Let us argue about abortion

[PredFan]

What if one doesn't agree with gun ownership, and believes it is their business to prevent gun ownership? Guns cause death too.
Long story short...Both are rights given to use by our constitution. I don't want your guns, stay away from my right to privacy.

Guns "caused" 30,708 deaths in 1998, there were at least 884,273 abortions that same year, that is over 28 deaths of a child for every single gun death.

Did you have a point?

It's not a "child" until it's born.

Semantics.

You fail.

 

[PredFan]

They're not nearly enough abortions,

Cynicism, I love it!

 

[PredFan]

Here's a 28 week old fetus...I guess at some point 4 weeks ago he *became* human:

He has been born, and is no longer a fetus, but a legal person.

because he either fell out of his mom's vagina or he was ripped out of her tummie by a baby doctor

In one it lives, and in one it dies. Bit of a difference there dontcha think?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Apparently the above wackiness from the Windbag is not supported by any credible evidence.

You, obviously, don't know what credible means.

He's a lib. "Credible" means "Agrees with him."

Since he provided exactly NO evidence, credible or not, you're as stupid as he is.

 

[thanatos144]

You, obviously, don't know what credible means.

He's a lib. "Credible" means "Agrees with him."

Since he provided exactly NO evidence, credible or not, you're as stupid as he is.

Tell me something .... What did the black community ever do to you that you wish infanticide on them?

 

[PredFan]

You, obviously, don't know what credible means.

He's a lib. "Credible" means "Agrees with him."

Since he provided exactly NO evidence, credible or not, you're as stupid as he is.

Didn't read your discussion, I'm just going by my past experience with you and other libs.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is this a baby? It's eight weeks into gestation.

Baby Steps: 4D Ultrasound - YouTube

Yep, only the least intelligent poster on USMB could put up a link labeled week 11 and call it a link of a fetus at 8 weeks.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

He has been born, and is no longer a fetus, but a legal person.

because he either fell out of his mom's vagina or he was ripped out of her tummie by a baby doctor

In one it lives, and in one it dies. Bit of a difference there dontcha think?

the mother gives the fetus life...not a god, not a government, and certainly not a Supreme Court decision by a bunch of Judeo-Christian lunatics.

Life is almost abstract when compared to living as a fully functioning entity outside the dependence of others.

Until a fetus is born and fully develops it's ability to be considered human (in the womb or out of it -trimsters?)) outside of the womb, it cannot be considered a human being entitled to legal protections without then having the state become the oppressor of a woman's body and very being

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Guns "caused" 30,708 deaths in 1998, there were at least 884,273 abortions that same year, that is over 28 deaths of a child for every single gun death.

Did you have a point?

It's not a "child" until it's born.

Semantics.

You fail.

Actually, he’s correct – semantics are very important when it comes to the law. And in the case of Colorado law, a fetus is not a legal person:

According to published reports, a brief filed by the hospital, owned by Englewood, Colo.-based Catholic Health Initiatives, said that the fetuses are not covered by state's Wrongful Death Act.

"Under Colorado law, a fetus is not a 'person' and plaintiff's claims for wrongful death must therefore be dismissed," the hospital argued.

A state district court and an appeals court agreed with the hospital. The case, originally filed in 2007, is currently on appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court.

Fetuses not people, Catholic hospital says in court

 

[PredFan]

because he either fell out of his mom's vagina or he was ripped out of her tummie by a baby doctor

In one it lives, and in one it dies. Bit of a difference there dontcha think?

the mother gives the fetus life...not a god, not a government, and certainly not a Supreme Court decision by a bunch of Judeo-Christian lunatics.

Life is almost abstract when compared to living as a fully functioning entity outside the dependence of others.

Until a fetus is born and fully develops it's ability to be considered human (in the womb or out of it -trimsters?)) outside of the womb, it cannot be considered a human being entitled to legal protections without then having the state become the oppressor of a woman's body and very being

That is your opinion which is not supported by science or in fact law.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

In one it lives, and in one it dies. Bit of a difference there dontcha think?

the mother gives the fetus life...not a god, not a government, and certainly not a Supreme Court decision by a bunch of Judeo-Christian lunatics.

Life is almost abstract when compared to living as a fully functioning entity outside the dependence of others.

Until a fetus is born and fully develops it's ability to be considered human (in the womb or out of it -trimsters?)) outside of the womb, it cannot be considered a human being entitled to legal protections without then having the state become the oppressor of a woman's body and very being

That is your opinion which is not supported by science or in fact law.

trouble with complex sentences and thoughts?

 

[PredFan]

the mother gives the fetus life...not a god, not a government, and certainly not a Supreme Court decision by a bunch of Judeo-Christian lunatics.

Life is almost abstract when compared to living as a fully functioning entity outside the dependence of others.

Until a fetus is born and fully develops it's ability to be considered human (in the womb or out of it -trimsters?)) outside of the womb, it cannot be considered a human being entitled to legal protections without then having the state become the oppressor of a woman's body and very being

That is your opinion which is not supported by science or in fact law.

trouble with complex sentences and thoughts?

Nope, you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A human goes through a process before they can be called a person, just like a seed must go through a process in order to become a tree.

What, precisely, is that process, and where in it does one become human?

I've explained the anatomic, physiologic, and other processes that contribute. You were confused and thought it was a magical process. You used the word magical. Magic. MAGIC! HAHAHAHA.

You have repeated the justification that a fetus is nothing more than a bunch of cells, The problem is that everyone, especially doctors, knows that is a lie.

Here is the little I know about the stages of human development, feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but provide links to actual medical texts, not wild posturings of your deluded mind.

Fertilization
Zygote
Blastocyst
Embryo
Fetus

Here comes the part that prove you wrong. By the blastocyst stage you can no longer describe the child as a clump of cells. Anyone looking at this stage under a microscope will clearly see that there are separate structures in existence, the embyoblast and the trophblast. One of these will develop into an adult human being, the other will be discarded.

By the way, you are correct that an acorn is not a tree, by the same token an infant is not an adult. An acorn is, however, an oak, just like that infant is a human. Perhaps you can finally deal with the real world now that I have dealt with your infantile attempt to derail the discussion.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A human goes through a process before they can be called a person, just like a seed must go through a process in order to become a tree.

What, precisely, is that process, and where in it does one become human?

She didn't say becomes a human. She said becomes a person.

What's the difference? Is it thinking? Does that make a comatose human not a person? Is it legal? Does that make humans corporations?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no point arguing about abortion. We all have the same arguments, and we will never agree. The pro life crowd will insult the pro choice crowd, and the pro choice crowd will insult right back.
This is one issue that no one will ever agree on, because no one is able to discuss the issue without getting into a slanging match.

I object to being accused of not being able to have a civil, fact based debate over abortion. I do it all the time.

I will state quite clearly that you have never presented any facts that would lead any sane person to conclude that a fetus is not human.

 

[PredFan]

One thing is certain, there is an incredible amount of stupidity on both sides of this issue.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

What have the pro abortion crowd at Slate been worrying about lately? They have decided to admit the pro life crowd is right, and declare that it doesn't matter if abortion is murder because the babies aren't important.

Here’s the complicated reality in which we live: All life is not equal. That’s a difficult thing for liberals like me to talk about, lest we wind up looking like death-panel-loving, kill-your-grandma-and-your-precious-baby storm troopers. Yet a fetus can be a human life without having the same rights as the woman in whose body it resides. She’s the boss. Her life and what is right for her circumstances and her health should automatically trump the rights of the non-autonomous entity inside of her. Always.

So what if abortion ends life? - Salon.com

Who here is stupid or lost enough to claim all life IS equal outside FantasyLand and Delusionville?

No one has the power to discredit the truth. Among the powers some humans have is the power not to let political emotions over ride their powers of reasoning. Try that and see if the voices go away.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

People who would force their personal religious beliefs into law to reduce the freedoms many Americans fought and died for are dangerous anti-Americans, at least according to the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence.

When the Bible punishes abortion at all, the Bible allows for small fines. No stronger punishment than a fine is mentioned and that is for causing an abortion in another family by accident. Period. No punishment is mentioned for inducing an abortion out of free will.

Because I am a fiscal conservative gun owner against most of the moral degeneracy of recent years some of these anti-Americans approached me to join their demented attempts to undermine individual freedoms Americans put blood on the ground defending. Approaches that didn't end well for the intruders on my family's rights. On the up side results were clear.

The bottom line is anti-abortion meddlers make up about every claim they make about science (Creationism, anyone?), the Bible, and America's founding documents. That is probably all rational people need to know about them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

My belief is that life begins at conception, giving you 20 weeks off of that just makes me look stupider than you. Put whatever numbers you feel necessary to obsess over into the question and explain what, medical or scientifically, is different about a baby just because the mother wants it? Is there some sort of chemical her body releases that changes that child into a real human?

And that's the difference between science and hick. Your belief doesn't mean crap. Your believe is centered on magical thinking because it makes you feel good. It has no biologic basis whatsoever. Eggs have human genetic non-viable material. Zygotes have human genetic non-viable material.

Strange, I don't recall using the word viable, can you show me where I used it in such a way to make anything you said anything less than an attempt to refrain the argument on your terms? I would like to quote from the OP link, which you, obviously, did not read.

Yet I know that throughout my own pregnancies, I never wavered for a moment in the belief that I was carrying a human life inside of me. I believe that’s what a fetus is: a human life. And that doesn’t make me one iota less solidly pro-choice.

The point should be obvious, even to you. I doubt it is, but it should be.

As to the question I now understand was your original that I missed: what biologically changes just because a woman wants it? Nothing. No one has made that claim except you.
But it's still the woman's right to choose what to do with her body and the non-viable tissue inside her. Not you.

We finally get to the truth, yet the same doctor that will happily abort a fetus at 35 weeks, yet fight tooth and nail to save a baby of 30 weeks if it is born premature. And, somehow, I am the one that is confused when I point out the double standard.

You have provided absolutely no evidence to back up your assertion that a baby is not human, all you can do is post pictures of acorns and ask me if they are fungi. Until you provide me with evidence, beyond your simple assertion, that the definition of human needs something more than I give it, perhaps a soul that is added after said human starts to breathe, you are not doing anything to convince anyone that passed 5th grade biology.

I don't care if people think I got through fifth grade, I am making a point about the hypocrisy of the pro abortion side of the debate. If you had actually read the pro abortion link in the OP you would have seen that all along, and not bothered to try and reframe this into a debate about semantics.

You do remember learning that tadpoles are frogs, don't you?

Except babies are humans. You can't even get basic terminology down right. You think a clump of cells is a baby. Moronic. You think the developmental process is magical. Moronic. Now you're talking about souls in a conversation of biology and physiologic changes? MORONIC. What part of 5th grade biology references souls? I must have missed that chapter. Can you clarify your magical thinking?

Now that I pointed out how absurd your thought process is you are attempting to make it seem like I am the one that believes in magic? How is it magical thinking to insist that all stages human development are part of being human? Is humanity defined by the ability to breathe air?

Do YOU remember learning about tadpoles and frogs? Babies are young humans. Tadpoles are young frogs. What's this?

Is that a frog? Is it a tree? Is it a baby? You're really not good at this game.

There you go again. Is a premature baby human?

If yes, why is a fetus at the same stage of development not human simply because it is still inside a mother's womb?

What is the magical difference between them that makes one human and the other not? How am I guilty of magical thinking in my belief that human is not something that occurs after birth?

Apologies, you use words like magical, and soul, and "pre-programmed" which is essentially the same thing as potential. Not yet programmed.

I used the word soul? Where? Are you confusing me with your smarter, yet still idiot, brother?

Are you trying to tell me that intestinal flora is not necessary to human life? That every doctor on the planet is wrong, and that you are the only person on the entire Earth that understands the WAY THINGS WORK?

Why don't I believe that?

Because you're a moron, as demonstrated countless times in this thread. Babies don't start with bacteria in their guts, and they're ok. We can kill all the bacteria in our gut with antibiotics, and we're just fine. They help. They're not required. If you disagree, support your claim. Provide evidence that shows people will die without gut bacteria. You should have stopped when you acknowledged your shortcomings.

I really do not have the education, or the time to educate myself enough, to refute that statement. I will, however, point out that a Google search brought up this paper which shows differently.

What, specifically, is the difference between what you says is a viable, yet non human, fetus, and a human. You expecting me to believe that expelling fluid form the lungs makes us human, is almost as absurd as rdean spouting his 6% statistic every time I challenge him on something. On top of that, it would mean that people using liquid ventilation are no longer human, something I do not believe.

Wow you can't follow this conversation at all, can you? No one said that expelling lung fluid makes us human. You asked what changes make a fetus a baby, and I listed that as one of the many physiologic changes. You continue to show you have no capacity to keep your vocabulary straight. Baby, fetus, human, and viable all mean the same thing in your limited hick mind. And then you go on to expound your stupidity with a claim about "liquid ventilation," which by the way is not a thing outside of sci-fi movies. Here's the bottom line: viability in and of itself is its own marker. The way we hit that marker is by developing organs until viability is reached. It's a process. One you don't seem to understand because the idea of a continuum of events blows your mind.

That process continues after birth, yet babies are human, and fetuses are not. Yet, somehow, the fact that I am completely unaware of the magical change that happens at birth to make a non human into a human, and the additional you are incapable of articulating it, proves I am the one that believes in magic.

It must be nice to be you.

So in summary:
you have no grasp of the basic vocabulary related to this issue
therefore you have no understanding of the processes
because you lack understanding, you find magical other reasons for your blind beliefs
you use words like magic and soul
you don't understand the continuum of fetal development but try to draw conclusions anyway
you liken fetuses to electronics
you think humans are parasites

Given all these moronic beliefs you've spouted in this thread alone, perhaps you should take this opportunity to bow out, realizing you have a laughable small understanding of the topic, whereby your imagination fills in the ample wholes in understanding.

What makes my belief that humanity is not based on location moronic?

Explain it to me and prove how smart you are.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

My belief is that life begins at conception, giving you 20 weeks off of that just makes me look stupider than you. Put whatever numbers you feel necessary to obsess over into the question and explain what, medical or scientifically, is different about a baby just because the mother wants it? Is there some sort of chemical her body releases that changes that child into a real human?

And that's the difference between science and hick. Your belief doesn't mean crap. Your believe is centered on magical thinking because it makes you feel good. It has no biologic basis whatsoever. Eggs have human genetic non-viable material. Zygotes have human genetic non-viable material.

As to the question I now understand was your original that I missed: what biologically changes just because a woman wants it? Nothing. No one has made that claim except you. ...

...

and this is her debating tactic.

Did she mention Galileo yet?

Smarter has never heard of him, you should provide a link.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You, obviously, don't know what credible means.

He's a lib. "Credible" means "Agrees with him."

Since he provided exactly NO evidence, credible or not, you're as stupid as he is.

The point was that there is a difference between evidence and proof.