Sorry obama I draw the line at embryonic destruction

[cool hand]

If he doesn't reverse this bullshit........................he's got one less vote in 2012.:nope

[MiamiHeat]

cry more about it you pansy

they are just cells. the possible advances in medical science are mind boggling.

[cool hand]

they are not just cells......only an idiot would say that. get educated.

[MiamiHeat]

they are just cells. they are going to eventually develop into something else, but they are just cells.

[cool hand]

they are human life cells.

[ratm1221]

I killed some human life cells this morning when I masturbated. You upset about that too?

[RandomGuy]

Ethical question:

The ONLY difference between the skill cells I just sloughed off when I scratched my nose, and those stem cells is that a specialized chemical reaction made those cells into embryos.

When we discover the chemical and genetic triggers that could turn ANY cell into a stem cell capable of producing a human life, will these embryonic stem cells still carry significance?

Further:

If we then use those triggers to make new stem cells from any cell in your body, and we use those new embroyonic cells to say, grow a new liver, have we killed a potential human being THEN?

[clambake]

pretty soon, blowing your nose will be taking a life.

[temujin]

Ethical question:

The ONLY difference between the skill cells I just sloughed off when I scratched my nose, and those stem cells is that a specialized chemical reaction made those cells into embryos.

When we discover the chemical and genetic triggers that could turn ANY cell into a stem cell capable of producing a human life, will these embryonic stem cells still carry significance?

Further:

If we then use those triggers to make new stem cells from any cell in your body, and we use those new embroyonic cells to say, grow a new liver, have we killed a potential human being THEN?

In mice, the technology already exists.
You can take those "any" cells, reprogram them into iPS ($1000 worth of reagents needed), inject them into the blastocyst of a female and get a mice.

iPS can be obtained from "any" cells in humans too.

[George Gervin's Afro]

they are human life cells.

So how do you feel when the embryos are discarded?

[LockBeard]

Hopefully the medical cures that come from this research won't cost so much that the government will deem them too costly for the average lowly american taxpayer.

I'd hate for only politicians/elite to have access to these life-saving medical applications in the future.


:lmao

[balli]

Meh, I'd just assume anti-abortion/anti-evolution freaks no longer get the benefits of any sort of medicinal treatment based on research that was/is even remotely genetic. That pretty much leaves the elite.

[Lebowski Brickowski]

His position on this issue was well publicized before the election. Why did you vote for him in '08?

[implacable44]

cry more about it you pansy

they are just cells. the possible advances in medical science are mind boggling.

Just cells ? You forgot about that whole .... created from embryos that are later discarded -- in other words creating life to kill it in the "Hopes" that you will be able to manipulate a cell to create a liver ?

You also don't understand the ethics -- Cloning will be soon to follow.....

[DarrinS]

Hey, at least he is laser-focused on this economic crisis.

Well, that and stem cell research and carbon taxes and health care reform and education. Yep, besides that laundry list, he's got all his energy focused on the economy.

[Ignignokt]

skin cells, nose hair cells, etc do not replicate to become human life, nor are they human life to begin with like embryonic cells.

[DarrinS]

Meh, I'd just assume anti-abortion/anti-evolution freaks no longer get the benefits of any sort of medicinal treatment based on research that was/is even remotely genetic. That pretty much leaves the elite.


You do know that you can conduct stem cell research without embryos, right?

[ploto]

You are OK with his views on abortion but not stem cell research?

[florige]

So how do you feel when the embryos are discarded?



Anybody care to answer this one?

[Bartleby]

Hey, at least he is laser-focused on this economic crisis.

Well, that and stem cell research and carbon taxes and health care reform and education. Yep, besides that laundry list, he's got all his energy focused on the economy.

Yeah, America is so far out in front when it comes to bio-research that it would be pointless to throw anything more into stem cells. Besides, there's no economic potential in it anyway.

[Bartleby]

Just cells ? You forgot about that whole .... created from embryos that are later discarded -- in other words creating life to kill it in the "Hopes" that you will be able to manipulate a cell to create a liver ?

You also don't understand the ethics -- Cloning will be soon to follow.....

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii297/babbalanja/slippery_slope.jpg

[nkdlunch]

I would preffer not to...

just rewatched Bartleby last week :D

[Bartleby]

I would preffer not to...

just rewatched Bartleby last week :D

Wow, I didn't think anybody else has actually seen the movie. It's so bad it's almost good (but not quite).

[nkdlunch]

dude that movie is definitely in my top 100 movies. I have it and already seen it 3 times

hilarious

[temujin]

skin cells, nose hair cells, etc do not replicate to become human life, nor are they human life to begin with like embryonic cells.

This is actually wrong.

You can reprogram them into ES-like cells and with them generate a mouse that is genetically identical to the original cells.

This has been done.

[temujin]

You do know that you can conduct stem cell research without embryos, right?

Aren't you scared of this?

[temujin]

Hey, at least he is laser-focused on this economic crisis.

Well, that and stem cell research and carbon taxes and health care reform and education. Yep, besides that laundry list, he's got all his energy focused on the economy.

That's right: what else is there in a modern country?

[DarrinS]

That's right: what else is there in a modern country?


Well, I could choose to do landscaping while my house is on fire, but I have priorities.

[Bartleby]

Well, I could choose to do landscaping while my house is on fire, but I have priorities.

Yeah, like standing in the middle of the street and bitching about how long the fire department is taking to get there.

[DarrinS]

Yeah, like standing in the middle of the street and bitching about how long the fire department is taking to get there.


If they showed up and didn't focus on the task at hand, yes, I'd bitch about it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?

Why are you cowards avoiding this simple question?

[Bartleby]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?

Why are you cowards avoiding this simple question?

I suspect some of them are too busy hiding behind other reasons for opposing it.

[Death In June]

It's my understanding that they're using aborted embryos. It's also possible to acquire stem cells from adult bone marrow, and in vitro fertilization (prior to implantation). You also have to realize they're either getting stem cells from the morula stage (16 cell) or the embryoblast of the inner cell mass. These are just balls of cells. The very definition of stem cells imply that no major organs, no life has been formed. The three germ layers haven't developed, the bilamanar disc hasn't formed. They're just totiepoetic (spelling?) cells.

[Jacob1983]

If killing unborn babies, creatures, organisms, or whatever you want to call them saves people's lives and/or improves people's way of life then bring it on!

[leo_d]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?

Why are you cowards avoiding this simple question?

a pro-abortionist calling other people cowards. talking about irony.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

a pro-abortionist calling other people cowards. talking about irony.

people who insist on labeling pro-choice supporters as pro-abortionists are complete and utter fucking morons. I have yet to meet someone who is pro-abortion

[implacable44]

those who insist on labeling people who label people are hypocrites...

[smeagol]

people who insist on labeling pro-choice supporters as pro-abortionists are complete and utter fucking morons. I have yet to meet someone who is pro-abortion

i've heard people on this board say abortions are ok right until one day before birth.

If that's not being pro-abortion, I'm not sure what is . . .

[balli]

i've heard people on this board say abortions are ok right until one day before birth.
Who? Not a regular, I can guarantee it.

And I'm not pro-abortion, but I'd be all for taking away peoples right to pro-create.

[George Gervin's Afro]

a pro-abortionist calling other people cowards. talking about irony.

nice try. care to answer the question? Or are you going to duck out like a conservative pu$$y? Please find anything remotely that proves me as pro abortion. Stay out of the big people forum.

[balli]

a pro-abortionist calling other people cowards. talking about irony.

Dude fuck you.

I'm tempted to go dig up that couple month old Cucking post on abortion. She absolutely skullfucked the anti-abortion movement.

[smeagol]

Who? Not a regular, I can guarantee it.

And I'm not pro-abortion, but I'd be all for taking away peoples right to pro-create.

So are you pro banning abortions at some random week of the pregnancy?

[George Gervin's Afro]

So are you pro banning abortions at some random week of the pregnancy?

stupid question

[balli]

Random? No. At some point? Yes. But I agree. Stupid question.

[smeagol]

So you guys are in favor of allowing 8 month old pregnancies to be aborted?

[balli]

So you guys are in favor of allowing 8 month old pregnancies to be aborted?

WTF kind of thing is that to say? It's almost comical, that's the conclusion you decided to reach based on how we answered your uber-lame and pointless question.

[smeagol]

WTF kind of thing is that to say? It's almost comical, that's the conclusion you decided to reach based on how we answered your uber-lame and pointless question.

Well, uber-idiot, I asked a question and you refused to answer it.

Care to explain what's lame about putting a limit to abortions based on duration of the pregnancy?

[balli]

Well, uber-idiot, I asked a question and you refused to answer it.
You asked a loaded fucking question to begin with by inserting the word random. I answered your loaded question. And then a non-loaded version. Point blank I said yes or no to each. WTF else do you want? I don't really know, but to come back with:

"uh, so... you support killing babies at 8 months then," is fucking garbage. And you're smart enough that I'd guess you know it.

[Bartleby]

Well, uber-idiot, I asked a question and you refused to answer it.

Care to explain what's lame about putting a limit to abortions based on duration of the pregnancy?

Nobody answered GGA's question, which is more on topic.

[George Gervin's Afro]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?

Why are you cowards avoiding this simple question?


Why won't any of you answer this question?

[leo_d]

Why won't any of you answer this question?

i didn`t answer because is a pretty obvious answer. of course im against it.

[smeagol]

You asked a loaded fucking question to begin with by inserting the word random. I answered your loaded question. And then a non-loaded version. Point blank I said yes or no to each. WTF else do you want? I don't really know, but to come back with:

"uh, so... you support killing babies at 8 months then," is fucking garbage. And you're smart enough that I'd guess you know it.

Your answer was pretty vague.

So tell me, at what point in the pregnancy should abortions be banned and why?

[Bartleby]

Why won't any of you answer this question?

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii297/babbalanja/its-a-trap.jpg

[LnGrrrR]

Your answer was pretty vague.

So tell me, at what point in the pregnancy should abortions be banned and why?

Do you agree with murder?

[balli]

Your answer was pretty vague.

So tell me, at what point in the pregnancy should abortions be banned and why?
How the hell is yes or no vague. That's about as clear an answer as you can get. And it was a stupid, loaded question to begin with.

20 weeks. When the fetus and its nervous system are developed enough to transmit pain.

[George Gervin's Afro]

How the hell is yes or no vague. That's about as clear an answer as you can get. And it was a stupid, loaded question to begin with.

20 weeks. When the fetus and its nervous system are developed enough to transmit pain.

I think this is fair.

[smeagol]

How the hell is yes or no vague. That's about as clear an answer as you can get. And it was a stupid, loaded question to begin with.

It was vague because it had no dates.


20 weeks. When the fetus and its nervous system are developed enough to transmit pain

So you think there is a big difference between 19 weeks and 20 weeks?

You also think all babies develop at the same time (ie no fetuses feel pain at 19 weeks)?

[George Gervin's Afro]

It was vague because it had no dates.



So you think there is a big difference between 19 weeks and 20 weeks?

You also think all babies develop at the same time (ie no fetuses feel pain at 19 weeks)?

You asked for as specific time frame and he gave it to you. If you don't like the answer tough shit.

[balli]

It was vague because it had no dates.
Your question specifically went out of the way to ask me if I supported abortion at quote-unquote, some random date. You want a good answer, ask a question that deserves it.




So you think there is a big difference between 19 weeks and 20 weeks?

You also think all babies develop at the same time (ie no fetuses feel pain at 19 weeks)?
I have no idea, I'm not a doctor, but you have to draw a line somewhere and if the general medical consensus is that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, then that's what I'm going to go on. If there's a fetus out there somewhere who develops faster, ts for that kid, it will all be over soon.

[RandomGuy]

Dude fuck you.

I'm tempted to go dig up that couple month old Cucking post on abortion. She absolutely skullfucked the anti-abortion movement.

???

Could you? I would be interested in reading that bit of perspective.

[ratm1221]

If there's a fetus out there somewhere who develops faster, ts for that kid, it will all be over soon.

:lmao

I try to stay out of the abortion debate, but that shit is funny right there...

[RandomGuy]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?



An intresting question. If one is really against abortion for whatever reason, then you have to figure out an ethical way of bringing these potential people to term.

Volunteers would be the most obvious answer, but how do you screen such volunteer women?

In the event of a miscarriage, do you charge them with murder? negligence?

Sticky wicket.

[smeagol]

I have no idea, I'm not a doctor, but you have to draw a line somewhere and if the general medical consensus is that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, then that's what I'm going to go on. If there's a fetus out there somewhere who develops faster, ts for that kid, it will all be over soon.

That is the problem with abortion. It is impossible to draw a line. It is clear that you don't care too much for the lives of the un-born.

[RandomGuy]

An intresting question. If one is really against abortion for whatever reason, then you have to figure out an ethical way of bringing these potential people to term.

Volunteers would be the most obvious answer, but how do you screen such volunteer women?

In the event of a miscarriage, do you charge them with murder? negligence?

Sticky wicket.

If one doesn't charge the women who miscarry, then you do so under the principle of "it was God's will" or no one was at fault.

How is this then distinguished from simply disposing of the embroyos anyways?

If it was God's ultimate decision that the miscarried embryos were to die, then would not that logic hold for embryos disposed of?

[balli]

That is the problem with abortion. It is impossible to draw a line. It is clear that you don't care too much for the lives of the un-born.
In my most radical view, compared to the lives of the already born? No, not really. There's too damn many people in this world.

Look, I'm not some activist. At the end of the day, abortion's not one of my issues. But I'm pro-choice. Just like I'm pro-choice on guns, just like I'm pro-choice on drugs; and on any other issue you want to throw at me besides rape, murder and paying your taxes, I'm probably gonna be pro-choice. So don't act like I'm waging some campaign of murder against the unborn, when all I'm doing is sympathizing with the rights of the living.

This Pro-Abortion shit has got to go, it's pro-choice and it's what Cucking was talking about in her post.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3057680&postcount=171

[ChumpDumper]

That is the problem with abortion. It is impossible to draw a line. It is clear that you don't care too much for the lives of the un-born.Eh, most people don't care about the lives of the born either -- they're just dropping the pretense earlier.

[sook]

guess what so are my sperm. Whats the difference? Jeez folks shutup

[sook]

Btw, we don't even need embryonic stem cells anymore.

It is quite recent but we have been able to take ordinary cells and take them back to stem cells

[LnGrrrR]

That is the problem with abortion. It is impossible to draw a line. It is clear that you don't care too much for the lives of the un-born.

I'm still waiting for you to answer the question on whether you support murder or not.

[smeagol]

I'm still waiting for you to answer the question on whether you support murder or not.

Only in some cases.

[leo_d]

people who insist on labeling pro-choice supporters as pro-abortionists are complete and utter fucking morons. I have yet to meet someone who is pro-abortion

So, this is all it takes for you rationalize abortion: semantics.

I guess if you had lived in the early 19 century you would have say "i would never own a slave, but i think people has the right to own them"

[implacable44]

Dude fuck you.

I'm tempted to go dig up that couple month old Cucking post on abortion. She absolutely skullfucked the anti-abortion movement.

Of course she did because you agreed with everything she said because it fits your idiotology. I have never seen or heard anyone dominate the abortion discussion and it is a direct reflection of your intellectual honesty to say such.

[LnGrrrR]

Only in some cases.

Which cases, specifically?

[George Gervin's Afro]

That is the problem with abortion. It is impossible to draw a line. It is clear that you don't care too much for the lives of the un-born.

I don't care about a fertilized egg. Your right. I also don't care for people having children they can't take care of. I don't care for people who torture and murder thier children. I don't care for people who proclaim to be pro life but support the death penalty. I don't care for people who are pro life yet don't want birth control being talked about. I don't care for people who want to force people to have babies and then oppose any type of social programs or funding to take care of those children. Your right I don't care.

[DarrinS]

I don't care about a fertilized egg. Your right. I also don't care for people having children they can't take care of. I don't care for people who torture and murder thier children. I don't care for people who proclaim to be pro life but support the death penalty. I don't care for people who are pro life yet don't want birth control being talked about. I don't care for people who want to force people to have babies and then oppose any type of social programs or funding to take care of those children. Your right I don't care.


Who's forcing people to have babies?

[DarkReign]

Eh, most people don't care about the lives of the born either -- they're just dropping the pretense earlier.

:lmao Well put.

[DarkReign]

Who's forcing people to have babies?

You know what he was getting at, cmon....

Hypothetical: If abortion were illegal, a woman who wants to have an abortion could not. Thus, she is being forced to carry the child to birth.

Im sure your argument around this will be "Who forced her to have unprotected sex?"

The answer is, no one forced her to have unprotected sex. But the government is forcing her to have the baby (if abortion was illegal).

[leo_d]

I don't care about a fertilized egg.

an egg that is the first glance of a human


Your right. I also don't care for people having children they can't take care of.

So if they can take care of them we better kill them.


I don't care for people who torture and murder thier children.

I thought you were pro-choice


I don't care for people who proclaim to be pro life but support the death penalty.

I don`t support the death penalty, but you bringing the DP to the conversation shows that you can`t see the diference between an innocent baby and a murderer.


I don't care for people who are pro life yet don't want birth control being talked about.

Agree, as long as the birth control method doesn`t include abortion


I don't care for people who want to force people to have babies and then oppose any type of social programs or funding to take care of those children. Your right I don't care.

agree, and I think the children have some rights that are independent from the economic reality of the parents, and I also think the government should take care of protecting those rights.

[LockBeard]

pretty soon, blowing your nose will be taking a life.

Why not, it's already considered a racist act.

[LockBeard]

Meh, I'd just assume anti-abortion/anti-evolution freaks no longer get the benefits of any sort of medicinal treatment based on research that was/is even remotely genetic. That pretty much leaves the elite.

haha man, I'd agree to that.

See, this is the compromise America needs.

[Wild Cobra]

For those who oppose this type of research because life is destroyed will you answer the following question.

How do you feel about the embryonic cells being discarded if not used?

Why are you cowards avoiding this simple question?

I am not in favor of extra embryonic cells being created in the first place. For pregnancy purposes, only fertilize the number required for the implanting process. Any more becomes a disregard for life.

[Wild Cobra]

You know what he was getting at, cmon....

Hypothetical: If abortion were illegal, a woman who wants to have an abortion could not. Thus, she is being forced to carry the child to birth.

Im sure your argument around this will be "Who forced her to have unprotected sex?"

The answer is, no one forced her to have unprotected sex. But the government is forcing her to have the baby (if abortion was illegal).
It comes back to responsibility.

DR, You are a libertarian, right? Isn't one of the foundations of libertarianism the right to make ones own decisions, but being responsible for the outcome? Responsibility is what separates libertarians from liberals. Liberals promote irresponsibility.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

People are so smart about certain things, they become complete dumbasses. The possibilities are endless for stem cells. This whole bull shit ethical conversation is just that--bull shit.

If we stopped trying to define shades of gray (because that always works in every context, right?) and just stick to a criteria we've used for 99.9999% of our existence, this becomes a non issue.

A human is born when they are born. And they are born when they come out. Simple as that. If you draw the line there, and take two steps back, you realize how fucking retarded arguing about abortion and embryos and fetuses (feteese?) are.

[carina_gino20]

A human is born when they are born. And they are born when they come out. Simple as that. If you draw the line there, and take two steps back, you realize how fucking retarded arguing about abortion and embryos and fetuses (feteese?) are.

Some babies are born at six months and survive. Some babies are aborted at seven or eight months. So one is human and one is not?

[Winehole23]

Some babies are born at six months and survive. Some babies are aborted at seven or eight months. So one is human and one is not?Ancient Germanic custom was even more hard-assed than CBF -- it held that the baby isn't a person until someone has fed it.

[ducks]

Ancient Germanic custom was even more hard-assed than CBF -- it held that the baby isn't a person until someone has fed it.

the mom feeds it the first day it is inside her

[Winehole23]

the mom feeds it the first day it is inside herOur Gothic forebears weren't as subtle and knowing as you, ducks.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Some babies are born at six months and survive. Some babies are aborted at seven or eight months. So one is human and one is not?

It sounds fishy the way you phrase it because you call both scenarios "babies"

If you say a baby is born at six months and survives, and a fetus is aborted at seven or eight months, it makes more sense from a superficial perspective.

But my point remains the same and the answer to your question is, as far as the legal definition of human, yes.

[DMX7]

:wakeup

Obama is right, move along people. move along.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm still waiting for Smeagol to tell me what cases of murder he's against.

[DarkReign]

It comes back to responsibility.

DR, You are a libertarian, right? Isn't one of the foundations of libertarianism the right to make ones own decisions, but being responsible for the outcome? Responsibility is what separates libertarians from liberals. Liberals promote irresponsibility.

Abortion is not a partisan issue for me. Whatever my political leanings, I am for personal liberty, and in my opinion only, the government has no business telling people what they can and cannot do with their body, even in pregnancy.

I know, thats touchy and ignorant for a lot of people that argue a fetus is life and so on. But thats my opinion and Im entitled to it.

If you legislate against abortion, thereby forcing people to have unwanted kids, do you think thats somehow going to make young people reconsider having unprotected sex?

I dont. So now instead of abortions, youre replacing that number with broken, ignorant, unwanted drains of society.

Moreover, on a more philosophical note, I dont value human life that much. Especially ignorant human life.

Finally, abortion doesnt mean shit to me. I was just clarifying GGAs statement, whether I agreed or not. I think this entire argument is pointless, if its legal, great. If not, oh well. It was never an option in my life at any point and it never will be.

I would love to walk through life expecting everyone to conform to my standards of living and decision-making, but thats a delusional pipe dream. Some people are much, much smarter than me, some people are much, much dumber. I'd love if everyone had the same personal responsibility I do, but they dont, and there is nothing a government can do to change that.

All a ban on abortion would do is fill the state foster system's around the country, and I am sure there a few unadmitted people on this forum who have had that experience.

[Fernando TD21]

I would only support abortion in a few cases. Like when the pregnancy is the result of rape or if the pregnancy can be a big threat to the woman's life. I would also support it if a diagnostic shows that the fetus have a serious malformation, that would sooner or later, cause the death of the baby.

If a couple just decided to have unprotected sex and that resulted in the woman's pregnancy, then they should keep the baby. Choices come with consequences, when they chose to have unprotected sex, they should take responsability for their actions. If they really aren't prepared to have the kid, then give him for adoption.

[smeagol]

Which cases, specifically?

Guys like Hitler and Pol Pot come to mind.

[smeagol]

People are so smart about certain things, they become complete dumbasses. The possibilities are endless for stem cells. This whole bull shit ethical conversation is just that--bull shit.

If we stopped trying to define shades of gray (because that always works in every context, right?) and just stick to a criteria we've used for 99.9999% of our existence, this becomes a non issue.

A human is born when they are born. And they are born when they come out. Simple as that. If you draw the line there, and take two steps back, you realize how fucking retarded arguing about abortion and embryos and fetuses (feteese?) are.

So you are ok with abortion right up until minutes before the baby is born?

[smeagol]

I'm still waiting for Smeagol to tell me what cases of murder he's against.

Againt?

I thought you wanted me to tell you the cases of murder I'm in favor of.

I'd say I'm against almost all cases of murder. Aren't you?

[George Gervin's Afro]

So you are ok with abortion right up until minutes before the baby is born?

there that stupid question again..

[InK]

So you are ok with abortion right up until minutes before the baby is born?

Whats with you and this imbecile quest to find a timeframe suitable for aborting fetuses? All your asking here in implicit fashion is, when exactly (human) life comes to be, arent you? So why dont u just say it outloud and be done with it? The best answer to that question probably is- somewhere between conception and birth- but since nobody knows exactly at which specific point, the line is set arbitrarily by consensus and scientific facts. If you can give good reason as to when life is actually created, a reason so good that the scientific community world wide will accept it, then you go right ahead and argue those reasons. If you dont manage to do so convincingly then i will take the right of choice of an undoubtebly living person, over the right of an entity of whos status im not certain off.

[InK]

I thought you wanted me to tell you the cases of murder I'm in favor of.

I'd say I'm against almost all cases of murder. Aren't you?

Almost....Whats the point of arguing with people who can't follow their premises to its logical conclusions? If all life is sacred( my presumtion), then how does one justify taking life in some exceptional cases? The only possible answer would be that the right of choice, the right of individual to take control over his/her own life ( and even end it if they so please) outweights the sacred nature of life. But that is not called murder, but suicide.

You are probably advocating the death penatly arent you? If somone does not respect the values i hold dear, i will out of pure outrage disrespect them as well. That will show how serious i am with my beleives? Gimme a break.

[smeagol]

there that stupid question again..

cbf said this:


A human is born when they are born. And they are born when they come out. Simple as that. If you draw the line there, and take two steps back, you realize how fucking retarded arguing about abortion and embryos and fetuses (feteese?) are.

therefore, my question is valid.

Oh, by the way, have you ever seen pictures of a 20 week old baby? That is the date you think it is ok to kill an unborn baby . . . that is a date where unborn babies look pretty human to me.

[smeagol]

Whats with you and this imbecile quest to find a timeframe suitable for aborting fetuses?


I'm trying to understand directly from the people who do not oppose abortions, when do they think it is ok abort.

It is a legitimate question. GGA and balijuana believe 20 weeks is the right mark.



All your asking here in implicit fashion is, when exactly (human) life comes to be, arent you? So why dont u just say it outloud and be done with it? The best answer to that question probably is- somewhere between conception and birth- but since nobody knows exactly at which specific point, the line is set arbitrarily by consensus and scientific facts.


I have never read any scientific paper that said life begins at week 20 of a pregnancy.

Week 8 is as far as I've read.


If you can give good reason as to when life is actually created, a reason so good that the scientific community world wide will accept it, then you go right ahead and argue those reasons. If you dont manage to do so convincingly then i will take the right of choice of an undoubtebly living person, over the right of an entity of whos status im not certain off.


I can't give good reason, that is why I would argue at conception. Because we simply don't know.

[DarkReign]

Ancient Germanic custom was even more hard-assed than CBF -- it held that the baby isn't a person until someone has fed it.


the mom feeds it the first day it is inside her


Our Gothic forebears weren't as subtle and knowing as you, ducks.

:lmao

Gold.

[smeagol]

Almost....Whats the point of arguing with people who can't follow their premises to its logical conclusions? If all life is sacred( my presumtion), then how does one justify taking life in some exceptional cases? The only possible answer would be that the right of choice, the right of individual to take control over his/her own life ( and even end it if they so please) outweights the sacred nature of life. But that is not called murder, but suicide.

You are probably advocating the death penatly arent you? If somone does not respect the values i hold dear, i will out of pure outrage disrespect them as well. That will show how serious i am with my beleives? Gimme a break.

I've been discussing abortion, not the death penalty.

I answered a posters quesion regarding when I would advocate for killing someone (off topic). Given that he insisted, I gave him two examples.

And with only this info, you claim to know what my beliefs are regarding the death penalty? It is you who has to give me a break . . .

[InK]

I've been discussing abortion, not the death penalty.

I answered a posters quesion regarding when I would advocate for killing someone (off topic). Given that he insisted, I gave him two examples.

And with only this info, you claim to know what my beliefs are regarding the death penalty? It is you who has to give me a break . . .

I apologize, i was assuming things.

[InK]

I can't give good reason, that is why I would argue at conception. Because we simply don't know.

Yes, that would be logical and completely understandable ( and i would agree wholeheartedly) if the thing incubating the unborn babies was not a human beeing. A human beeing who has some god given rights ( or however u guys put it, correct?) and can enforce them without clearly breaking the rights of another individual, who has those same rights as well? And since status of fetuses is questionable, while status of the mother carrying them is not-- i do not see a good reason why to oppose the right of the individual to have the right of choice.

[Wild Cobra]

If a couple just decided to have unprotected sex and that resulted in the woman's pregnancy, then they should keep the baby. Choices come with consequences, when they chose to have unprotected sex, they should take responsability for their actions. If they really aren't prepared to have the kid, then give him for adoption.
Yes, responsibility is key. Ignorance too. It isn't only unprotected sex that leads to unwanted pregnancies. I would argue that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.

BIRTH CONTROL HAS A FAILURE RATE!

[ChumpDumper]

I would argue that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.You should probably say that you would make up an unfounded argument that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yes, responsibility is key. Ignorance too. It isn't only unprotected sex that leads to unwanted pregnancies. I would argue that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.

BIRTH CONTROL HAS A FAILURE RATE!

your kidding right?

[Yonivore]

Well, cool hand, it seems you can love The Won, again...

Obama lifted vile Bush stem cell executive order, immediately replaces it with another ban (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44943) two days later.

It's a hopey changey kind of thing.

Of course, us cynics, will wonder if this was done as a "pump and dump" favor for some folks invested in stem cell research outfits who wanted to get out? I guess it could be a case of signing-before-reading disease...something I'm sure Stem Cell Research promised to cure.

Sucker the rubes back in, let the fat cats flee. It'd be interesting to see if any big money fled Stem Cell Research companies in the past couple of days.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Yes, responsibility is key. Ignorance too. It isn't only unprotected sex that leads to unwanted pregnancies. I would argue that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.

BIRTH CONTROL HAS A FAILURE RATE!

where the fuck do you get your numbers from to make these ridiculous claims?? I'm seriously asking you, this isn't sarcasm...

[Yonivore]

High school biology apparently isn't required for politicians, lawyers, or Rhodes Scholars.

ZZ-W6dvIqmU

So, it appears he's opposed to Embryonic Stem Cell research...or, at least he would be, if he knew when fertilization took place. Hey, he signed the original bill placing the ban so, maybe, Slick Willie is just playing both ends against the middle here.

[ChumpDumper]

Well, cool hand, it seems you can love The Won, again...

Obama lifted vile Bush stem cell executive order, immediately replaces it with another ban (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=44943) two days later.

It's a hopey changey kind of thing.

Of course, us cynics, will wonder if this was done as a "pump and dump" favor for some folks invested in stem cell research outfits who wanted to get out? I guess it could be a case of signing-before-reading disease...something I'm sure Stem Cell Research promised to cure.

Sucker the rubes back in, let the fat cats flee. It'd be interesting to see if any big money fled Stem Cell Research companies in the past couple of days.Of course, you didn't read your own article:


The amendment says, in part: "None of the funds made available in this Act may be used for—(1) the creation of a human embryo or embryos for research purposes; or (2) research in which a human embryo or embryos are destroyed, discarded, or knowingly subjected to risk of injury or death."Bolding added.

So the bill that was written mostly before Obama took office forbids itself giving money to something that was already banned when it was added.

You're an idiot.

[ChumpDumper]

And a plagiarist.
I wonder if this was done as a "pump and dump" favor for some folks invested in stem cell research outfits who wanted to get out? Sucker the rubes back in, let the fat cats flee.

H/T SDA

Bonus video below the fold - Bill Clinton failing high school biology. High school biology apparently isn't required for politicians, lawyers, or Rhodes Scholars.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/284303.php

The lesson here: when trying to make yourself look smarter than you are, don't pretend to be another idiot.

[Bartleby]

And a plagiarist.

Ouch!

[Wild Cobra]

You should probably say that you would make up an unfounded argument that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.
Why is it unfounded? How many people not using birth control are trying not to get pregnant?

Key phrase:

UNWANTED PREGNANCY!

[Fernando TD21]

Yes, responsibility is key. Ignorance too. It isn't only unprotected sex that leads to unwanted pregnancies.
Ok, protected sex is not 100% effective in avoiding pregnancy. But there is more than one type of birth control method. The point is, if you don't want to get pregnant, there are many things that you can and should do to avoid it.
But you are right about ignorance, many people doesn't even know or care about birth control methods until it's too late.


I would argue that protected sex leads to more unwanted pregnancies than protected sex does.

BIRTH CONTROL HAS A FAILURE RATE!
:huh

[ChumpDumper]

I think the key phrase is the one you compared to itself.

Please correct yourself and we'll continue. I made the mistake of copying and pasting it, compounding the misunderstanding.

[Blake]

And a plagiarist.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/284303.php

The lesson here: when trying to make yourself look smarter than you are, don't pretend to be another idiot.

Sorry CD I draw the line at yonivoric destruction