In msg #281 you wrote, “What you continue to ignore is that your very own site said that those 50% that spontaneously abort do so for reasons other than genetic defects.”
Now you write (Msg #286), “YOUR OWN FUCKING LINK STATED THAT THE MAJORITY DO NOT SPONTANEOUSLY ABORT DUE TO THE GENES.”
So, stop pulling a Repub and state either one or the other because msg #281 implies ALL the 50% that spontaneously abort due so due to reasons other than genetic defects while msg #286 states “THE MAJORITY DO NOT SPONTANEOUSLY ABORT DUE TO THE GENES.” So, is it ALL or is it “THE MAJORITY” because if it’s the majority and not ALL then that means SOME of the fertilized cells do not contain the necessary components to carry on the processes of life.
You keep pretending that something dying means it never was alive. That is complete bullshit. As stated, AND IGNORED BY YOU, by your definition NOTHING could ever have the components to carry on the process of life. Because by your definition, the death of the organism means it didn't contain 'the necessary components to carry on the processes of life'. You fucking moron.
So stop this bullshit of offering misleading, ambiguous crap.
Ambiguous? You mean like saying something doesn't 'have the necessary components for life' yet FAILING to provide ANY evidence of such? You mean something like that? What 'components' are missing?
YOUR OWN SITE stated the main reasons for spontaneous abortions. But you ignore that because it doesn't fit into your little dehumanization fairy tale.
As for being able to determine where a cell originated you are correct, however, that has nothing to do with this discussion. The point I wanted to make is DNA does not determine what is and what isn't a human being. If it determines what a liver cell is, fine. It's a liver cell and a liver is not a human being. If DNA determines a cell is a kidney cell, fine. A kidney is not a human being. As I stated from the very beginning DNA can only determine human material. It can not determine what is a human being.
Funny how you didn't continue on with your little line above... because had you continued to the fertilized egg cell... what would DNA have told us? You fucking moron.
When a DNA profile is requested a sample may be taken from inside the mouth, a blood draw, a skin cell, etc. Basic common sense should tell you if a DNA profile can be produced from any of those samples and all results are equally valid and knowing saliva and blood and a skin cell are not human beings then DNA can not determine what is a human being. It can only determine what is human material.
ROFLMAO... wow... just wow. Read what you wrote above and stop and THINK about it for a minute. It is so unbelievably retarded, it makes me think you are Cypress or Bfgrn.
So, stop pulling a Repub by veering off track by trying to pull the conversation all over hell and produce something concrete. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference if DNA can determine a liver cell or a kidney cell. It doesn't make a damn bit of difference if the majority of fertilized cells abort due to reasons other than defects. The point is there are some fertilized cells so damaged they can not carry on the processes of life which means they are not organisms which means they are not human beings which means all fertilized cells are not the start of a human being's life which means the anti-abortionist argument is null and void.
Again, you are just making shit up. You continue to walk closer and closer to the truth, but upon seeing reality, you pull back into your nonsense. It DOES matter that DNA can tell us that a fertilized egg cell is human. It does matter that most spontaneous abortions are not due to genetics (which was your original claim). Saying that because it died means it didn't have these mysterious 'components' you keep mentioning organisms 'must have to carry on the processes of life'.
Your entire argument has been debunked time and again. But because you want to dehumanize the child, you will continue to refuse to see the truth.
The anti-abortionist argument that all fertilized cells are human beings is not true and that's the foundation of their argument. They have no proof and if you took the time to educate yourself and check other web sites you'll see there is no proof of such an absurd idea.
and AGAIN, you are wrong. DNA dictates that they are all human beings. Some of these human beings are going to die before implantation. Some will die during the pregnancy. Some will die as infants. Some will die as toddlers, some as teens, some as young adults, some as senior citizens. The fact that they do not all live the same period of time doesn't magically take away their humanity.
I can't help but also point out that you have offered NO proof or evidence AT ALL to back up your claims that they aren't human. You simply stomp your feet, shout 'they died, thus they can't be human' and act as if that is evidence. Fucking moron.
