Liberals On Abortion

[ding]

I guess you missed the part where they have never existed before or will never exist again. It’s a one shot deal.

Thousands of one shot deals starve to death in the third world every day, you aren't in any big rush to save them.

View attachment 330810

How do you know what I do?

But are you seriously trying to make a two wrongs makes a right argument?

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Fostering Absolution Contrasting Deontological Versus Consequentialism "

* Asceticism At Its Worst *

They have exactly the attributes they are supposed to have for that stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death. At any point along that continuum they are fully human despite your rationalizations to see them as less than human.

Choosing to preface a necessity for a clause that is an idealistic extreme does not also make the clause a realistic means .

See Golden mean (philosophy) - Wikipedia about aesthetic means between the extremes .

 

[Dana7360]

" Constitutionally Consistent And Valid Empathy Ethics "

* Ignorant Of Your Own Dogma *

Now that we've established your desire to kill the innocent, a question:

When the relgious reich reconciles a conjecture for guilt from carnality and innocence , let us know .

* Syncretism And Extraterrestrials *

Sin (mythology) - Wikipedia

Try to stick to words you understand.....even if that might make you mute.

The term 'reich' has specific implications, and there is no such entity in America.

Now....why do you favor human sacrifice?

Why do you favor sacrificing a woman’s freedom to decide her procreation preferences? Are you a Nazi lover?
.

I know you've proven to be a moron, but see if this gets through your thick skull: a woman has no more justification for slaughtering the child she helped create......and slaughtering same for nothing more than here temporary convenience.....than an individual has of shooting the neighbor who blocked his driveway.

The baby is not a part of her body. She is temporarily feeding it the same as she would be if breastfeeding a six month old.

If you get emotional & resort to stupid name-calling, we know you lost the argument, especially when you equate a neighbor to a woman’s genetic material inside her body.
Or, equating breast-feeding a born independently-breathing child to supplying nourishment to developing bio cells through the placenta.
Can you get any more idiotic? LOL!
.

But you are stupid.

Watch this: is the unborn a part of her body, or a separate, distinct and unique human being?

Chic, you are science stupid.

Watch this: the unborn is a part of her body AND a separate, distinct and unique “human being” (by definition) ... when she is pregnant.

So what?
.

If it's a separate distinct unique human being then remove it from the woman and allow it to be that separate, distinct and unique human being. Allow it to do all the things every separate, distinct and unique human being does.

A separate and distinct human being lives outside another person's body, if it's attached to another person's body, it's not separate from that second body.

These people have to lie and use the most extreme words in their quest to take privacy rights from women.

I will also add, the people who have blood on their hands and love to kill are the conservatives who have no problem with killing tens of thousands of separate, distinct and unique human beings with the virus. One conservative started a thread titled the people most affected by the virus are the least productive. Using that as an excuse to justify killing those separate, distinct, and unique human beings.

The people who spent lifetimes contributing to our nation now have the "pro life" people demanding the right to kill them with the virus simply because of money. One of the most weak and vulnerable segments of our nation and conservatives want to kill them. We wouldn't have a United States of America without the contributions of the people these "pro life" conservatives want to kill.

They demand people put their lives in jeopardy to produce meat for them. Yet don't want the owners of the companies to make the work place safe for them to work without the treat of death.

These people haven no problem with creating signs and displaying them at their rallies against the shutdown.

 

[PoliticalChic]

" Constitutionally Consistent And Valid Empathy Ethics "

* Ignorant Of Your Own Dogma *

Now that we've established your desire to kill the innocent, a question:

When the relgious reich reconciles a conjecture for guilt from carnality and innocence , let us know .

* Syncretism And Extraterrestrials *

Sin (mythology) - Wikipedia

Try to stick to words you understand.....even if that might make you mute.

The term 'reich' has specific implications, and there is no such entity in America.

Now....why do you favor human sacrifice?

Why do you favor sacrificing a woman’s freedom to decide her procreation preferences? Are you a Nazi lover?
.

I know you've proven to be a moron, but see if this gets through your thick skull: a woman has no more justification for slaughtering the child she helped create......and slaughtering same for nothing more than here temporary convenience.....than an individual has of shooting the neighbor who blocked his driveway.

The baby is not a part of her body. She is temporarily feeding it the same as she would be if breastfeeding a six month old.

If you get emotional & resort to stupid name-calling, we know you lost the argument, especially when you equate a neighbor to a woman’s genetic material inside her body.
Or, equating breast-feeding a born independently-breathing child to supplying nourishment to developing bio cells through the placenta.
Can you get any more idiotic? LOL!
.

But you are stupid.

Watch this: is the unborn a part of her body, or a separate, distinct and unique human being?

Chic, you are science stupid.

Watch this: the unborn is a part of her body AND a separate, distinct and unique “human being” (by definition) ... when she is pregnant.

So what?
.

If it's a separate distinct unique human being then remove it from the woman and allow it to be that separate, distinct and unique human being. Allow it to do all the things every separate, distinct and unique human being does.

A separate and distinct human being lives outside another person's body, if it's attached to another person's body, it's not separate from that second body.

These people have to lie and use the most extreme words in their quest to take privacy rights from women.

I will also add, the people who have blood on their hands and love to kill are the conservatives who have no problem with killing tens of thousands of separate, distinct and unique human beings with the virus. One conservative started a thread titled the people most affected by the virus are the least productive. Using that as an excuse to justify killing those separate, distinct, and unique human beings.

The people who spent lifetimes contributing to our nation now have the "pro life" people demanding the right to kill them with the virus simply because of money. One of the most weak and vulnerable segments of our nation and conservatives want to kill them. We wouldn't have a United States of America without the contributions of the people these "pro life" conservatives want to kill.

They demand people put their lives in jeopardy to produce meat for them. Yet don't want the owners of the companies to make the work place safe for them to work without the treat of death.

These people haven no problem with creating signs and displaying them at their rallies against the shutdown.

View attachment 330876

Out of a deep curiosity, which of these is your reason for support of abortion?

• Your desire to have an unrestricted ability to kill those human beings that represent an inconvenience to your lifestyle….almost 100% of abortions are simply for convenience, and nothing else.
• The ease of abortion as post sexual congress birth-control?
• As obeisance to the dark forces that the Judeo-Christian faith has battled for eons?
• Or simply a moral malaise, finding it too much of a burden to have any sense of responsibility for your own actions….the actions that produced that baby?
• The mistaken belief that the unborn is a part of the mother's body, and not a separate, unique human being?

Warning.....if you are actually attempting to answer the question.....and this is the first time you actually tried to think....you might be susceptible to an aneurysm.

 

[hadit]

Again with the wandering off into the weeds. Stick to abortion, remember? Or maybe you didn't really mean it earlier and were just trying to get me to stop destroying your arguments.

Again, that you can't follow an argument from point a to point b isn't my problem.

Abortion never gets banned because then they couldn't use it to keep stupid people like you angry.

And there it is, the inevitable wandering into juvenile insults when your arguments don't hold up. Face reality, your arguments boil down to pure selfishness on your part. You want to people to vote ways that make you happy and think they're stupid when they vote to make themselves happy. Pure selfish arrogance.

Which means that if you see the number of abortions going down, you start getting nervous? Can't have all those babies making it into this world, now, might take something away from you.

Naw, the only reason why SURGICAL abortion are declining is because PHARMACEUTICAL abortions are replacing them. This is progress, really.

Now, if you tools were serious about reducing the NEED for abortion, there are ways to do that. Universal health care, paid family leave, comprehensive sex education and wider distribution of contraception.. All of which would involve- wait for it - MORE GOVERNMENT>

Actually, reducing the need for abortion can be done without any government intervention at all, but you don't want that.

 

[JoeB131]

And there it is, the inevitable wandering into juvenile insults when your arguments don't hold up. Face reality, your arguments boil down to pure selfishness on your part. You want to people to vote ways that make you happy and think they're stupid when they vote to make themselves happy. Pure selfish arrogance.

Wow, that didn't even make any sense... but never mind.

The problem with you wingnuts is you vote on your unhappiness, and then wonder when the One Percent Screw you.

Abortion never gets banned, the rich always get their tax cuts... you scratch your big monkey cranium and wonder why.

Actually, reducing the need for abortion can be done without any government intervention at all, but you don't want that.

Not really. A woman who doesn't want to be preggers will always find a way to not be preggers.

 

[hadit]

And there it is, the inevitable wandering into juvenile insults when your arguments don't hold up. Face reality, your arguments boil down to pure selfishness on your part. You want to people to vote ways that make you happy and think they're stupid when they vote to make themselves happy. Pure selfish arrogance.

Wow, that didn't even make any sense... but never mind.

The problem with you wingnuts is you vote on your unhappiness, and then wonder when the One Percent Screw you.

Abortion never gets banned, the rich always get their tax cuts... you scratch your big monkey cranium and wonder why.

Actually, reducing the need for abortion can be done without any government intervention at all, but you don't want that.

Not really. A woman who doesn't want to be preggers will always find a way to not be preggers.

On the contrary, we're very happy, because we, unlike you, find our happiness outside of government and outside of "sticking it" to somebody else. Even with the abortion issue, while it makes us sad and angry, we know the solution doesn't lie in government. It's nice when we can elect officials who agree with us and enact legislation that makes it safer for women, makes them truly consider what they're doing without the cloak of rhetoric you guys always like to use and reduces the number of abortions, and we're especially happy when sanity reigns and minor girls have the protection of their parents, but we always know that politicians are political creatures and respond only to money and votes, so we let them know we're out there and we vote. You seem to think that some politicians actually care about your issues, which is laughable, because they don't. We KNOW that government generally gets in the way, whereas you seem determined to believe that if you just keep giving you the democrat party your votes, they'll punish the EEEVULLL rich guys and give you their money, yet they never do. Ever notice that? In fact, have you ever noticed that democrats always leave office extremely rich and only get richer afterwards? You seem to think that's righteous, while you squeal like a stuck pig when somebody invents a product that everyone wants and buys.

A woman who doesn't want to be pregnant always has a foolproof method to make sure it doesn't happen, but you don't want that. Again, short term selfishness.

 

[JoeB131]

On the contrary, we're very happy, because we, unlike you, find our happiness outside of government and outside of "sticking it" to somebody else.

Oh, contraire.. You guys want to stick it to those uppity feminists who want to control their own bodies.

It's nice when we can elect officials who agree with us and enact legislation that makes it safer for women, makes them truly consider what they're doing without the cloak of rhetoric you guys always like to use and reduces the number of abortions, and we're especially happy when sanity reigns and minor girls have the protection of their parents

You think there's a woman out there who doesn't consider what she's doing? Minor girls often need protection FROM their religious nut parents.

You seem to think that some politicians actually care about your issues, which is laughable, because they don't. We KNOW that government generally gets in the way, whereas you seem determined to believe that if you just keep giving you the democrat party your votes, they'll punish the EEEVULLL rich guys and give you their money, yet they never do.

Oh, quite the contrary, they often end up paying their fair share, and the regulations keep them in line. This is why they support absolute morons like Bush and Trump, not because they are good for the country, but what they let them get away with.

In fact, have you ever noticed that democrats always leave office extremely rich and only get richer afterwards? You seem to think that's righteous, while you squeal like a stuck pig when somebody invents a product that everyone wants and buys.

Yeah, actually, I do when the people who assemble that product, move it, market it, and sell it dont get their fair share. Actually, usually the guy who "invents" it gets ripped off, too. It's the big corporations that profit.

A woman who doesn't want to be pregnant always has a foolproof method to make sure it doesn't happen, but you don't want that. Again, short term selfishness.

Sounds like a guy who's never had contact with female genitalia....

As George Carlin once said, "Ever notice the people who are against abortion are people you'd never want to fuck anyway."

 

[hadit]

On the contrary, we're very happy, because we, unlike you, find our happiness outside of government and outside of "sticking it" to somebody else.

Oh, contraire.. You guys want to stick it to those uppity feminists who want to control their own bodies.

They're welcome to control their bodies. Obviously, they're not, and you don't want them to.

It's nice when we can elect officials who agree with us and enact legislation that makes it safer for women, makes them truly consider what they're doing without the cloak of rhetoric you guys always like to use and reduces the number of abortions, and we're especially happy when sanity reigns and minor girls have the protection of their parents

You think there's a woman out there who doesn't consider what she's doing? Minor girls often need protection FROM their religious nut parents.

Of course there are women out there who have never seen the baby that's growing inside them and do not consider what they're actually getting ready to do, and minor girls need their parents. Abortion absolutists who try to get between them, convince the girl to get it done, then ditch a traumatized girl once they're satisfied are a problem. "We got it done without letting you know, Mom and Dad. Here's your traumatized teenager back for you to deal with. We're done with her".

You seem to think that some politicians actually care about your issues, which is laughable, because they don't. We KNOW that government generally gets in the way, whereas you seem determined to believe that if you just keep giving you the democrat party your votes, they'll punish the EEEVULLL rich guys and give you their money, yet they never do.

Oh, quite the contrary, they often end up paying their fair share, and the regulations keep them in line. This is why they support absolute morons like Bush and Trump, not because they are good for the country, but what they let them get away with.

"Fair share"? That's laughable, as you don't define fair share and no matter how much they have to pay, you always demand more. And yet you think democrats are the answer, even though they never give you what you want, since they have their hands out to the rich just like everybody else. When democrats stop having $50,000/plate fund raisers and accepting big donations from billionaires you might be making headway. Until then, you're just believing the propaganda.

In fact, have you ever noticed that democrats always leave office extremely rich and only get richer afterwards? You seem to think that's righteous, while you squeal like a stuck pig when somebody invents a product that everyone wants and buys.

Yeah, actually, I do when the people who assemble that product, move it, market it, and sell it dont get their fair share. Actually, usually the guy who "invents" it gets ripped off, too. It's the big corporations that profit.

A big corporation started as an idea in somebody's mind and became a big corporation because that person had the drive and determination to succeed. Of course, as soon as he starts to succeed, your ilk swoops in and starts trying to punish that very success.

A woman who doesn't want to be pregnant always has a foolproof method to make sure it doesn't happen, but you don't want that. Again, short term selfishness.

Sounds like a guy who's never had contact with female genitalia....

As George Carlin once said, "Ever notice the people who are against abortion are people you'd never want to fuck anyway."

And again you demonstrate the vacuity and weakness of your arguments. Obviously, you don't think they can stand on their own. Sad, really.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course there are women out there who have never seen the baby that's growing inside them and do not consider what they're actually getting ready to do, and minor girls need their parents. Abortion absolutists who try to get between them, convince the girl to get it done, then ditch a traumatized girl once they're satisfied are a problem. "We got it done without letting you know, Mom and Dad. Here's your traumatized teenager back for you to deal with. We're done with her".

Nobody is "traumatized" by an abortion unless they've been exposed to religious nuttery.

A big corporation started as an idea in somebody's mind and became a big corporation because that person had the drive and determination to succeed. Of course, as soon as he starts to succeed, your ilk swoops in and starts trying to punish that very success.

God, I hope so.. Personally, I'd like to see a division of the FBI that has the sole job of putting rich people in prison along with poor people and a jar of vasoline, just so they know how it feels.

And again you demonstrate the vacuity and weakness of your arguments. Obviously, you don't think they can stand on their own. Sad, really.

Naw, I've just moved on to mocking you.. you're a tool and don't even realize it. In 20 years, chicks will still be aborting their mistakes, and you'll still be whining about it.

 

[PK1]

" Constitutionally Consistent And Valid Empathy Ethics "

* Ignorant Of Your Own Dogma *

Now that we've established your desire to kill the innocent, a question:

When the relgious reich reconciles a conjecture for guilt from carnality and innocence , let us know .

* Syncretism And Extraterrestrials *

Sin (mythology) - Wikipedia

Try to stick to words you understand.....even if that might make you mute.

The term 'reich' has specific implications, and there is no such entity in America.

Now....why do you favor human sacrifice?

Why do you favor sacrificing a woman’s freedom to decide her procreation preferences? Are you a Nazi lover?
.

I know you've proven to be a moron, but see if this gets through your thick skull: a woman has no more justification for slaughtering the child she helped create......and slaughtering same for nothing more than here temporary convenience.....than an individual has of shooting the neighbor who blocked his driveway.

The baby is not a part of her body. She is temporarily feeding it the same as she would be if breastfeeding a six month old.

If you get emotional & resort to stupid name-calling, we know you lost the argument, especially when you equate a neighbor to a woman’s genetic material inside her body.
Or, equating breast-feeding a born independently-breathing child to supplying nourishment to developing bio cells through the placenta.
Can you get any more idiotic? LOL!
.

But you are stupid.

Watch this: is the unborn a part of her body, or a separate, distinct and unique human being?

Chic, you are science stupid.

Watch this: the unborn is a part of her body AND a separate, distinct and unique “human being” (by definition) ... when she is pregnant.

So what?
.

So being a separate and distinct human being confers individual rights.

Yes, the human being with unique DNA gets individual rights when becoming a true individual, completely separate from its mother & breathing independently ... after birth.
That’s when they can get their own SSN!

So what?
.

I guess you missed the part where they have never existed before or will never exist again. It’s a one shot deal.

They? Non-sentient “beings”?
Do you care about all the sentient beings on earth that are abused or neglected?
I smell a hypocrite here.
.

They have exactly the attributes they are supposed to have for that stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death. At any point along that continuum they are fully human despite your rationalizations to see them as less than human.

“They” are fully “human” ONLY due to human DNA they have, but bio development EVENTUALLY makes them “human beings” ... if all goes well.
It’s estimated that HALF of human pregnancies are aborted NATURALLY (due to mutations, etc), many without the woman knowing she was pregnant!
.

 

[JoeB131]

“They” are fully “human” ONLY due to human DNA they have, but bio development EVENTUALLY makes them “human beings” ... if all goes well.
It’s estimated that HALF of human pregnancies are aborted NATURALLY (due to mutations, etc), many without the woman knowing she was pregnant!

Well said. The religious nutters would have us investigate miscarriages as murders..

We'd have to throw crime scene tape around tampons.

Law and Order: Fetus Police

 

[PK1]

There are two (2) main issues in this thread’s discussion:

1) The conceived human set of DNA is COMPLETELY biologically dependent INSIDE the pregnant woman, and is not an INDIVIDUAL “human being” until it completes its NORMAL development and is completely SEPARATE from its mother, AFTER BIRTH.

2) The pregnant woman has FULL rights to HER body, including ALL biological subsystems, such as liver, kidney, womb, etc.
That is basic LIBERTY, respect & privacy for each CITIZEN & their family, and not the govenment’s concern.
.

 

[hadit]

Of course there are women out there who have never seen the baby that's growing inside them and do not consider what they're actually getting ready to do, and minor girls need their parents. Abortion absolutists who try to get between them, convince the girl to get it done, then ditch a traumatized girl once they're satisfied are a problem. "We got it done without letting you know, Mom and Dad. Here's your traumatized teenager back for you to deal with. We're done with her".

Nobody is "traumatized" by an abortion unless they've been exposed to religious nuttery.

And that simply exposes your ignorance on the subject and nothing more need be said about that. You've become a walking cliche. Congratulations.

A big corporation started as an idea in somebody's mind and became a big corporation because that person had the drive and determination to succeed. Of course, as soon as he starts to succeed, your ilk swoops in and starts trying to punish that very success.

God, I hope so.. Personally, I'd like to see a division of the FBI that has the sole job of putting rich people in prison along with poor people and a jar of vasoline, just so they know how it feels.

And more ignorance exposed. Something tells me you're not successful, never tried to be successful, and don't know any successful people.

And again you demonstrate the vacuity and weakness of your arguments. Obviously, you don't think they can stand on their own. Sad, really.

Naw, I've just moved on to mocking you.. you're a tool and don't even realize it. In 20 years, chicks will still be aborting their mistakes, and you'll still be whining about it.

And people will still be successful, and you'll still be whining that it's not fair and somebody should take what they earned and give it to you, democrats will still be promising to do that and you'll still be voting for them, and you won't get it. Too bad. You have only selfish wants to fight for.

 

[ding]

" Constitutionally Consistent And Valid Empathy Ethics "

* Ignorant Of Your Own Dogma *

Now that we've established your desire to kill the innocent, a question:

When the relgious reich reconciles a conjecture for guilt from carnality and innocence , let us know .

* Syncretism And Extraterrestrials *

Sin (mythology) - Wikipedia

Try to stick to words you understand.....even if that might make you mute.

The term 'reich' has specific implications, and there is no such entity in America.

Now....why do you favor human sacrifice?

Why do you favor sacrificing a woman’s freedom to decide her procreation preferences? Are you a Nazi lover?
.

I know you've proven to be a moron, but see if this gets through your thick skull: a woman has no more justification for slaughtering the child she helped create......and slaughtering same for nothing more than here temporary convenience.....than an individual has of shooting the neighbor who blocked his driveway.

The baby is not a part of her body. She is temporarily feeding it the same as she would be if breastfeeding a six month old.

If you get emotional & resort to stupid name-calling, we know you lost the argument, especially when you equate a neighbor to a woman’s genetic material inside her body.
Or, equating breast-feeding a born independently-breathing child to supplying nourishment to developing bio cells through the placenta.
Can you get any more idiotic? LOL!
.

But you are stupid.

Watch this: is the unborn a part of her body, or a separate, distinct and unique human being?

Chic, you are science stupid.

Watch this: the unborn is a part of her body AND a separate, distinct and unique “human being” (by definition) ... when she is pregnant.

So what?
.

So being a separate and distinct human being confers individual rights.

Yes, the human being with unique DNA gets individual rights when becoming a true individual, completely separate from its mother & breathing independently ... after birth.
That’s when they can get their own SSN!

So what?
.

I guess you missed the part where they have never existed before or will never exist again. It’s a one shot deal.

They? Non-sentient “beings”?
Do you care about all the sentient beings on earth that are abused or neglected?
I smell a hypocrite here.
.

They have exactly the attributes they are supposed to have for that stage of the human life cycle which begins at conception and ends at death. At any point along that continuum they are fully human despite your rationalizations to see them as less than human.

“They” are fully “human” ONLY due to human DNA they have, but bio development EVENTUALLY makes them “human beings” ... if all goes well.
It’s estimated that HALF of human pregnancies are aborted NATURALLY (due to mutations, etc), many without the woman knowing she was pregnant!
.

They are fully human throughout every stage of their life.

 

[Monk-Eye]

" Hue Man Red Herring "

* When Physical Capacity Of A Non Sentient Fetus Fails Classification Within Homo Sapiens Sapiens Category *

They are fully human throughout every stage of their life.

The term human means little more than " those with the hue of a man " .

The term hue man is being misapplied as equivalent with a classification of homo sapiens sapiens , but homo sapiens sapiens implies that to be included in the group requires sapience , which has a prerequisite of sentience .

Hominidae - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, of which only modern humans remain.[1]

Great ape personhood - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Great ape personhood is a movement to extend personhood and some legal protections to the non-human members of the Hominidae or great ape family: chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans.[1][2][3]

 

[JoeB131]

And that simply exposes your ignorance on the subject and nothing more need be said about that. You've become a walking cliche. Congratulations.

Again, the only reason why any woman feels bad about abortion is religious nuttery...

And more ignorance exposed. Something tells me you're not successful, never tried to be successful, and don't know any successful people.

No, I don't know a lot of assholes who would fuck over their own mothers to make money. I consider that a point of pride.

Of course, I have more respect for them than I do for the Religious nutbags like you who keep TAKING IT UP THE ASS because they got you all upset about the abortions and the gays.

 

[ding]

" Hue Man Red Herring "

* When Physical Capacity Of A Non Sentient Fetus Fails Classification Within Homo Sapiens Sapiens Category *

They are fully human throughout every stage of their life.

The term human means little more than " those with the hue of a man " .

The term hue man is being misapplied as equivalent with a classification of homo sapiens sapiens , but homo sapiens sapiens implies that to be included in the group requires sapience , which has a prerequisite of sentience .

Hominidae - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Hominidae (/hɒˈmɪnɪdiː/), whose members are known as great apes[note 1] or hominids (/ˈhɒmɪnɪdz/), are a taxonomic family of primates that includes eight extant species in four genera: Pongo, the Bornean, Sumatran and Tapanuli orangutan; Gorilla, the eastern and western gorilla; Pan, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo; and Homo, of which only modern humans remain.[1]

Great ape personhood - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Great ape personhood is a movement to extend personhood and some legal protections to the non-human members of the Hominidae or great ape family: chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans.[1][2][3]

Human life begins at conception and ends at death. Every point along that path is human.

People like you dehumanize human life to rationalize the ending of a human life.

 

[ding]

And that simply exposes your ignorance on the subject and nothing more need be said about that. You've become a walking cliche. Congratulations.

Again, the only reason why any woman feels bad about abortion is religious nuttery...

And more ignorance exposed. Something tells me you're not successful, never tried to be successful, and don't know any successful people.

No, I don't know a lot of assholes who would fuck over their own mothers to make money. I consider that a point of pride.

Of course, I have more respect for them than I do for the Religious nutbags like you who keep TAKING IT UP THE ASS because they got you all upset about the abortions and the gays.

One need not be religious to know it is wrong to end a human life.

 

[Monk-Eye]

* Anthropocentric Priests Space Alien Dignitaries "

* Shunting Additional Diversions To Reconcile *

One need not be religious to know it is wrong to end a human life.

First , we know that per son is the constitutional term and hue mammon is another .

The premise for the statement " One need not be religious to know it is wrong to end a human life. " is blatantly pretentious and unabashedly false as the statement is generic in being void of conditionals or contingencies .

Legitimate aggression and illegitimate aggression are antonyms , where illegitimate aggression is defined as violence , where self defense against violence is legitimate aggression

Aggression and non aggression are antonyms , where aggression is defined as violence , where self defense against violence is aggression that is violence ; hence , by definition , the meaning of non violence principles as per non aggression principles is pacifism .

Clearly , not all aggression should be classified as illegitimate aggression , not all aggression should be classified as violence .

Those attempting to reconcile legitimate versus illegitimate aggression with the non aggression principles failed , which is perhaps why an acronym for non aggression principles would be " nap " , as in its theorists were taking one .

There is a standing challenge for others to establish where abortion would be deemed illegitimate aggression and therefore violate non violence principles .

* Creed Of Oblation Is Not True Of All Religions *

" Machining Leveraging Tooling For Therapy "

* Incognito Strapped Lunar Tick Shopping Freaks *

A catholic asceticism specifies that consummate sexual congress should only occur with an intent to procreate , and that definition of sexual congress relegates any deviation into a category of paraphila .

The protestant reformation maintains that ejaculation of male or female while avoiding conception is not sacrosanct as long as it occurs within the privacy institution of marriage .

The catholics are now suspecting that puritans are seeking a public information campaign to promote paraphilia as the new and improved alternative to usual coitus when individuals are not willing to accept the risks of possible impregnation .

Neither catholicism nor protestantism recant that after conception a facilitation of delivery becomes an oblation , and the definition of oblation designates an such belief as religion .

Issue is that public policy interests of a state do not seek to establish religion , rather public policy interests of a state are devised for individuals which have been born , or are of sufficient development for natural birth , and a timeline of natural birth is nearly concomitant with an onset of sentience .

* Protestantism Sporting Onanism Seasons And Wet Dreams Succubi *

Now testosterone levels vary with age and androgens facilitate body humors for turgor while the prostate is amended by each climax .

Which side is supposing that sex for any purposes other than for procreation is " sinful " , that is subjected to " sin mythology " , that is subjected to " gravitational tides of the moon " ?


Paraphilia - Wikipedia
Paraphilia (previously known as sexual perversion and sexual deviation) is the experience of intense sexual arousal to atypical objects, situations, fantasies, behaviors, or individuals.[1][2]

Puritans - Wikipedia
In current English, puritan often means "against pleasure". In such usage, hedonism and puritanism are antonyms.[13] In fact, Puritans embraced sexuality but placed it in the context of marriage. Peter Gay writes of the Puritans' standard reputation for "dour prudery" as a "misreading that went unquestioned in the nineteenth century", commenting how unpuritanical they were in favour of married sexuality, and in opposition to the Catholic veneration of virginity, citing Edward Taylor and John Cotton.[14] One Puritan settlement in western Massachusetts banished a husband because he refused to fulfill his sexual duties to his wife.[15]

Onan - Wikipedia
The implication from the narrative is that Onan's act as described is what gave rise to divine displeasure, but even if that is the case it is not clear whether his objectionable behaviour was the refusal to complete the levirate obligation of providing sperm for his brother's widow to continue his brother's name (and clan rights) or "shedding seed in vain", or even having sex with Tamar (who would normally be prohibited to him as a sister-in-law) outside the context of an overriding levirate obligation.