Supercandy afraid of reality puts those who speak truth on Ignore...zygote not child!

Mott the Hoople said:
I fail to see what that has to do with anything. As I said, there are times where it is morally permisable to end a human life. Actually the reasons are not so different. We kill in war, often, the protect our selves from those who would kill us. In abortion is is often performed to protect the life of the mother. Same thing dude.
Click to expand...

it is not the same thing. the rational for both are different. using your logic, rape and sex are the same, however, they are not. the rational behind the different acts are wholly different, despite both involve sex..... would you agree?
 
enough said:
this proves beyond a doubt you are retarded. it doesn't matter if it one person, the person making the claim has to back it up. since you're being stupid about it...i also challenge it. there, that is two.

go tell darla to back up her 800,000 claim. we know you won't, because you never back up any of your claims.
Click to expand...

bijou runs away again.
 
Jarod said:
The way the Right act is akin to standing by a river watching a crowd of people walking into a river only to be drowned, instead of shouting out and warning those not yet in the river not to go in, they are trying to pass legislation to make swiming illegal.
Click to expand...

odd....I see the left standing on the bank shouting that they have to right to drown their children and encouraging them to do so.....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Point out just exactly where the health exception is here?
Click to expand...

you really had trouble seeing it the first time?....."The bill allowed the exception in the case if "the partial-birth abortion was necessary to save the life of the woman upon whom it was performed"....the part I quoted wasn't so big you shouldn't have been able to find it.....
 
Superfreak said:
Um, any chance at LIFE is better than the certain death via butchering that you would give them. What could they possibly experience in life that would be as bad as being ripped apart during an abortion?
Click to expand...

'Any chance at life'. Would a life born in poverty, crack addiction, crime and dysfunction be better than nonexistence? Because let's be honest here - a life ended in abortion is not nearly as brutal as a life ended via child abuse or neglect. Asserting that there's no difference between the two proves you're incapable of rationally discussing this issue.

BTW, how do you feel about the incineration of embryos in fertility clinics?
How many unwanted children born to unstable, unfit mothers have you adopted, SF?

Each time you refuse to respond, the 'answers' become clearer and clearer. :D
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
Maybe you should. Obviously you don't understand what you are reading. The development of a nueral tube is not the same as a functioning brain, which you would understand if you had one. :p
Click to expand...

I thought you studied biology....the neural tube develops in the 1-3rd week, as my link states.....by the fifth week the brain is sending signals to the heart, causing it to beat.....that IS a functioning brain.....perhaps only slightly more function than your own, but still, functioning....
 
Mott the Hoople said:
An embryo doesn't have a fully developed heart at 5 weeks.
Click to expand...

no one said it did....but there is a heart, it is beating, and the brain is sending signals to it, which are recordable brain waves......I provided a link which states that.....do you have something which proves my link is not correct........perhaps, if you learn a bit more about biology we can continue this discussion....in the meantime, I will discuss things with people who know more about the topic......
 
Bijou said:
What kind of life do you want to force on these innocent children, j-mac?
Click to expand...

how about a wonderful life with adoptive parents who will love and support them......let the woman who really would rather kill them, give them up for adoption instead and then go on about their lives.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
how about a wonderful life with adoptive parents who will love and support them......let the woman who really would rather kill them, give them up for adoption instead and then go on about their lives.....
Click to expand...

So you'd like to force her to carry the child to term? 'Smaller government' - isn't that a righty slogan? But it doesn't apply to women's reproductive rights, does it?

Still wondering why sane people don't take the Righty retards seriously?

And hey - how many unwanted black orphans are in demand in this country? Poor unfit black mothers can't squeeze enough of them out to meet the demand....right, retard?
 
Bijou said:
So you'd like to force her to carry the child to term? 'Smaller government' - isn't that a righty slogan? But it doesn't apply to women's reproductive rights, does it?

Still wondering why sane people don't take the Righty retards seriously?
Click to expand...

do you think it's too much of a burden for her to commit nine months of her life to giving birth to the child she conceived.......nobody is interfering with her reproductive rights......only with her child killing rights......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why wouldn't a woman who lives a life of poverty, addiction, crime and disfunction put her child up for adoption instead of kill it?......
Click to expand...

Are you aware that it takes nine months to gestate a child? Some women, for myriad reasons, are unwilling to make the sacrifice pregnancy demands, unless they're keeping the child. You don't have to agree with, or approve of, the women for whom the choice to abort is the most practical; furthermore, it's none of your business.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
do you think it's too much of a burden for her to commit nine months of her life to giving birth to the child she conceived.......nobody is interfering with her reproductive rights......only with her child killing rights......
Click to expand...

I think it's too much of an obnoxious interference by the government to tell her to give up nine months of her life if she chooses not to. It is a direct violation of her reproductive rights. No one but the mother has the right to determine when she chooses to have a child.

And she has the right to abort. It's in her body.
 
Bijou said:
No, retard. Your argument isn't the same at all. You hide beyond the 'stem cell research' and stay mum on on the incineration of embryos. Apparently, to 'tards like you and the rest of your retarded party, it's okay to kill embryos that were 'meant' to be babies - but not okay to kill them via their use in stem cell research. Some whackjob nonsense about 'harvesting' fore eee-vil science.

If your fight were really about life-and-death, your focus would be on shutting down fertility clinics, your christ-y whacko outliers from your party would be gunning down fertility clinic doctors a la Dr. Tiller. Your crap is hopelessly transparent. It's about being a mouth-breathing control freak and nothing more.
Click to expand...

Their beliefs are based on the old days/ways where people had as many children as possible and the Lord took those whom He chose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top