, with a human mom and dad, but that doesn't make them human beings. Its human cos its not a dog or a cat or a monkey. But its not human in that it has no legal rights. I guess you could say its sub-human, like a retard or someone with no brain or someone whos dead. A dead body is human in appearance, with a mom and a dad but when yo're dead you have no rights, so its not human in that way.

reply from: yoda

I don't call it murder.
Does that mean you are going to admit the truth, or are you just making a whining noise again?

reply from: yoda

You are either very stupid or totally dishonest:
MSN Encarta Dictionary http://dictionary.msn.com/ hu·man be·ing (plural hu·man be·ings) noun 1. member of the human species: a member of the species to which men and women belong. Latin name Homo sapiens
"Legal rights" have what, exactly, to do with our BIOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION? (You do realize, don't you, that "human being" is a common term for our species?)
But I see you used the term "sub-human", you remind me of slave owners and Nazis..... who said certain humans were "sub-human".

reply from: 4choice4all

I admit the truth....you just disagree. Now go harass your cohorts about calling it murder Mr. Webster.

reply from: yoda

And your "truth" would be that the dictionaries are all wrong?

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Look here gramps, it doesn't matter what you call it! Call it Bob or Mary or Human or Person, it doesn't matter, what matters is that its in the woman and if she doesnt want it there it doesn't have to stay there and she can gget it legally removed!
And the Jews were BORN and the slaves were BORN, now if it were Jewish POC or Black POC then yeah, they can be expelled - as long as its the woman's choice!

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Do you have a bruise on your forehead from where you bang your head against the wall?

reply from: 4choice4all

LOL.....stock up on gauze!
I don't take them seriously enough to be frustrated by their lack of reading comprehension and juvenile behaviors. There are some decent posters here though....so if you don't mind wading through the poopyheadbloodsoakedscanc bit......you can find some decency.

reply from: Shenanigans

Did you really just use the terms "sub human" and "retard"?
WTH is wrong with you? Other then the obvious? I mean, does that mean people of mental deficenties are "sub-human", or those with disabilities?

reply from: 4choice4all

Yeah...retardation is not the same a brain dead....and I don't think the disabled or retarded are subhuman. Be careful about throwing words around...they can be hurtful.

reply from: Shenanigans

HAHA! NYprochoice got a telling off!!

reply from: 4choice4all

That's telling someone off? pbbttt...that's just taking issue with some words she used.

reply from: prochoiceinNY

Yeah, sorry, sometimes I"m not too good at expressing myself. I've probably made a few hasty posts which don't quite express what I think.

reply from: yoda

And yet, they were still called "sub-human" by those who wished to enslave and/or kill them.
You're in that same category.

reply from: yoda

Au contraire. Sometimes what you're really thinking just sneaks out......
And it's hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube, isn't it?
So, when are you going to explain WHY you claim that we unborn humans are not "human beings"?
Better yet, when are you going to document that LIE?

reply from: Rosalie

I'm having a kindergarten flashback right now.
How old are you people?

reply from: faithman

And yet, they were still called "sub-human" by those who wished to enslave and/or kill them.
You're in that same category.
http://www.lifedynamics.com/Abortion_Information/Pro-life_Product/maafa.cfm

reply from: yoda

So, 4C4A when are you going to explain WHY you claim that we unborn humans are not "human beings", and why dictionary definitions are ALL WRONG?
Better yet, when are you going to document that LIE?

reply from: Rosalie

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/13/iran-demonstrations-viole_n_215189.html
http://elections.7rooz.com/link/330/ http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4451899 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.

reply from: yoda

Au contraire. Sometimes what you're really thinking just sneaks out......
So, when are you going to explain WHY you claim that we unborn humans are not "human beings"?
Better yet, when are you going to document that LIE?

reply from: sander

Au contraire. Sometimes what you're really thinking just sneaks out......
So, when are you going to explain WHY you claim that we unborn humans are not "human beings"?
Better yet, when are you going to document that LIE?
They're pathetic in their attempts to ignore your questions, Yoda.
But, even they know when they've backed themselves into a corner...

reply from: Shenanigans

I'm having a kindergarten flashback right now.
How old are you people?
Some people tell me to act my age not my shoe size... but my shoes are pretty big.

reply from: Shenanigans

Makes you value what rights you do got when you live in a country where you won't get shot in the face for showing your ankles.

reply from: sander

As soon as Rosalie and her bunch of lunatic friends start speaking up for the voices who cannot be heard; the child in the womb, I'll pay attention to what else they have to say regarding other....hold on to your hat.....HUMAN BEINGS!
If she had more than two working brain cells she might have noticed the Iranian people's voices are being heard...world wide.
Not so much with the darling, helpless, TRULY VOICELESS babies.

reply from: 4choice4all

when darling helpless truly voiceless unborn fetuses march through the streets peacefully....a million at a time.....then I will listen to your side....it's a deal!

reply from: sander

Continue on in your supercilious manner concerning the child in the womb, it only further dis-credits your side and will only help the polls to rise higher for prolife.

reply from: faithman

Continue on in your supercilious manner concerning the child in the womb, it only further dis-credits your side and will only help the polls to rise higher for prolife.
NOW YOUR LEARNING KIDDO!!!!! That is why MC3 allows these baby killing parasites to hang around. This iste is spreading the pro-life message all accross the land, and borthead pukes can't stand it. All the can do is come here and try to spam us with their shallow condesending drivel. Either ignore them, or slap the crap out of them and be done with it. Like their entire movement, they deserve nothing but disdain. Always remember. These punks promote sucking the brains out of perfectly healthy and viable womb children, simply because cowardly scancs don't want to be a mom.

reply from: yoda

Au contraire. Sometimes what you're really thinking just sneaks out......
So, when are you going to explain WHY you claim that we unborn humans are not "human beings"?
Better yet, when are you going to document that LIE?

reply from: Darkmoon

Ummm, no...We must stop quibbling about terminology before the debate can ensue. These semantic disputes are nothing more than a distraction....
Pardon me for butting in, but I've found that the dictionary can serve people like a salad bar. They take what they want and leave the rest. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you at this point, I'm just making an observation insofar as definitions as they've been used on this site.
Um, I didn't mean to hijack. My apologies. I just thought it was interesting how people use the dictionary when it suites their purpose...just like the bible or any other man-written documentation.

reply from: Darkmoon

Ah, sorry, my bad. I didn't mean it as an argument, I was just butting in to make an observation concerning debate, politics and religion. I should have clarified that.

reply from: 4choice4all

Cp....I did answer your question. You always ignore that fact and try to twist it to seem like someone is avoiding responding. I have said that a lot happens at birth biologically. Because you lack the ability to acknowledge that...I'll humor you.
At birth the most important thing,imo, is that the new person is fully biologically independent of another born person...we now have two born beings and the woman does not have to biologically support it. Biologically, we have the first breath and the alterations that take place to the cardiac and respiratory systems. Legally we issue a certificate of live birth or death certificate based on this event. You are a citizen of the location in which you were born and the people to which you are born.
I do not advocate killing PEOPLE...I just define people as born humans. So no, I do not advocate the murder or children...but you knew that...you just like reading your own thoughts?? We've talked enough for you to know my position. The unborn do not deserve rights..they are not beings....the woman's rights to control her biology is imperative and supercedes the future rights of any potential being. YOU KNOW THIS...you don't agree..but you DO understand my point. You are merely being obtuse.

reply from: 4choice4all

And I was clear....you just don't agree with my points.
Physical dependence and biological dependence are completely different...you know that though. You also know that ANY person can take over the care for an infant..biologically related or not. Most women don't have breastmilk for days...if at all...heard of a wet nurse. That argument highlights your ignorance on breastfeeding...and how you are willing to be obtuse to avoid conceding that a point was made...even if you don't agree with that point.
You concede that if the woman's life is at risk..killing is acceptable. So not all killing is immoral according to you. I extend that to say killing something that requires your body to live when you do not want to provide that service is ok too.
There absolutely is a physiological change at birth...to the cardiac and respiratory systems.
I answered about the legal status and you want to interject philosophical points into that. Legally your birth matters separately from philosophical or scientific or theological points. It matters if you want to be president of the US later It matters if your mother wants to pursue child support...acquire health insurance...it matters legally. You can argue that you don't care, legally speaking, but you realize that legally...it's a major event.
Not semantics...no matter how much you would like to regulate my points to mere semantics...they are not.
I'm not denying reality...I'm disagreeing with you. How vain that you consider your points to be "truth"...vain and a bit scary. Keep trumpeting in the streets that you have "the truth"...doesn't make it so...only makes you seem a bit "off".

reply from: nancyu

No, because the majority isn't going to be looking after the woman and her POC when its born!
I dont care if 99.99% of people are anti-choice, those .01% of people still have the right to have an abortion if they choose and they will still get one even if is illegal - there are all kinds of herbs and meds you can get from the shop that can assist in expelling POC. My grammy told me how they used to do it in her day, her wisdom will stay with me and I pass it on to my sisters so they'll know what to do if choice is knocked from the law!!
Dear prochoiceinNY,
I see that you like to refer to unborn children as POC, so I don't think you'll mind if I refer to you from now on as POS.
I watched a movie one day called "The Little Girl Who Lives Down the Lane" in that movie she (the little girl) described how she killed POS who tried to control her life by poisoning their tea. Maybe I could pass this info on to my friends until sense and consistency shows up in the law.
Since for the moment murdering people after they are born is illegal. Maybe they could use this info if they run across POS like you. After all, it's only illegal if you get caught, right?
(Oh I just love using pro abort logic against them. They never seem to get it though. POS. Maybe because their logic isn't that logical...)
Don't forget, POS you are blindly following the status quo and that can change in the blink of an eye. It did 36 years ago, and it is about to happen again -- very soon I'm thinking.
http://maafa21.com

reply from: nancyu

Look here gramps, it doesn't matter what you call it! Call it Bob or Mary or Human or Person, it doesn't matter, what matters is that its in the woman and if she doesnt want it there it doesn't have to stay there and she can gget it legally removed!
And the Jews were BORN and the slaves were BORN, now if it were Jewish POC or Black POC then yeah, they can be expelled - as long as its the woman's choice!
You forgot POS were born, too.
Did you ever learn any history POS? It used to be "legal" to "choose" to kill Jews and slaves, too. I wonder if they had a back up plan in case their "choice" was taken away...
http://maafa21.com

reply from: nancyu

Well at least you've reduced your slander to calling the unborn "not worthy", and no longer make the claim that they are not human beings. That's progress, I guess.
I'll clarify for you then:
The POC may look human, with a human mom and dad, but that doesn't make them human beings. Its human cos its not a dog or a cat or a monkey. But its not human in that it has no legal rights. I guess you could say its sub-human, like a retard or someone with no brain or someone whos dead. A dead body is human in appearance, with a mom and a dad but when yo're dead you have no rights, so its not human in that way.
Wow. You really are a POS.

reply from: yoda

Actually, that's not the case here.
What we have here are proaborts that say things that would be equivalent to "there are no onions on the salad bar". When I show them that there are indeed onions, they call me names and change the subject.
When you say "a fetus is not a baby", you are claiming that the "salad bar" of definitions of "baby" does not contain the word "fetus", and I have proven time and again that it does.
It takes only ONE valid definition to establish the validity of a usage, and that's all I need to post. YOUR side, on the other hand, makes outrageous "IS NOT A" type claims and makes no effort to document them.

reply from: yoda

Slave owners did not advocate enslaving PEOPLE...... just Africans.....
Nazis did not advocate killing PEOPLE....... just Jews....

reply from: yoda

And yet, you have yet to make any case for equating dependence OF ANY KIND to a loss of the moral right to life........
You just assume that we agree that they are equal....... and we don't.

reply from: yoda

As long as carole and Farty don't see you doing that, I think it'll be okay.

reply from: Shenanigans

You're kinda right, but the unborn's heart is indep of the mother, for the mother's blood to get into the foetus' blood stream would be bad.
The foetus breaths within the mother's body, its lungs take in fluid.
However, you are correct in that the oxygen and nutrients are supplied via the umblicial cord.
But that's where viability comes into play...

reply from: 4choice4all

http://eileen.250x.com/Main/7_R_Eile/BirthChange.htm

reply from: yoda

"At birth, two major events happen that radically alter fetal hemodynamics;
1. ligation of the umbilical cord causes a huge, though transient rise in arterial pressure, and
2. a rise in plasma C02 and fall in blood P02 help to initiate regular breathing. "
OH WELL THEN..... that changes EVERYTHING, doesn't it?
I mean, no human being morally deserves the right to live out their natural life until their blood pressure rises "hugely but transiently" their plasma CO2 rises, and their blood PO2 falls, right?
Wow....... and I didn't think that they proabort ever tried to document their claims....... there it is, right before your eyes!!
NOW I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING THAT THE PROABORTS SAY!!
And, I can translate it, too. No matter what they say, it all means the same thing: "I demand the right to kill any kids who haven't left my body, with no justification, and no apology".
Could not be any clearer.......

reply from: 4choice4all

LTR.
I never said that was sole justification of my support on abortion...but you know that.
And if you read the article there is more that occurs than those 2 factors...but you know that.

reply from: 4choice4all

There is more than those two things...again, you know it but are being obtuse to make a point.
Having human dna and being a human being are different. So you analogy that it's no different than killing a Jewish or black person doesn't hold.

reply from: yoda

And ALL of them are physical, biological processes having to do with human development.....
NOT ONE of them have anything at all to do with a "moral right to life", unless you happen to be a "developmental supremacist".
Is that your thing? Do you justify the slaughter of the innocent by saying that less developed human beings have no moral right to life?
Come on, get to the bottom line here.... you really don't feel that you need any justification to kill anyone whom you have the legal right to kill, do you?
You're just playing with words here, and very badly, I might add.
And, BTW, I'm still waiting to see some "documentation" that we are not human beings throughout all our physical existence, including that before birth. But I'm not holding my breath...... if ya know what I mean?

reply from: Shenanigans

How awfully convenient for you.

reply from: sander

And ALL of them are physical, biological processes having to do with human development.....
NOT ONE of them have anything at all to do with a "moral right to life", unless you happen to be a "developmental supremacist".
Is that your thing? Do you justify the slaughter of the innocent by saying that less developed human beings have no moral right to life?
Come on, get to the bottom line here.... you really don't feel that you need any justification to kill anyone whom you have the legal right to kill, do you?
You're just playing with words here, and very badly, I might add.
And, BTW, I'm still waiting to see some "documentation" that we are not human beings throughout all our physical existence, including that before birth. But I'm not holding my breath...... if ya know what I mean?
WOW!
Is there a creature on earth so full of it as 4c?
I'm stunned with her stupidity....thanks for being patient for the sake of the babies.
Most people would have dismissed the amount of ignorance she displays long ago.
She wants babies to be killed for any and all reasons, so she has jumped thru hoops of her own stupid making.....again, WOW!

reply from: 4choice4all

Again...I've been clear in my thoughts. I've stated numerous times that I don't believe a fetus is a "person" deserving the rights of "personhood" based on my theological, philosophical, scientifc and medical beliefs on what constitutes personhood. Not on any one point...but a variety of points from a variety of veiwpoints....biological changes merely being one aspect. CP asked more about the physiological changes that occur...so that's a point I was talking about here.
Again...you KNOW that I'm not saying less developed human beings have no right to life....because YOU KNOW I don't consider a fetus a human being..since we've discussed that numerous times. Technically, my own son could be considered "less developed" since he has issues with cognition. Of course, I consider him a human being...and any other born entity with human dna a "human being'. But again...you knew that.
Frankly.....this game of being argumentative when you actually can't present a single sensible logical intelligent rebuttal is OLD and getting to be quite a BORE. My 9 yo is less likely to resort to name calling when she's frustrated and can't communicate her thoughts in a mature way.

reply from: Shenanigans

Cut the crap, 4choice, you base your whole argument on the born vs. not born to denote personhood. Which is about as intellectually stimulating as a dead snail.
You can't argue logic with someone who insists on holding onto an illogical argument.
Your argument is illogical, thus we can throw all the medical texts and bibles at you till we develop RSI, its not going to change your mind becuase your mind was made up on illogical, irrational hiccups.
You must support abortion at any and all stages for any and all reasons regardless of your "thoughts". Your logic, your faulty logic demands you must support a woman's right to have her 40week old healthy foetus aborted, all because that 40 weeker is "not a person".

reply from: 4given

The unborn don't possess human DNA? When you were pregnant with him.. and your other children, were you asked about your alien appendage, or your baby? I suppose you weren't gifted with a "potential baby shower" either. How odd..

reply from: 4choice4all

Of course the unborn has human dna....never said it didn't.
Baby is semantics when you are talking personally. My friends called it the bean...certainly, they knew it wasn't a bean. Sometimes I absolutely called it a fetus..sometimes baby....but I also refer to my dog as the warthog. My point is....when we are not discussing the legalities of abortion and the realities of pregnancy...we can use any word we are comfortable with...but assigning a term to something doesn't make it true.
Yes...I argue that being born denotes a certain "line in the sand" for personhood and for the rights of personhood....absolutely. Because the act of being born carries a certain weight,imo, legally, medically, scientifically, theologically and philosophically. If you find it a bore...why do you insist on engaging...if you call being inflammatory but adding nothing engaging.

reply from: yoda

And yet she displays such energy in doing that.... there must be some real serious emotional trauma there to make someone do that to themselves.

reply from: yoda

And I'll bet your 9 yo would be ashamed to make all the unsupported claims that you have made, and never even attempt to support them.
You repeat your "it's not a human being" mantra over and over, without pausing for so much as a moment to say why, or discuss my reasons for saying that you are totally wrong. Your arrogance and blatant pride in your ignorance is astounding, it's as if you were deliberately trying to sabotage the proabort arguments all by yourself.
That may be the case, but I'm quite confident that you are not a prolifer pretending to be proabort, because no prolifer of conscience could say the things you say, on the chance that someone might actually believe you.

reply from: yoda

By your standards, toofy, we should be allowed to kill you since you obviously aren't "thinking yet".

reply from: sander

And yet she displays such energy in doing that.... there must be some real serious emotional trauma there to make someone do that to themselves.
That's what I'm thinking. I've never seen anything like it.
I realize the vast majority of proaborts have no qualms with being dishonest, but she takes this to new levels.
It's astounding to watch someone repeat an asanine lie over and over....maybe it's part mental illness and part just plain stupid?
But, it's something to behold, that's for sure.
This must have been the same lying spirit that took over the nazis since they were so convinced Jews were sub-human, not to mention slave owners and the SCOTUS at one point thinking the same way about Blacks.
I really believe that's what she demonstrates like no other proabort....
It's disgusting, scary and sad all rolled into one. I would have hoped that kind of thinking would have died out with the German nazis and slave owners, but it never will. There will always be a certain class of people that will recieve the distain of others in order for those others to gain power.
How tragic.

reply from: sk1bianca

or-gan-ism
- noun
1. a form of life composed of mutually interdependent parts that maintain various vital processes.
2. a form of life considered as an entity; an animal, plant, fungus, protistan, or moneran.
an organism with human DNA is a human being.

reply from: yoda

It's cultish behavior. People with strong, unfulfilled emotional needs tend to gravitate towards cults, and are happy to constantly repeat illogical slogans and mantras as the price for acceptance into the cult.

reply from: sander

It's cultish behavior. People with strong, unfulfilled emotional needs tend to gravitate towards cults, and are happy to constantly repeat illogical slogans and mantras as the price for acceptance into the cult.
That makes PERFECT sense!
I may have to start calling you, Dr. Yoda.

reply from: yoda

Yeah, the very word "doctor" does carry a certain amount of respect, doesn't it? Thanks.

reply from: sander

Yeah, the very word "doctor" does carry a certain amount of respect, doesn't it? Thanks.
yw
That explains how so many people thru the years have followed evil and then spent the rest of their lives trying to find ways to cope with a very sick conscience.
Lies seem to be the salve for these creatures.

reply from: yoda

Still waiting for 4c4a to try to support his "They're not human beings" statement in any way whatsoever. He just throws that garbage out there, and abandons it. Obviously, he doesn't believe his own crap.

reply from: yoda

Bump for 4c4a, who for some reason can't see this thread.......

reply from: 4choice4all

I've supported it in numerous threads.....do you have a new question or are you bored? BTW...I'm a 'she" ...not a "he".

reply from: yoda

bump for 4c4a............

reply from: sk1bianca

again...
or-gan-ism
- noun
1. a form of life composed of mutually interdependent parts that maintain various vital processes.
2. a form of life considered as an entity; an animal, plant, fungus, protistan, or moneran.
an organism with human DNA is a human being.

reply from: yoda

No, you haven't supported it at all, in any threads, you just repeat it over and over like a broken record.
OF WHAT SPECIES ARE WE BEFORE OUR BIRTH......????????


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