Are you born gay?

[nt250]

The Roe v Wade decision is BS. The right to privacy does not supercede the taking of human life. That is unless you define an unborn human being as all manner of things EXCEPT what it is ... an unborn human being.

Unborn being the key word here.

Tumors are alive. Should tumors have the same rights as it's host? Oh, I forgot. Men get tumors, too. Sorry. What was I thinking?

 

[Gunny]

Unborn being the key word here.

Tumors are alive. Should tumors have the same rights as it's host? Oh, I forgot. Men get tumors, too. Sorry. What was I thinking?

Irrelevant comparison. Unborn is not a "key word," it's a state of existence which a human being no less a human being.

 

[MissileMan]

The Roe v Wade decision is BS. The right to privacy does not supercede the taking of human life. That is unless you define an unborn human being as all manner of things EXCEPT what it is ... an unborn human being.

I guess maybe we need to relabel all the flour on the supermarket shelves as "unbaked bread". Recipes might get a bit confusing. We'll have to abandon the use of the term egg of course. You'll soon be able to go to your favorite diner and get a Hard-boiled-chicken sandwich. For breakfast, you can get Chicken Cordon-Bleu and it'll look just like a Ham and Cheese Omelette.

We can also get rid of the biological terms like zygote and fetus and rewrite the biology texts so that at the moment of conception, Voila! A human being!

 

[Gunny]

I guess maybe we need to relabel all the flour on the supermarket shelves as "unbaked bread". Recipes might get a bit confusing. We'll have to abandon the use of the term egg of course. You'll soon be able to go to your favorite diner and get a Hard-boiled-chicken sandwich. For breakfast, you can get Chicken Cordon-Bleu and it'll look just like a Ham and Cheese Omelette.

We can also get rid of the biological terms like zygote and fetus and rewrite the biology texts so that at the moment of conception, Voila! A human being!

You can be as smartass as you want, and call it whatever cute little name you and/or science has come up with for it, but the fact remains, it is an unborn human being.

Not to be confused with domestic livestock bred and raised specifically for consumption.

But then, THAT is your whole argument in a nutshell, isn't it? Do your damnedest distance the fetus from the fact that it is a human being -- in essence dehumanize it -- so you can justify to yourself and society morally that it is okay to kill it.

 

[MissileMan]

You can be as smartass as you want, and call it whatever cute little name you and/or science has come up with for it, but the fact remains, it is an unborn human being.

Not to be confused with domestic livestock bred and raised specifically for consumption.

But then, THAT is your whole argument in a nutshell, isn't it? Do your damnedest distance the fetus from the fact that it is a human being -- in essence dehumanize it -- so you can justify to yourself and society morally that it is okay to kill it.

And you can keep it up with the emotional arguments, but until sufficient development has occurred, a fetus is a mass of tissue with the potential to become a human being, not, repeat not a human being.

 

[nt250]

And you can keep it up with the emotional arguments, but until sufficient development has occurred, a fetus is a mass of tissue with the potential to become a human being, not, repeat not a human being.

It's the whole soul thing. They get all defensive when it's pointed out that it's simply their religion that drives their beliefs so they really don't have a leg to stand on.

Gets them kind of pissy.

 

[Gunny]

And you can keep it up with the emotional arguments, but until sufficient development has occurred, a fetus is a mass of tissue with the potential to become a human being, not, repeat not a human being.

There's no emotional argument. Just a factual one. The fetus isn't going to become anything BUT a human being.

Your development argument is just more smokescreen to try and call something everything but what it is.

 

[Gunny]

It's the whole soul thing. They get all defensive when it's pointed out that it's simply their religion that drives their beliefs so they really don't have a leg to stand on.

Gets them kind of pissy.

You're full of shit, making mass generalizations, as usual. You feel free to show me EXACTLY WHERE I attempted to use religion in ANY argument concerning abortion.

The argument is so damned simple religion isn't even required. I'm quite aware that something like religious morals are wasted on people willing to call something what it isn't in order to justify murdering it.

 

[MissileMan]

There's no emotional argument. Just a factual one. The fetus isn't going to become anything BUT a human being.

At least 15% of fetuses are miscarried and become nothing at all.

 

[MissileMan]

I'm quite aware that something like scientific fact is wasted on people willing to call something what it isn't in order to justify outlawing it.

Fixed that for ya.

 

[Gunny]

Fixed that for ya.

That's the best you got? F-ing with my post?

I'm impressed.

Too bad you can't fix your own blindness.

 

[MissileMan]

That's the best you got? F-ing with my post?

I'm impressed.

Too bad you can't fix your own blindness.

Careful bud...your emotional is showing. Miss #309?

 

[nt250]

You're full of shit, making mass generalizations, as usual. You feel free to show me EXACTLY WHERE I attempted to use religion in ANY argument concerning abortion.

The argument is so damned simple religion isn't even required. I'm quite aware that something like religious morals are wasted on people willing to call something what it isn't in order to justify murdering it.

Oh, no, you're not emotional at all.

Here's one generalization you are just going to love:

You're a man. Shut up. As a man, you have no right to even have an opinion on the subject.

Like that one?

 

[Gunny]

Careful bud...your emotional is showing. Miss #309?

Keep dreaming.

I didn't miss the post. It's irrelevant to the discussion. We are discussing what something "is," not what something never becomes.

 

[Gunny]

Oh, no, you're not emotional at all.

Here's one generalization you are just going to love:

You're a man. Shut up. As a man, you have no right to even have an opinion on the subject.

Like that one?

I've got an even better one for you:

I pay taxes, vote and am a member of this society. My vote makes my opinion as good as yours. Your lack of education on the topic and resorting to insults and deflections in an attempt to cover it up would be what makes my opinion on the topic superior to yours.

So maybe YOU need to shut up until you educate yourself on what you are rattling your tongue against the roof of your mouth about.

 

[jillian]

And you can keep it up with the emotional arguments, but until sufficient development has occurred, a fetus is a mass of tissue with the potential to become a human being, not, repeat not a human being.

Ah...but if you notice, the responses also contain a lot of, "well, she shouldn't have gotten pregnant if she didn't want a child" kind of thing. It's about retribution and control. You know, they're supposed to pay for their sins and women are supposed to be subservient and not make decisions on their own -- just like children.

And, in the final analysis, it's this puritan concept of retribution and control that drives this debate. Then they'll say they don't raise religion in their arguments. They don't have to. The determination as to when a fetus becomes a life, being a religious one, has no other basis.

 

[MissileMan]

Keep dreaming.

I didn't miss the post. It's irrelevant to the discussion. We are discussing what something "is," not what something never becomes.

The FACT that a significant percentage of what you've deemed human beings don't actually become human beings is irrelevant?

I guess maybe we're using different definitions for the term. What exactly is your definition of human being?

 

[Gunny]

Ah...but if you notice, the responses also contain a lot of, "well, she shouldn't have gotten pregnant if she didn't want a child" kind of thing. It's about retribution and control. You know, they're supposed to pay for their sins and women are supposed to be subservient and not make decisions on their own -- just like children.

And, in the final analysis, it's this puritan concept of retribution and control that drives this debate. Then they'll say they don't raise religion in their arguments. They don't have to. The determination as to when a fetus becomes a life, being a religious one, has no other basis.

It isn't about retribution and control. That's lame, and just bullshit. It's about people being accountable for their actions. You lefties are only big on holding conservatives/Republicans accountable for their actions, even if they didn't do it.

The determination of when a fetus has life is not religious. That also is bullshit. It has life at conception. No-brainer.

I already stated what the REAL final analysis is: you call something what it is not to justify killing it for personal convenience.

Heaven forbid one be responsible for his/her actions. How you get retribution and control out of that must take some REAL liberalthink.

 

[Kagom]

How's a thread about homosexuality turn to one about abortion?

 

[Gunny]

The FACT that a significant percentage of what you've deemed human beings don't actually become human beings is irrelevant?

I guess maybe we're using different definitions for the term. What exactly is your definition of human being?

They're human beings that don't make it, for whatever reason. What IS the point? Some human beings don't make it all the way across the street either. So what?

We are human beings. Homo sapiens. Our offspring are human beings. They aren't tadpoles until they become frogs. It's human life from conception to death. A physical fact.