Abortion intended to wipe out black. Hilarious

[Cerpin Taxt]

I agree. To hell with potentials. A human is not a potential human. It IS a human. It simply is not an ADULT human yet. As I said earlier, the difference between a fetus and an adult is a matter of degree, not being.

Adults do not respirate through an umbilical cord attached to another person's metabolism.

A tumor arrived in your body by means of an intruder, or at least something you didn't consent to.

You know next to nothing about biology, don't you?

Also worth mentioning is the fact that not removing it might kill you. A baby is introduced by an act you DID consent to, in full knowledge of the consequences, excepting rape.

Consent to sex is not tantamount to consent to become and remain pregnant. The violations imposed by a fetus infringe upon a woman's fundamental right to bodily integrity, and any waivers to those rights must be explicit. Simply put, your assertion here is a blatant error of fact.

It's wrong that unborn humans must die so that we may escape inconvenience.

It's unfortunate, indeed. It is entirely consistent and appropriate for the established individual liberties under our Constitution, however.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

She wouldn't have gotten pregnant if you hadn't consented to sex. Consenting to a risk means consenting to the possible results.

Absolutely preposterous. You might as well say that there are no grounds for seeking restitution for being the victim of an automobile collision, since, according to you, driving on public motorways means consenting to the possibility of being in a wreck.

Or take flying on a plane for another example of your puerile reasoning. Nobody can sue airline carriers for losing their loved ones in a plane crash, since, obviously, consenting to ride in an airplane means consenting to the possibility of a crash.

Do you realize how many absurdities I can derive from your stupid, stupid claim?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Adults do not respirate through an umbilical cord attached to another person's metabolism.


You know next to nothing about biology, don't you?


Consent to sex is not tantamount to consent to become and remain pregnant. The violations imposed by a fetus infringe upon a woman's fundamental right to bodily integrity, and any waivers to those rights must be explicit. Simply put, your assertion here is a blatant error of fact.


It's unfortunate, indeed. It is entirely consistent and appropriate for the established individual liberties under our Constitution, however.

How is it unfortunate that a fetus that is not a human life and cannot be killed is removed because of the wish of the person carrying it?

Be careful about definitions and don't subject to guilt where there is none.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

And scientifically, a new life begins when two sets of chromosomes combine to form a completely new set of DNA.

This is not a scientific fact. Rather, it is a fact that the gametes are alive, even before they form the zygote. Biologically, "life" is a process, not a thing.

We shall not deny the right to life, liberty or property without due process of law.

The objects of rights and duties under the United States Constitution are persons, and persons are born.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Absolutely preposterous. You might as well say that there are no grounds for seeking restitution for being the victim of an automobile collision, since, according to you, driving on public motorways means consenting to the possibility of being in a wreck.

Most people will find this a stupid claim but in reality, what are the chances?

I have limited capabilities to use search functions (i'm cut off by profession) but i'm sure any bright young lad could find it?

I'd expect that the risk of unwanted pregnancy and a car accident are about the same.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

How is it unfortunate that a fetus that is not a human life and cannot be killed is removed because of the wish of the person carrying it?

A zygote/embryo/fetus is alive, and can be killed, the same way any cells or tissue can be killed. A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a life, however, any more than a HeLa cell culture or tumor is a life.

In any case, a zygote/embryo/fetus is certainly a potential human being, and it is my opinion that any loss of that potential is unfortunate. That does not mean that I do not recognize and defend a woman's right to become unpregnant at her own discretion.

Be careful about definitions and don't subject to guilt where there is none.

I often get the feeling that I am the only person engaging in this debate that is actually careful about his definitions.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

A zygote/embryo/fetus is alive, and can be killed, the same way any cells or tissue can be killed. A zygote/embryo/fetus is not a life, however, any more than a HeLa cell culture or tumor is a life.

In any case, a zygote/embryo/fetus is certainly a potential human being, and it is my opinion that any loss of that potential is unfortunate. That does not mean that I do not recognize and defend a woman's right to become unpregnant at her own discretion.


I often get the feeling that I am the only person engaging in this debate that is actually careful about his definitions.

I get the feeling that you don't get what the fuck "human life" actually means, legally, medically and scientifically.

Perhaps if you read what i wrote instead of arguing against what i did not write that would help?

 

[rchiu]

Because it would bring a lot of revenue (so much that taxes could be cut elsewhere, probably), and it's not about morals, it's about lives.

Not that I disagree with your stand. I agree it's about live but in addtion, it's also about personal responsibility. All these liberals go around having sex without protection and don't think twice about consequences, and when they got preganent, it's the baby that pays the utimate price. Yeap, that sounds really fair.

Yeah yeah I know abortion supporters will counter with but but what about rape...etc. Sure we can have some exceptions and let's face the fact, have many of those abortion is really about rape, medical emergencies...etc.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Not that I disagree with your stand. I agree it's about live but in addtion, it's also about personal responsibility. All these liberals go around having sex without protection and don't think twice about consequences, and when they got preganent, it's the baby that pays the utimate price. Yeap, that sounds really fair.

Yeah yeah I know abortion supporters will counter with but but what about rape...etc. Sure we can have some exceptions and let's face the fact, have many of those abortion is really about rape, medical emergencies...etc.

So basically.... You're all pissy about not getting any and want those who do to have to pay for it?

That's it? Because the rest of your blabbering makes no sense unless you don't have the faintest clue about biology.

 

[Atreus21]

Are you under the impression that abortions are supernatural?

I'm under the impression that abortions are unnatural.

Assuming arguendo that a fetus is a person, then it clearly violates a woman's right to defend her body from unwanted occupants, and under our Constitution her right to rid her body of that occupant with deadly force if necessary is inviolate.

Self-defense is predicated on the condition that the victim did not invite the condition upon themself.

 

[Atreus21]

Adults do not respirate through an umbilical cord attached to another person's metabolism.

So what? Since when does dependence dictate whether one is a human being or not?

Consent to sex is not tantamount to consent to become and remain pregnant. The violations imposed by a fetus infringe upon a woman's fundamental right to bodily integrity, and any waivers to those rights must be explicit. Simply put, your assertion here is a blatant error of fact.

A woman who invites a condition upon herself cannot complain that her wish is granted. The same goes for men.

 

[rchiu]

So basically.... You're all pissy about not getting any and want those who do to have to pay for it?

That's it? Because the rest of your blabbering makes no sense unless you don't have the faintest clue about biology.

oh I get plenty but at least I do it responsibly and make sure I don't make a baby and simply get rid of him/her for my own personal convenience. And by the way, if that matters, I was responsible for bringing 2 boys into this world and I am doing my part to not only making sure they are born but they are giving the financial backing, the time and the care to make sure they grow up to be good human being.

Utlimately you guys want your "freedom", and don't give a $hit about who suffers and who dies. All these biology crap is just an execuse, all you have not one day of biology training and all of the sudden you are the authority on biology and knows for certain when "live" is actually formed.

 

[Atreus21]

Absolutely preposterous. You might as well say that there are no grounds for seeking restitution for being the victim of an automobile collision, since, according to you, driving on public motorways means consenting to the possibility of being in a wreck.

An automobile collision is an accident. Excluding rape, having sex is not.

Or take flying on a plane for another example of your puerile reasoning. Nobody can sue airline carriers for losing their loved ones in a plane crash, since, obviously, consenting to ride in an airplane means consenting to the possibility of a crash.

Do you realize how many absurdities I can derive from your stupid, stupid claim?

What's truly stupid is your inability to admit the difference between a consequence resulting from an accident, and a consequence resulting from a conscious decision to take a risk.

If you gamble, you risk losing big.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

oh I get plenty but at least I do it responsibly and make sure I don't make a baby and simply get rid of him/her for my own personal convenience. And by the way, if that matters, I was responsible for bringing 2 boys into this world and I am doing my part to not only making sure they are born but they are giving the financial backing, the time and the care to make sure they grow up to be good human being.

Utlimately you guys want your "freedom", and don't give a $hit about who suffers and who dies. All these biology crap is just an execuse, all you have not one day of biology training and all of the sudden you are the authority on biology and knows for certain when "live" is actually formed.

You get plenty and "us guys" want our "freedom"?

You're pathetic. You can't even lie without giving yourself up in the same post.

Look, son, i've raised my children and been responsible all of my life, i've never fucked a woman without knowing exactly what i was in for.

That isn't the point you stupid twat, the point isn't that i get a choice if i get her pregnant, the point is that she has one and she gets to have one because pre-week 25 it has nothing to do with any living human.

You'd think that would be bloody clear if you had read what we went through earlier and since i don't want to explain it so your daft arse again (since i have done so before in other threads and explained it again in this fucking thread) i just ask you to read what has been put forth for you to read before you reply again.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

So what? Since when does dependence dictate whether one is a human being or not?



A woman who invites a condition upon herself cannot complain that her wish is granted. The same goes for men.

Here you go Cerpin TWAT, you brought this upon yourself by arguing sheit you cannot back up.

Fucking idiot.

 

[Atreus21]

Here you go Cerpin TWAT, you brought this upon yourself by arguing sheit you cannot back up.

Fucking idiot.

I'd never expect a defender in you, John.

 

[rchiu]

You get plenty and "us guys" want our "freedom"?

You're pathetic. You can't even lie without giving yourself up in the same post.

Look, son, i've raised my children and been responsible all of my life, i've never fucked a woman without knowing exactly what i was in for.

That isn't the point you stupid twat, the point isn't that i get a choice if i get her pregnant, the point is that she has one and she gets to have one because pre-week 25 it has nothing to do with any living human.

You'd think that would be bloody clear if you had read what we went through earlier and since i don't want to explain it so your daft arse again (since i have done so before in other threads and explained it again in this fucking thread) i just ask you to read what has been put forth for you to read before you reply again.

Oh yeah, Mr. know it all said pre-week 25 has nothing to do with any living human and that is so. And a few pages in a tech forum just settled this one of the biggest debate in the 21st centuray with a definitive conclusion. Yeap, I bow down to your all mighty knowledge and expertise.

The point is that you got a choice, your wife/girlfriend got a choice, use protection, use planning and if all fails, man up and take up responsibility. You DO NOT KNOW when a life is formed, we do not know. You are assuming killing a fetus is not killing a human being. Just admit it, you are taking that chance to absolve yourself from any responsibility and the consequence of that fun and enjoyable sex.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Oh yeah, Mr. know it all said pre-week 25 has nothing to do with any living human and that is so. And a few pages in a tech forum just settled this one of the biggest debate in the 21st centuray with a definitive conclusion. Yeap, I bow down to your all mighty knowledge and expertise.

The point is that you got a choice, your wife/girlfriend got a choice, use protection, use planning and if all fails, man up and take up responsibility. You DO NOT KNOW when a life is formed, we do not know. You are assuming killing a fetus is not killing a human being. Just admit it, you are taking that chance to absolve yourself from any responsibility and the consequence of that fun and enjoyable sex.

If you had read what i fucking wrote you would have gotten the point.

If you are born with the same activity in the cerebral cortex as a pre week 25 fetus you are considered dead.

You are clinically dead then, if you are born then you are considered dead but if you are not then somehow you are alive? Yeah, that makes a shitload of sense, right? If your child is born that way then it will be buried, but isn't that murder then? I mean, if a fucking fetus which is just as much alive can be killed wouldn't the born child be killed in the same fucking sense?

The point is, you are trying to enforce religious dogma into the situation, well, either that or you are just plain fucked in the head if you think that it's a living person if it's in the womb but not alive if it's born.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I'm under the impression that abortions are unnatural.

What laws of nature are violated?

Self-defense is predicated on the condition that the victim did not invite the condition upon themself.

Yes, and... ? As I've explained copiously, consent to sex is not consent to become and remain pregnant.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

An automobile collision is an accident. Excluding rape, having sex is not.

Having sex != Becoming pregnant.

What's truly stupid is your inability to admit the difference between a consequence resulting from an accident, and a consequence resulting from a conscious decision to take a risk.

Oh please, do explain that difference.

If you gamble, you risk losing big.

So what? Every single second of every single day you are gambling with your life. By stepping outside you are risking being struck by lightning. By getting in an elevator your are risking getting stuck and starving to death. By sitting at your desk in an office building you are risking the building collapsing down around you with you in it. You do not consent to these unintended consequences, even though they are very real possibilities. Yet, according to your reasoning, every person is always at fault for everything that happens to them. Oh? You got raped? Well you shouldn't have consented to jogging in the park, since getting raped in the park is a possible consequence of jogging there. Can't prosecute the rapist, you consented to it!

Great reasoning there, boy wonder.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

What laws of nature are violated?




Yes, and... ? As I've explained copiously, consent to sex is not consent to become and remain pregnant.

Just so you know it, self defence is not predicated on any such condition.

It can be a just defence at any point, even after an invitation.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I get the feeling that you don't get what the fuck "human life" actually means, legally, medically and scientifically.

You are cordially invited to explain anywhere that I have used any terms inconsistently.

Perhaps if you read what i wrote instead of arguing against what i did not write that would help?

I answered your question directly and explicitly. If you do not like the answers you are given, that is your problem.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

So what? Since when does dependence dictate whether one is a human being or not?

You asserted that the only difference between a fetus and an adult was degree. I presented a fact which contradicted your claim. Eat it.

A woman who invites a condition upon herself cannot complain that her wish is granted. The same goes for men.

A woman gets to decide for herself whether her pregnancy is invited or not, not you.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

You are cordially invited to explain anywhere that I have used any terms inconsistently.


I answered your question directly and explicitly. If you do not like the answers you are given, that is your problem.

I already did.

THAT is the point.

Look, i don't know what the fuck your problem is but i DID explain every fucking thing in this thread so go read through it, if you don't understand it i'll recoup very slowly just for your dumb arse.

Are we clear?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

All these liberals go around having sex without protection and don't think twice about consequences, and when they got preganent, it's the baby that pays the utimate price. Yeap, that sounds really fair.

There are no babies involved in the early termination of a pregnancy.

Yeah yeah I know abortion supporters will counter with but but what about rape...etc. Sure we can have some exceptions and let's face the fact, have many of those abortion is really about rape, medical emergencies...etc.

Abortions are about a person's right to live free from unwanted intrusions into his or her own body. Just because you invite a stranger into your house does not give him the right to steal things from your fridge, and you maintain the right to evict him from your premises at any time. The same principles would even apply to pregnancy, if the fetus was a person. It so happens that it isn't, so it matters not in any case.