The Politics of the "Abortion" Word Games

[Boss]

I love how neocons are all about forcing a woman against her will to do something she doesn't want to do but ***** that children cost money for the taxpayers. Well what the heck did you expect?

And I love how the left doesn't give one solitary shit about human rights unless it's some minority group they can pander to for their votes. If fetuses could vote you'd all be lobbying for voter registration at conception.

 

[BlindBoo]

What ridiculous question. Viability is not an ambiguous term. It is when an organism has ability to sustain its' living functions(heart, lungs liver....), not the ability to provide for itself. Therefore a newborn in nearly all instances by definition is viable.

The organism is able to sustain whatever it produces provided it remains in the appropriate environment to do so. A newborn is never able to sustain it's living functions without some assistance and no organism can sustain life outside the parameters of appropriate environment. We could sew you up inside a womb full of amniotic fluid and you wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Tell you what... let's dunk you under water for 5 minutes and see if you can remain "viable" and if you can't, we can determine you were not a 'real' human being!

Again you are confusing the ability to provide food, water and shelter with viability.

 

[BlindBoo]

I can't think of one poster who made the claim that a fetus is not living or is not human. The point of viability is reached when it can sustain it's life without being attached to the life support system.

That's because you're a liar.

Coming from you that really hurts........

I've no doubt you have no problem lying or being recognized as one. People without honor or integrity rarely give a crap.

If I'm lying you should have no problem providing a link or a name of a poster who thinks that an unborn developing human fetus in not living or is not human. Otherwise, your accusation, like so many before, is false.

JoeB argued it for 14 pages, did you fail to read the thread?

I've read it all. Because you accuse JoeB of something doesn't mean it's true. With your propensity for using hyperbole, I'm incline to not believe a word you say. Perhaps sometime in the future Joe will enlighten us and answer the question if he think a fetus is alive and is human.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well, no, the fetus is described as "the baby" when the mother wants it. It's described as "that problem I have to take care of next Tuesday" if she doesn't. I'm sorry you don't get this.

But isn't it silly for a bunch of men to be here talking about what women should do with their uteri?

So does a woman have the power to change a baby into something non-human by her desires? Unless that is what you are now arguing, you haven't made any rational point. Sorry you don't get this.

I don't care about her uterus, I care about the unborn human being inside it. And I, along with millions of other men and women, will continue to speak out and demand we be civilized. I'm not intimidated or dissuaded in the least by your hyped rhetoric and insults. It only serves to show you have no argument and are on the wrong side of this issue. The pro-life movement is not going away.

YEAH! What HE said... .

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

That's because you're a liar.

Coming from you that really hurts........

I've no doubt you have no problem lying or being recognized as one. People without honor or integrity rarely give a crap.

If I'm lying you should have no problem providing a link or a name of a poster who thinks that an unborn developing human fetus in not living or is not human. Otherwise, your accusation, like so many before, is false.

JoeB argued it for 14 pages, did you fail to read the thread?

I've read it all. Because you accuse JoeB of something doesn't mean it's true. With your propensity for using hyperbole, I'm incline to not believe a word you say. Perhaps sometime in the future Joe will enlighten us and answer the question if he think a fetus is alive and is human.

The Pre-born human in utero... is living from the moment of conception, that such is therefore human life, is not even debatable.

Joe can't cop to it, because Joe is incapable of rising above the relativism in which he is mired.

Joe needs to believe that because the earliest stages of development, pre-born human life is not sentient, that it lacks human rights, is a feckless rationalization, to which Joe would never subscribe where HIS LIFE were at issue.

If we substitute the 'absence to reason soundly' for sentience, using Joe's own reasoning, HE would have no rights... and HIS life would 'rightfully' be snuffed out the moment HIS existence became an inconvenience to someone who had power over him.

And it is there, where we can rest assured that Joe's position lacks any kinship with principle.

But hey... let's be honest, what Leftist position does, right?

 

[BlindBoo]

Coming from you that really hurts........

I've no doubt you have no problem lying or being recognized as one. People without honor or integrity rarely give a crap.

If I'm lying you should have no problem providing a link or a name of a poster who thinks that an unborn developing human fetus in not living or is not human. Otherwise, your accusation, like so many before, is false.

JoeB argued it for 14 pages, did you fail to read the thread?

I've read it all. Because you accuse JoeB of something doesn't mean it's true. With your propensity for using hyperbole, I'm incline to not believe a word you say. Perhaps sometime in the future Joe will enlighten us and answer the question if he think a fetus is alive and is human.

The Pre-born human in utero... is living from the moment of conception, that such is therefore human life, is not even debatable.

Joe can't cop to it, because Joe is incapable of rising above the relativism in which he is mired.

Joe needs to believe that because the earliest stages of development, pre-born human life is not sentient, that it lacks human rights, is a feckless rationalization, to which Joe would never subscribe where HIS LIFE were at issue.

If we substitute the 'absence to reason soundly' for sentience, using Joe's own reasoning, HE would have no rights... and HIS life would 'rightfully' be snuffed out the moment HIS existence became an inconvenience to someone who had power over him.

And it is there, where we can rest assured that Joe's position lacks any kinship with principle.

But hey... let's be honest, what Leftist position does, right?

You claiming to speak for Joe?

 

[Boss]

Again you are confusing the ability to provide food, water and shelter with viability.

No, I am saying "viability" is an ambiguous term that means nothing. We apply it to the fetus in the context of what the fetus can or can't do outside it's appropriate environment. That standard isn't applied to human life elsewhere, only when it's in the womb. You are arguing that since it can't sustain itself outside the womb it's not 'viable' human life, but no human life can sustain itself outside the environment it is intended to survive in. The fetus certainly can sustain itself inside the womb attached to the uterus, if it couldn't we wouldn't need to abort anything.

 

[Boss]

That's because you're a liar.

Coming from you that really hurts........

I've no doubt you have no problem lying or being recognized as one. People without honor or integrity rarely give a crap.

If I'm lying you should have no problem providing a link or a name of a poster who thinks that an unborn developing human fetus in not living or is not human. Otherwise, your accusation, like so many before, is false.

JoeB argued it for 14 pages, did you fail to read the thread?

I've read it all. Because you accuse JoeB of something doesn't mean it's true. With your propensity for using hyperbole, I'm incline to not believe a word you say. Perhaps sometime in the future Joe will enlighten us and answer the question if he think a fetus is alive and is human.

You've not read the thread if you haven't read JoeB claiming a fetus is not a human life. Like I said, he went on about it for 14 pages, just go back to about Page 90. But Joe is not the only one, I encounter this argument regularly on all abortion threads. It's usually one of the very first arguments presented. The "meaningless clump of cells" argument has been around a long time, and if you're just now hearing about it, you are WAY behind the curve in this convo.

 

[JoeB131]

But it meets your definition of being alive too... if you're killing it.

Of course, we already know it meets the science definition for being alive. So far what you haven't shown is any rational source which says it's not alive.

Nor is that relevent in any way.

Until we declare ladies' hoo-haas property of the state, they are going to get abortions.

Deal with it.

 

[JoeB131]

As for this "viability" thing... do you believe, if you plopped down a newborn baby in the middle of Manhattan, it would be able to sustain life on it's own? What about a 6-month old? A two-year old? Seems to me these organisms depend on something helping them sustain life for a while, until they master the skills to do so on their own. Are they not viable human beings?

the point is, you can't FORCE someone to take care of that baby someone plopped down in the middle of Manhatten.

You guys want to force a woman to have a baby after a night of drunken sex.

 

[JoeB131]

The Pre-born human in utero... is living from the moment of conception, that such is therefore human life, is not even debatable.

Joe can't cop to it, because Joe is incapable of rising above the relativism in which he is mired.

Joe needs to believe that because the earliest stages of development, pre-born human life is not sentient, that it lacks human rights, is a feckless rationalization, to which Joe would never subscribe where HIS LIFE were at issue.

If we substitute the 'absence to reason soundly' for sentience, using Joe's own reasoning, HE would have no rights... and HIS life would 'rightfully' be snuffed out the moment HIS existence became an inconvenience to someone who had power over him.

And it is there, where we can rest assured that Joe's position lacks any kinship with principle.

But hey... let's be honest, what Leftist position does, right?

It's not relativism, guy, it's pragmatism.

Really, what i think or what you think is kind of besides the point. It that lady doesn't want ot be a mom right now, it's going into the medical Waste container, and we are all better off for it.

Now, if you guys were really about less abortions, you'd support liberal causes like free health care, sex education, paid family and medical leave and a bunch of other socialist shit that makes us all a little more responsible for each other.

But you don't. You're just upset ladies are making decisions about their hoo-haas.

 

[JoeB131]

You've not read the thread if you haven't read JoeB claiming a fetus is not a human life. Like I said, he went on about it for 14 pages, just go back to about Page 90. But Joe is not the only one, I encounter this argument regularly on all abortion threads. It's usually one of the very first arguments presented. The "meaningless clump of cells" argument has been around a long time, and if you're just now hearing about it, you are WAY behind the curve in this convo.

at the point that most abortions are performed, (8-12 weeks) the fetus is no bigger than kidney bean.

ANd frankly, no woman is going to **** up her whole life plan over a kidney-bean.

 

[Boss]

Now, if you guys were really about less abortions, you'd support liberal causes like free health care, sex education, paid family and medical leave and a bunch of other socialist shit that makes us all a little more responsible for each other.

If any of that shit caused fewer abortions I'd probably be for them. Not only do they have zero effect on abortions, they don't even work to do what they claim and they certainly don't promote personal responsibility.

But thank you once again for demonstrating how this is all about politics for you. Your truest concerns for human life are virtually non-existent when it comes to your political party. You pander to pro-choice women, not because you care about their rights, but because they are a voting demographic and fetuses aren't.

You are all repugnant human beings who should be ashamed of what you're supporting but you're not... you have no shame when it comes to Liberalism.

 

[Boss]

You've not read the thread if you haven't read JoeB claiming a fetus is not a human life. Like I said, he went on about it for 14 pages, just go back to about Page 90. But Joe is not the only one, I encounter this argument regularly on all abortion threads. It's usually one of the very first arguments presented. The "meaningless clump of cells" argument has been around a long time, and if you're just now hearing about it, you are WAY behind the curve in this convo.

at the point that most abortions are performed, (8-12 weeks) the fetus is no bigger than kidney bean.

ANd frankly, no woman is going to **** up her whole life plan over a kidney-bean.

If a fetus were a kidney bean, I would have no problem with abortion. However, it is a living human being and deserves my consideration.

 

[JoeB131]

If any of that shit caused fewer abortions I'd probably be for them. Not only do they have zero effect on abortions, they don't even work to do what they claim and they certainly don't promote personal responsibility.

Then please explain why France which has ALL Those things has half the per capita number of abortions the US has?

But thank you once again for demonstrating how this is all about politics for you. Your truest concerns for human life are virtually non-existent when it comes to your political party. You pander to pro-choice women, not because you care about their rights, but because they are a voting demographic and fetuses aren't.

No, my concern is crushing Christian stupids and rubbing their face in it. I'm sorry you don't get that.

Millions of human lives starve to death every day in the world. I don't see you giving a **** about them.

You are all repugnant human beings who should be ashamed of what you're supporting but you're not... you have no shame when it comes to Liberalism.

No, I'm just pragmatic. Abortion makes up for the fact we don't have a 50% infant mortality rate anymore, which was the human condition throughout most of history.

 

[JoeB131]

If a fetus were a kidney bean, I would have no problem with abortion. However, it is a living human being and deserves my consideration.

There's whole medical waste dumps full of things your consideration didn't help. Just sayin'.

 

[TemplarKormac]

What ridiculous question. Viability is not an ambiguous term. It is when an organism has ability to sustain its' living functions(heart, lungs liver....), not the ability to provide for itself. Therefore a newborn in nearly all instances by definition is viable.

The organism is able to sustain whatever it produces provided it remains in the appropriate environment to do so. A newborn is never able to sustain it's living functions without some assistance and no organism can sustain life outside the parameters of appropriate environment. We could sew you up inside a womb full of amniotic fluid and you wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Tell you what... let's dunk you under water for 5 minutes and see if you can remain "viable" and if you can't, we can determine you were not a 'real' human being!

Again you are confusing the ability to provide food, water and shelter with viability.

So, a toddler relies on the mother for sustenance the same as he did while within the womb. They can't both be fetuses, now can they?

 

[TemplarKormac]

It is when an organism has ability to sustain its' living functions(heart, lungs liver....), not the ability to provide for itself.

Your logic is flawed. All the organs are formed before birth and are functioning before birth. Viable in, viable out. Read a dictionary.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You are way beyond a moron. You have a VERY serious cognitive illness. Have a competent adult read what you just wrote and explain why you need to be institutionalized for the remainder of your natural life.

• "Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking or derailing threads.

USMB Rules and Guidelines US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

And you need to have an adult read you the rules to USMB posting so you'll stop violating them. This makes two days in a row you have come here and flagrantly violated this rule, and I am not going to ignore it any longer. You are old enough to know how to play by the rules. If you post again without including subject-relative content, I will report you and encourage others to do the same.

In keeping with the rules, I will add that fetuses are still human beings, your vapid little retort didn't change that fact one iota.

You are way beyond a moron. You have a VERY serious cognitive illness. Have a competent adult read what you just wrote and explain why you need to be institutionalized for the remainder of your natural life.

• "Zone 2": Political Forum / Israel and Palestine Forum / Race Relations/Racism Forum / Religion & Ethics Forum: Baiting and polarizing OP's (Opening Posts), and thread titles risk the thread either being moved or trashed. Keep it relevant, choose wisely. Each post must contain content relevant to the thread subject, in addition to any flame. No trolling. No hit and run flames. No hijacking or derailing threads.

USMB Rules and Guidelines US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

And you need to have an adult read you the rules to USMB posting so you'll stop violating them. This makes two days in a row you have come here and flagrantly violated this rule, and I am not going to ignore it any longer. You are old enough to know how to play by the rules. If you post again without including subject-relative content, I will report you and encourage others to do the same.

In keeping with the rules, I will add that fetuses are still human beings, your vapid little retort didn't change that fact one iota.

Add anal retentive to you psychological profile.

You want to IGNORE murder, attempted murder, violence, bombings, arson, death threats, kidnappings, assault, disruptions, bomb threats and harassment by your ilk.

Let's see...murder, attempted murder, violence, bombings, arson, death threats, kidnappings, assault, disruptions, bomb threats and harassment by religious zealots who kill in God's name. Sound familiar??

Where have we seen that before?

And you wish to spew ad hominem, ad baculum and non sequiturs all at once!

 

[TemplarKormac]

No unborn human has the ability to give you that right so it is an impossible assertion on your part. You have the right to pronounce and claim that you speak for them but in reality, you do not, and that you make that claim makes you a little full of yourself imo.

I understand. I am sure the same sentiment was held for those who spoke up for the slaves and women back in the day. Animals also can't give me that right and I advocate for their right to not be abused. So I think I am going to just keep on standing up for whoever's rights I feel are being violated, and if you don't like me doing that, you can bring your happy ass to Alabama and try to stop me.

Feel free to stand on your soapbox and spout whatever nonsense you feel like spouting.

You'll have to get off the soapbox first, pal. Go find your own.