Zone1 Abortion Debate: Come Clean and without fallacy

" Rejecting Disparaging Limitations Of Natural Systems "

* Nature Versus Nurture For Creation From Sex Cells *


A sophisticated physical state of cells can create haploids cells from diploids , which are termed gametes ( game meets ) .
Parthenogenesis, or "virgin birth," is a form of asexual reproduction where embryos develop from unfertilized eggs, common in invertebrates (bees, aphids) and some vertebrates like sharks, Komodo dragons, and whiptail lizards. It allows single females to colonize new environments and reproduce without a mate, though it creates clones, reducing genetic diversity and adaptation.

Key Aspects of Parthenogenesis
  • Animals that reproduce via Parthenogenesis: Various invertebrates (rotifers, aphids, ants, bees, wasps) and vertebrates, including over 80 species of reptiles, amphibians, and fish (e.g., Komodo dragons, hammerhead sharks, Brahminy blind snakes).
 
" Uninvolved Freak Farmer Fanatics Dictate Life Liberty And Pursuit Of Happiness To Individuals About Severe Congenital Deformities "

* One Of Them Is Married *


By etymology of the term person , which relates per , as in countable by census , and son , as in male .

Thus the pair are not persons and by us 14th amendment are not eligible for citizenship in etas unis , else see us 19th amendment .

Thus , the pair are countable by census , whether as a single individual or a duality of two individuals is statistically inconsequential and each should be provided a voting ballot where it is is possible for each to vote without witness of the other .

In that there are two distinct minds and acknowledgement of introspection of sentient and sapient beings and its capacity for suffering , through empathy and trivial incidence , each should be given a vote , though physically joined .

Which is yearn indoctrinated opinion for intersex that would include hermaphrodites and other natural deviations ?

. Conjoined twin Abby Hensel is married - see reality TV stars' wedding photos .
Abby controls their right arm and leg, and Brittany controls the left.
Intersex doesnt exist this is a term used to describe abnormal secondary sexual development not gender. They are still either male or female.
 
" Uninvolved Freak Farmer Fanatics Dictate Life Liberty And Pursuit Of Happiness To Individuals About Severe Congenital Deformities "

* One Of Them Is Married *


By etymology of the term person , which relates per , as in countable by census , and son , as in male .

Thus the pair are not persons and by us 14th amendment are not eligible for citizenship in etas unis , else see us 19th amendment .

Thus , the pair are countable by census , whether as a single individual or a duality of two individuals is statistically inconsequential and each should be provided a voting ballot where it is is possible for each to vote without witness of the other .

In that there are two distinct minds and acknowledgement of introspection of sentient and sapient beings and its capacity for suffering , through empathy and trivial incidence , each should be given a vote , though physically joined .

Which is yearn indoctrinated opinion for intersex that would include hermaphrodites and other natural deviations ?

. Conjoined twin Abby Hensel is married - see reality TV stars' wedding photos .
Abby controls their right arm and leg, and Brittany controls the left.
Two persons sharing one body. . . Neither one of them fully independent on their own. . .

Got it.
 
Maybe we should create a Department of Procreation and regulate things properly.
 
Youve gone off the rails. A Zygote is no more or less human than any cell in your body
Zygote; The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm (fertilization).


Can you say the same for "any other cell in your body?"

What other "cell in your body" is also a newly created human "organism"?

Do tell.
 
Zygote; The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm (fertilization).


Can you say the same for "any other cell in your body?"

What other "cell in your body" is also a newly created human "organism"?

Do tell.
Every cell has your complete DNA in it and can create a clone
 
Are you suggesting that human beings morph into existence out of something less, Joe?

Like a frog from a tadpole or a butterfly from a caterpillar?

How can they "give birth to a baby" unless there is first a "baby" to give birth "too?"


You are kind of making my point.

Most ZEF don't become babies.
Most Tadpoles never become Frogs.
Most Caterpillars never become butterflies



Could we please start that fascist effort you just described, before the midterms?

Also. . .

Conjoined twins. . .

Ugh. Yes, let's give birth too horribly deformed children. That's the ticket.
 
something men cannot do.

Unless, of course, they choose to identify as women.

IMG_6619.gif
 
You are kind of making my point.

Most ZEF don't become babies.
Most Tadpoles never become Frogs.
Most Caterpillars never become butterflies
So semantics then.

That's all you have from this?


Ugh. Yes, let's give birth too horribly deformed children. That's the ticket.

By "give birth" do you mean "parturition?"
 
So semantics then.

That's all you have from this?

That's all we need. As long as it's inside the woman's body, it's her decision whether or not it becomes a baby or medical waste.



By "give birth" do you mean "parturition?"

I mean that religious crazies think that a girl with two heads and a lifetime of medical issues was a good idea.
 
That's all we need. As long as it's inside the woman's body, it's her decision whether or not it becomes a baby or medical waste.

Is that thing in her body another human being, Joey?

We know it is.

We also know why you refuse to acknowledge that it is.

I mean that religious crazies think that a girl with two heads and a lifetime of medical issues was a good idea.

1. It's two "girls" not one and they are grown women (one of them is married, even)

2. Should they be "put down" because of their birth defects and difficulties, Joey?
 
According to Wikipedia, DNA does not establish personhood.

person (pl.: people or persons, depending on context) is a being who has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness, and being a part of a culturally established form of social relations such as kinship, ownership of property, or legal responsibility.


A newly inseminated zygote does not have reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness. No one knows exactly when these attributes develop in a fetus. Certainly a fetus at 9 month minus 1 day has some level of consciousness. So somewhere between these two extremes, personhood is achieved.

The question is where to draw the line. Personally, I would attach personhood at about the 20th week, splitting the pregnancy down the middle. I don't have any obvious reason to choose this point. It seems safe enough to avoid the sin of murder, while still allowing the mother enough time to abort the non-person inside her if she chooses.

Life is complicated/
Life is complicated. That doesn't mean we should dehumanize human life just so we sleep better. Own it.
 
Life is complicated. That doesn't mean we should dehumanize human life just so we sleep better. Own it.
At no time have I ever suggested a fertilized ovum is not a human life. It obviously is.

It's just not a person. Not at that stage.

I'm sorry if your position in abortion causes you to sleep poorly. I sleep just fine.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: cnm
15th post
At no time have I ever suggested a fertilized ovum is not a human life. It obviously is.

It's just not a person. Not at that stage.

I'm sorry if your position in abortion causes you to sleep poorly. I sleep just fine.
What is the broadest, most inclusive definition of what a natural person is?

Do you agree that the definition should be broad and open enough to include every human being, regardless of their age, gender, race, level of development, religion, etc.?

It would be kind of fascist to use the definition to intentionally exclude any of those groups. . .

Wouldn't it?
 
At no time have I ever suggested a fertilized ovum is not a human life. It obviously is.

It's just not a person. Not at that stage.

I'm sorry if your position in abortion causes you to sleep poorly. I sleep just fine.
A person is a specific human being. Is it somehow more offensive to end a person's life than it is to end a human being's life?
 
Is that thing in her body another human being, Joey?

Nope. It's not viable, so not a human being.

1. It's two "girls" not one and they are grown women (one of them is married, even)

No, it's a freak of nature.

You should actually read about what they did to keep "it" alive, including chopping off a third arm it had growing out of it's back.



That is you admitting you wouldn't support abortion if it ended a human life. I win.
No, that's just you stomping your little feet and saying, "Globby is a real person!"
 
Back
Top Bottom