A question for women who aborted a child in their life.

[mamooth]

This will be a pleasure.

I await your endless repetitions "BECAUSE I SAY SO!". Sure, you'll mangle the science and logic too, but "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" will be your primary tactic. You'll be declaring that your entirely subjective beliefs aren't actually entirely subjective, even though they clearly are.

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

You did not read my position did you? I find abortion abhorrent but support its legality because it was litigated.
Your position is no women ever regret it or are riddled in guilt. You know people so well huh?
I asked a question and got a lot of answers. So you assume I'm Christian, sick, and miserable. Lol

 

[Chuz Life]

This will be a pleasure.

I await your endless repetitions "BECAUSE I SAY SO!". Sure, you'll mangle the science and logic too, but "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" will be your primary tactic. You'll be declaring that your entirely subjective beliefs aren't actually entirely subjective, even though they clearly are.

Your attempt to poison the well will not work on this. I am going to answer your question with a list of statements. Most of them will have a true or false question at the end. I will word it so that the answer to each one should be "true."

If you anseer "false" to any of them, the onus will be on you to explain WHY it is false.

Let's show everyone how intellectually honest or dishonest you are. Shall we?

 

[Chuz Life]

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU were first biologically conceived by your parents.

First, you explain how you weren't YOU when YOU were an unfertilized egg. . . Try not to hide any ugly haploid bigotry. If you're going to butcher helpless haploid humans, own up to it. . .
Also, try not to go all eugenics-freak DNA supremacist on us.

Ok, after I started thinking about how best to respond to this, I realize, I won't have time to get it all in one post (during my lunch break.)

So, let me start with what SHOULD be common ground, first. Then, I will continue on my next break. I appreciate the question, for what it's worth, because it's not an area that comes up in the debate, very often. Please answer these true or false questions that will ultimately lead you to the point of my conclusion (for why I was not me, when I was an unfertilized egg.") They are all worded so that the answer should be "true."

The short answer to your question is that I was never an unfertilized egg and (biology 101) neither were you.

Here's why.

1. I am a human being. True or False?

2. I am a human Organism. True or False?

3. Human Beings / Human Organisms are Mammals. True or False?

4. More specifically, Human Beings / Human Organisms are "Placental Mammals." True or False?

My Lunch is about over. Answer these and I'll ask the next series as soon as possible.

 

[mamooth]

I'll play along for now, though I am not obligated to jump through your hoops. If one of your questions is senseless or invalid, I'll point that out.

1. I am a human being. True or False?

True.

2. I am a human Organism. True or False?

True.

3. Human Beings / Human Organisms are Mammals. True or False?

True.

4. More specifically, Human Beings / Human Organisms are "Placental Mammals." True or False?

True.

 

[mamooth]

Your position is no women ever regret it or are riddled in guilt.

No, my position is that of Reagan's Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, who indicated in 1989 that he could find no evidence that abortion affected mental health. There's been no evidence to change that conclusion in the intervening years.

You know people so well huh?

1 in 3 women will have an abortion in their lifetimes. Odd how that hasn't manifested as a wave of mental illness.

 

[Lysistrata]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

You did not read my position did you? I find abortion abhorrent but support its legality because it was litigated.
Your position is no women ever regret it or are riddled in guilt. You know people so well huh?
I asked a question and got a lot of answers. So you assume I'm Christian, sick, and miserable. Lol

You did not word your question in a neutral manner, but rather as some attempt to manipulate the emotions of these women and incite guilt. You deliberatedly used loaded language: the woman aborted a "child" and "terminated their brothers and sisters lives." Some people may feel guilt and others not. You were not seeking honest answers. Why did you even ask the question?

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

Your position is no women ever regret it or are riddled in guilt.

No, my position is that of Reagan's Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, who indicated in 1989 that he could find no evidence that abortion affected mental health. There's been no evidence to change that conclusion in the intervening years.

You know people so well huh?

1 in 3 women will have an abortion in their lifetimes. Odd how that hasn't manifested as a wave of mental illness.

I have to switch to audio.

Vocaroo | Online voice recorder

Vocaroo is a quick and easy way to share voice messages over the interwebs.

voca.ro

I prefer to hear your voice and see what you sound like. Debate is voice. Not a keyboard and Google

 

[playtime]

^^^

God bless you always!!!

Holly

^^^ I am well aware of other people having different beliefs compared to the ones that I have gone with. You do realize that there is more to the Lord's word than just want is in the old testament, right?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

of course. but how does that matter? you didn't really answer, now did you?

who gets to say 'never mind' to the OT, when it's supposedly written about god? who gets to decide which parts are valid & which parts aren't ? or impose any/all of it on those that don't believe what you believe?

this is a secular nation where no one religion is state sanctioned; therefore you live your life according to your bible, should you choose & you are allowed to pick & choose what's in there... but not force that belief on anybody else.

I never once said that the old Testament is to be disregarded especially when that happens to be where the ten commandments are, one of them being about killing which is what category abortion will always fall into no matter how you people try to justify it.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

would you vote to make it legal to shackle a woman to force her to give birth?

& did you vote for trump?

If abortion was already illegal like it should be, you wouldn't have to ask such a question now would you? Yes, I voted for our current leader.

God bless you and him always!!!

Holly

you didn't answer the question.

again.

would you like to see women in shackles to prevent them from having one?

i'll also extend that question & apply it: to punishing her, should she seek an 'illegal' abortion as well. yes or no ?

i see you that you voted for a fornicator,
& who committed adultery,
& has coveted his neighbor's goods,
& has coveted his neighbor's wife,
& has stolen
& has not honored his mother & father

i see the picking & choosing is in full force.

& he has lusted
& is a glutton
& is greedy
& is a lazy sloth
& has shown what his 'wrath' can do
& he's envious
& he has too much destructive 'pride'.

lol... god bless you too!

 

[Shelzin]

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Scientists are working like crazy to be able to reproduce a human being outside of the womb. That means that there is no age after conception at which a baby is not viable. The viability argument is a lie.

I read this. But you are not worth anymore time than saying it.

I understand. It takes a lot of work to counter the truth and it's certainly not worth the work when you know I'll use logic and reason to decompose your lies. If you know your work will be destroyed, it's not worth the time to do it.

I read this. But you are not worth anymore time than saying it.

 

[Shelzin]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

 

[Chuz Life]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

Opinion noted.

It's ok to have opinions.

If it doesn't bother you to be wrong, it doesn't bother me that you are wrong.

 

[Shelzin]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

Opinion noted.

It's ok to have opinions.

If it doesn't bother you to be wrong, it doesn't bother me that you are wrong.

Wrong?

"I think therefor I am" is pretty good standard within science. Or are you going the soul route? I will not take digs at you for thinking there is a soul and it happens at conception... No problem, I disagree.. But.. ok.

If ***I*** can't think there is no ***I***. There could be a collection of living cells there, but there is no ***I***.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ I am well aware of other people having different beliefs compared to the ones that I have gone with. You do realize that there is more to the Lord's word than just want is in the old testament, right?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

of course. but how does that matter? you didn't really answer, now did you?

who gets to say 'never mind' to the OT, when it's supposedly written about god? who gets to decide which parts are valid & which parts aren't ? or impose any/all of it on those that don't believe what you believe?

this is a secular nation where no one religion is state sanctioned; therefore you live your life according to your bible, should you choose & you are allowed to pick & choose what's in there... but not force that belief on anybody else.

I never once said that the old Testament is to be disregarded especially when that happens to be where the ten commandments are, one of them being about killing which is what category abortion will always fall into no matter how you people try to justify it.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

would you vote to make it legal to shackle a woman to force her to give birth?

& did you vote for trump?

If abortion was already illegal like it should be, you wouldn't have to ask such a question now would you? Yes, I voted for our current leader.

God bless you and him always!!!

Holly

you didn't answer the question.

again.

would you like to see women in shackles to prevent them from having one?

i'll also extend that question & apply it: to punishing her, should she seek an 'illegal' abortion as well. yes or no ?

i see you that you voted for a fornicator,
& who committed adultery,
& has coveted his neighbor's goods,
& has coveted his neighbor's wife,
& has stolen
& has not honored his mother & father

i see the picking & choosing is in full force.

& he has lusted
& is a glutton
& is greedy
& is a lazy sloth
& has shown what his 'wrath' can do
& he's envious
& he has too much destructive 'pride'.

lol... god bless you too!

You do realize that a person who does what needs to be done where one situation is concerned is going to be unfortunately flawed somewhere else, right? Sadly no one on this planet is perfect.

God bless you and our current leader always!!!

Holly

P.S. If being shackled is what it takes for the delivery to happen, oh well. To me, the only reason why an abortion should happen is if the pregnancy/delivery will bring an end to the life of the mother, especially if the well being of other people, like other kids for example, depends on the well being of the mother.

 

[Chuz Life]

I'll play along for now, though I am not obligated to jump through your hoops. If one of your questions is senseless or invalid, I'll point that out.

1. I am a human being. True or False?

True.

2. I am a human Organism. True or False?

True.

3. Human Beings / Human Organisms are Mammals. True or False?

True.

4. More specifically, Human Beings / Human Organisms are "Placental Mammals." True or False?

True.

Continuing: Please answer these new true or false questions that I think will ultimately lead you to the point of my conclusion (for why I was not me, when I was an unfertilized egg.") They are all worded so that the answer should be "true."

The short answer to your question is that I was never an unfertilized egg and (per biology 101) neither were you. . . because I am a human organism and a haploid human cell is not a human organism in any way other than semantics.

5. Placental Mammals (including human beings) bear live young, which are nourished before birth in the mother's uterus through a specialized embryonic organ attached to the uterus wall, the placenta. True or False?

6. A sperm cell is a haploid reproductive CELL. True or False?

7. An Ovum is a haploid reproductive CELL. True or False?

8. One of the most basic definitions for what an "organism" is - is "any living thing." True or False?

9. There is a biological difference between "single celled" organisms and "multi-cellular" organisms. True or False?

More questions later.

I am not intentionally dragging this out. Patience appreciated.

 

[Chuz Life]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

Opinion noted.

It's ok to have opinions.

If it doesn't bother you to be wrong, it doesn't bother me that you are wrong.

Wrong?

"I think therefor I am" is pretty good standard within science. Or are you going the soul route? I will not take digs at you for thinking there is a soul and it happens at conception... No problem, I disagree.. But.. ok.

If ***I*** can't think there is no ***I***. There could be a collection of living cells there, but there is no ***I***.

To understand my viewpoint, you should think less about religion and more about "empathy" and the OBJECTIVE ability to trace a "person's" aging and development, backwards to their point of origin.

Also, for what it is worth, the biggest disconnect between our views is that you obviously believe that "personhood" is a metaphysical property that is applied by you in an ex post facto kind of way. Namely, Most human beings / "persons" can think. . . Therefore if one can not THINK, it must not be a human being (person.) To YOU.

That is the epitome of a fallacious (ex post facto) argument. It is narrow minded, exclusionary and (thankfully) a concept that is already rejected by science and law.

My view is more open minded and inclusive. I accept and adhere to the already existing legal definitions that simply define a "natural person" as "a human being."

Laws which (for now) permit abortions run contrary to that definition.

And there in, lies the rub.

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

Opinion noted.

It's ok to have opinions.

If it doesn't bother you to be wrong, it doesn't bother me that you are wrong.

Wrong?

"I think therefor I am" is pretty good standard within science. Or are you going the soul route? I will not take digs at you for thinking there is a soul and it happens at conception... No problem, I disagree.. But.. ok.

If ***I*** can't think there is no ***I***. There could be a collection of living cells there, but there is no ***I***.

To understand my viewpoint, you should think less about religion and more about "empathy" and the OBJECTIVE ability to trace a "person's" aging and development, backwards to their point of origin.

Also, for what it is worth, the biggest disconnect between our views is that you obviously believe that "personhood" is a metaphysical property that is applied by you in an ex post facto kind of way. Namely, Most human beings / "persons" can think. . . Therefore if one can not THINK, it must not be a human being (person.) To YOU.

That is the epitome of a fallacious (ex post facto) argument. It is narrow minded, exclusionary and (thankfully) a concept that is already rejected by science and law.

My view is more open minded and inclusive. I accept and adhere to the already existing legal definitions that simply define a "natural person" as "a human being."

Laws which (for now) permit abortions run contrary to that definition.

And there in, lies the rub.

Dang that was good. You can definitely break down concepts well and make total sense.

I'm a great writer in longhand. But suck at typing..uggghhh. But I am really good at expressing myself in voice. Lol. I think you said you don't like the sound of yours? No one likes to hear their voice. Is Thaaat me? I sound that bad???...lol

I think I'm creeping people out doing that, like the cat person whoever. Never heard back...lol

 

[deanrd]

Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, who is of the opinion that old people, i.e. those most at risk, should volunteer to die to save the economy.
Wouldn't that be considered suicide?
A rather odd position coming from the party of life.

 

[Chuz Life]

When you look at your living children in their eyes,

And we have another loving Christian hoping to inflict their sick warped sense of guilt on to normal people. Some people just want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

A true failure indeed, as any genetic test will handily prove that the unborn is in fact an individual, with its own unique DNA sequence that it will carry through its whole life regardless of age.

Put it's not a person.

Just as a brain dead body being kept alive by machines is not a person. It's a body with it's own unique DNA sequence that it has carried through it's whole life regardless of age.

Just suppose that body hooked up to the machine has even half the prognosis that typical child in the womb has.

What it is, isn't what it will be. It is what it is. Until it's a person, it is not a person.

Please explain for the class how you were not YOU when YOU wete first biologically conceived by your parents.

Please explain how your biological father is Your biological father, if you were not YOU (a person) when he biologically parented you.

Without my personality and capability of thought... There is no me. There is a body. It wasn't MY body... It was A body, that I ended up in once that body grew old enough to actually have a thought. That thought was the start of ME. Not before that.

Opinion noted.

It's ok to have opinions.

If it doesn't bother you to be wrong, it doesn't bother me that you are wrong.

Wrong?

"I think therefor I am" is pretty good standard within science. Or are you going the soul route? I will not take digs at you for thinking there is a soul and it happens at conception... No problem, I disagree.. But.. ok.

If ***I*** can't think there is no ***I***. There could be a collection of living cells there, but there is no ***I***.

To understand my viewpoint, you should think less about religion and more about "empathy" and the OBJECTIVE ability to trace a "person's" aging and development, backwards to their point of origin.

Also, for what it is worth, the biggest disconnect between our views is that you obviously believe that "personhood" is a metaphysical property that is applied by you in an ex post facto kind of way. Namely, Most human beings / "persons" can think. . . Therefore if one can not THINK, it must not be a human being (person.) To YOU.

That is the epitome of a fallacious (ex post facto) argument. It is narrow minded, exclusionary and (thankfully) a concept that is already rejected by science and law.

My view is more open minded and inclusive. I accept and adhere to the already existing legal definitions that simply define a "natural person" as "a human being."

Laws which (for now) permit abortions run contrary to that definition.

And there in, lies the rub.

Dang that was good. You can definitely break down concepts well and make total sense.

I'm a great writer in longhand. But suck at typing..uggghhh. But I am really good at expressing myself in voice. Lol. I think you said you don't like the sound of yours? No one likes to hear their voice. Is Thaaat me? I sound that bad???...lol

I think I'm creeping people out doing that, like the cat person whoever. Never heard back...lol

Thanks for the compliments.

Yeah, I think I sound horrible on tape which sucks because I like to talk and sing. I just can't stand to hear myself.

 

[Shelzin]

To understand my viewpoint, you should think less about religion and more about "empathy" and the OBJECTIVE ability to trace a "person's" aging and development, backwards to their point of origin.

That's... Actually what I believe I'm doing. However we have different rulers we are going by.

Also, for what it is worth, the biggest disconnect between our views is that you obviously believe that "personhood" is a metaphysical property that is applied by you in an ex post facto kind of way. Namely, Most human beings / "persons" can think. . . Therefore if one can not THINK, it must not be a human being (person.) To YOU.

It's correct that I don't see them as a person. Simply being a human being doesn't mean anything to me.

That is the epitome of a fallacious (ex post facto) argument. It is narrow minded, exclusionary and (thankfully) a concept that is already rejected by science and law.

That's incorrect. In your words to me... To YOU.

My view is more open minded and inclusive. I accept and adhere to the already existing legal definitions that simply define a "natural person" as "a human being."

This is where we go back to you doing an argument from authority. Which ... If you need others to agree with you in order to be right, in this case lawmakers/government... Suggests that your argument isn't nearly as strong as you think it is. This is why I reject it.

Laws which (for now) permit abortions run contrary to that definition.

I would suggest that supports my stance over yours using your own argument as to why you are "right"

While I disagree with your reasoning to reach this conclusion, I find it odd that you seem to be arguing with yourself on this.

And there in, lies the rub.

I'm not here to change your mind. I'm harmed not at all by your choice or opinion on this. Being a "pro-life" is absolutely fine with me. I'm just explaining why I think the way I do, and I have addressed those points you have brought up and why I have come to the conclusions I have.