A Touchy Question On Gendercide Or In This Case Homocide

[koshergrl]

Logical fallacy.

And a really bad one at that.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Fetal Pain, stress, ect:

Fetal development of the thalamus occurs
much earlier than the sensory cortex,26-28 but functional evidence
for thalamic sensory processing will require novel
neuroimaging techniques29 or the recording of thalamic field
potentials24 from fetuses. If cortical activity is not required for
pain perception in adults, why should it be a necessary criterion
for fetuses? Despite this caveat, robust cortical activity
occurs in preterm neonates exposed to tactile or painful stimuli,
which may be correlates of sensory content or its context
and certainly imply conscious perception.

http://anes-som.ucsd.edu/VP Articles/Topic C. Anand.pdf





The article also speaks of "fetal stress' being felt and real far prior to 28 weeks.
Such states what you do and more, they also state that they are not sure and there are many more factors. it also states that fetal stress is real and felt far earlier than 28 weeks. If you had a child prematurely and decided to assure that child lived would you allow the doctor to cut the infant open without pain medications? Perhaps the infant needed an operation at 25 weeks would you believe that this baby can’t feel what the doctors are doing?

You neglected to post the first part of that paragraph, which is integral for context:

Some argue that activation of the sensory cortex is a necessary
criterion for pain “perception” to occur in the fetus,
citing the lack of evidence for pain-specific thalamocortical
connections in fetal life.6 This line of reasoning, however,
ignores clinical data showing that ablation or stimulation of
the primary somatosensory cortex does not alter pain perception
in adults, whereas thalamic ablation or stimulation
does

And yes, without a thalamus, the baby would not be able to perceive pain.

I did not forget anything. I said that the article stated what you had stated, but with many caveats. Not to mention it speaks of fetal stress being felt far before 28 weeks.

Despite this caveat, robust cortical activity
occurs in preterm neonates exposed to tactile or painful stimuli,
which may be correlates of sensory content or its context
and certainly imply conscious perception.

 

[Neotrotsky]

It's clear Obama and many on the left don't care if people want to find out what sex their unborn baby is before deciding to abort them or not.

What if it's true that Homosexuality is really genetic?

What if they were to isolate that gene?

What if they were able to say definitively that their child is gonna be straight or Gay and people decided to abort the child accordingly?

What if people started using sexual orientation as a reason to snuff that unborn baby out of existence?

Would you feel the same way about Gendercide...or in this case Homocide.

Just asking.

The left puts party politics
over the correct moral choice

 

[The T]

It's clear Obama and many on the left don't care if people want to find out what sex their unborn baby is before deciding to abort them or not.

What if it's true that Homosexuality is really genetic?

What if they were to isolate that gene?

What if they were able to say definitively that their child is gonna be straight or Gay and people decided to abort the child accordingly?

What if people started using sexual orientation as a reason to snuff that unborn baby out of existence?

Would you feel the same way about Gendercide...or in this case Homocide.

Just asking.

The left puts party politics
over the correct moral choice

While claiming Moral 'High Ground' they never took.

 

[The T]

All this has shit to do with if a woman wants to do it for her reasoning, her reasoning has shit to do with your reasoning

So her reasoning could be to get pregnant and abort a perfectly healthy baby over and over until she gets the 'right' one?

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

People that ABUSE LAW should be arrested, no?

How about those that ABUSE the Constitution?

Arrested?

Called into question?

Constitution IS law...is it not asshat?

 

[Unkotare]

It's their choice dude...in another thread you're going to talk about how freedom is good in every way, not in this one

Are you saying you support gender-specific abortion?

He's saying he supports the choice of the mother to decide whether or not she wants to keep the baby.

Who are you, his fucking spokesman? He can answer for himself. If you want to answer for yourself go ahead, otherwise shut the fuck up.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So her reasoning could be to get pregnant and abort a perfectly healthy baby over and over until she gets the 'right' one?

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

People that ABUSE LAW should be arrested, no?

How about those that ABUSE the Constitution?

Arrested?

Called into question?

Constitution IS law...is it not asshat?

People who break the law should be arrested. Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you. Just because you have a X face doesnt mean you are one.

Word edited, not for use outside the flame zone.

 

[The T]

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

People that ABUSE LAW should be arrested, no?

How about those that ABUSE the Constitution?

Arrested?

Called into question?

Constitution IS law...is it not asshat?

People who break the law should be arrested. Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you. Just because you have a X face doesnt mean you are one.

Sight unseen...

Son? Give up. you have zero point zero.

 

[CaféAuLait]

All this has shit to do with if a woman wants to do it for her reasoning, her reasoning has shit to do with your reasoning

So her reasoning could be to get pregnant and abort a perfectly healthy baby over and over until she gets the 'right' one?

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

So if the propensity is there to abuse such a law why not assure there is a clear directive on such a decision? If it is happening why not clarify it with a law which says it is illegal to do such.

For the people who run traffic lights there are repercussions, such is illegal.

 

[The T]

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

People that ABUSE LAW should be arrested, no?

How about those that ABUSE the Constitution?

Arrested?

Called into question?

Constitution IS law...is it not asshat?

People who break the law should be arrested. Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you. Just because you have a **** face doesnt mean you are one.

Fallacy? *I* Don't hold office junior.

Try again to make sense. My patience is as infinite as YOU think it is...

Dumbass.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So her reasoning could be to get pregnant and abort a perfectly healthy baby over and over until she gets the 'right' one?

It could be...not saying its right but people will always abuse laws on the books. Just like people will run red lights if they want to but traffic lights aren't bad.

So if the propensity is there to abuse such a law why not assure there is a clear directive on such a decision? If it is happening why not clarify it with a law which says it is illegal to do such.

For the people who run traffic lights there are repercussions, such is illegal.

I agree, but make it illegal to do what? Once you have a hard time explaining it, thats the problem

 

[Unkotare]

Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you.

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

 

[The T]

Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you.

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

I wouldn't ask that idiot for ANY straight answer on anything.

 

[Unkotare]

Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you.

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

I wouldn't ask that idiot for ANY straight answer on anything.

His non-answer shames him almost as much.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you.

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

Yes but that is because I support all abortion not just one type over another.

 

[The T]

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

I wouldn't ask that idiot for ANY straight answer on anything.

His non-answer shames him almost as much.

As it should.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

I wouldn't ask that idiot for ANY straight answer on anything.

His non-answer shames him almost as much.

you guys are a hoot

 

[The T]

I wouldn't ask that idiot for ANY straight answer on anything.

His non-answer shames him almost as much.

you guys are a hoot

GLAD you glean so much entertainment at our expense.

 

[Unkotare]

Either way a womans reason is her reason and doesnt need to be authorized or approved by you.

You didn't answer my question. Do you support gender-specific abortion?

Yes but that is because I support all abortion not just one type over another.

So you think it's just fine to abort a baby because it's a girl? That seems like an acceptable moral 'choice' to you?

 

[Katzndogz]

Abortion has become so grotesque, it's time to get rid of it completely. There is no way to save it or preserve the right.