I like the abortions are "way up" from when it was illegal and the official number was 0... The US reached it abortion peak, as a percent of population in ~1980, since then the number has almost halved. So, if there ever was an "abortion culture" it is already half dead... And perhaps there are more single parent families, but unlike in the 1960s when a father could beat is wife and children for the LOLz, now people can divorce a rise children on there own.
Gotta love conservative distortions. Roe v Wade had nothing to do with murdering Jr morons. It had everything to do with the only two people being involved in a medical decision being the patient and the Dr.
You idiots can't be opposed to govt involvement in medical care AND be opposed to Roe v Wade.
I love how you Righties will happily spew out invective like you bought it in bulk, but when someone dares to challenge your so-called "facts" they're "rude." This guy's Channel is nothing but the hot air, reactionary, divisive rants of an extreme, but dishonest ideologue. And his fans & followers are intellectually deprived and misinformed robots & zombies that, sadly, make up the bulk of the Republican party. What you don't realize is that Andrew Klaven is one of the elite 1%. It's sad.
@InformantNet And what you don't realize is that it was the "elite 1%" that built this country moron. Yes, Klaven is a douchebag but that majority of the right are "misinformed robots & zombies"? Really? You've personally met a majority of Republicans or are you just spewing bullshit rhetoric like that miserable cunt Jeanne Garafalo who said that anyone who disagrees with Obummer is a racist?
@Ilikemustard no it doesn't a zygote is complete human at it's earliest stage, whereas a sperm cell or an egg cell is half, and not in the right place to develop anyway. Sperm cells die on their own after not being used, and periods come and go every month, this happens naturally, killing babies in the womb preventing the natural progression of life is COMPLETELY different. Your logic is fundamentally flawed.
@Ilikemustard notice I said "complete human at it's earliest stage" not just complete human, what I meant is that cell has all the data required to grow and become a human, whereas sperm cells and egg cells do not. Clearly I am not saying that a zygote IS a talking breathing human being yet, however the development and size of the human is irrelevant as to whether or not he/she should have rights, babies are less developed and smaller than pensioners but both are "complete humans".
A single sperm has just as much "data" as a zygote.
You may claim that it isn't yet a human because it requires a fertile egg in order to grow into a human. Well a zygote requires a uterus in order to grow into a human.
How dare you hold us responsible for our own actions? This is America, where our forefathers fought and died to give us freedom from things like consequences and responsibility. If you really want to do something useful, why not raise some money to cure VD so that the rest of us can have irresponsible sex?
Liberals are severely screwed up people. They will fight tooth and nail for the exeucution of innocent, unborn children yet vehemently oppose capital punishment of violent psychopaths, pedophiles and rapists.
@muzzster1970 Pedophilia is a mental disorder. You do not execute the mentally handicapped. Well, maybe you do. Rape, while an atrocious crime, does not kill anyone. Are you now advocating that we kill criminals who do not commit pre-meditated murder?
@KamekoBruns God help the world if you ever had child, and he/she was interfered with by a pedo-what then? Go and speak to victims of rape about their life sentences of truamatic hell. Geez you're thick, I already told you what I advocate. Please feel free to hold their hands in prison. Leftists are all talk, symbolism and bleeding heart stupidity. Liberalism is the real mental disorder. Again, you see nothing wrong with executing the innocent unborn. Buffoon.
@muzzster1970 I have a kid and I would not want a pedo murdered. I would want them put away from society where they cannot harm another. I work with rape victims and victims of domestic abuse. Judging by your claim of "life sentences" they do not.
Anyone who can call a fetus that cannot live outside of the womb a child is the real buffoon.
And I'm no leftist. I know that because I do not goosestep to your beat you think I am but you're wrong.
@KamekoBruns You should've deleted you prior inane, leftist rants before posting a response you bare faced liar. Please stop insulting victims of serious, unspeakable crimes.
@muzzster1970 Speaking my mind is offensively bold? Wow. You truly are a fascist and prove yet again that anyone who does not goosestep to your particular world view must be stamped down into submission.
When you're ready to move the conversation to something beyond ad hominem attacks you let me know, till then stay happy under that bridge munching on your favorite sheep.
@KamekoBruns- Did you really just call someone a fascist, which is the go to word for liberals and leftists by the way, and then say "When you're ready to move the conversation to something beyond ad hominem attacks you let me know"? I can't believe this. THAT is the typical double standard from liberals that many conservatives have come to deal with. You guys throw out rhetoric and use the term fascist, and bigot, without knowing what the words mean. Educate yourself please!!
Fascism="a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."
From the definition, which comes from Merriam Webster's by the way, it would seem that through sheer implementation that liberal democrats fall more into fascism that conservatives republicans. Especially in terms of "severe economic and social regimentation." Look at the public option plan. Look at how much taxes have been raised under democrats. Look at how much funding has gone to places like Planned Parenthood even though it is a clear subversion of the Hyde Amendment.
@xSamWaynex Here we go again. You're incoherently rambling on about shit that has nothing to do with the fucking conversation. I'm talking to one person and you're making it like I'm talking about an entire group.
Hyde Amendment? What in fucks name are you talking about? Please, if you want to be part of the conversation try to stay on point.
The only thing I was discussing here was this Muzzster the Moron. Nothing else.
@KamekoBruns- You really don't know what the Hyde Amendment is? IF you did then you would know that it is indeed on topic as well. You accused someone of being a fascist when in actuality the laws and policies that have been enacted by liberal democrats fit more into fascism than those of conservative republicans. For instance the Hyde Amendment states that no federal funding will go toward abortion on demand. However almost 487 million dollars was given to planned parenthood.
@xSamWaynex No, that is not on the topic since that is not in anyway what I was fucking talking about asshat. Once again, you see an orange and call it a monkey. As for the Hyde Amdt, you are, once again, only partly correct yet mostly wrong. The Hyde Amendment applies ONLY to those funds appropriated for the Dept of Health and Human Services. I really can't keep doing this with you. You are so incredibly stupid you're almost retarded.
@KamekoBruns- Obviously you have no idea what the Hyde Amendment was even for as you inaccurately stated its purpose. The Hyde Amendment does not ONLY apply to those funds appropriated for the department of health and human resources, as the wording of the amendment itself CLEARLY says that NO federal funding shall go toward abortions. It NEVER states which department it is talking about in anyway. It CLEARLY says that NO federal funding, that means from ANYWHERE in the federal gov.
@xSamWaynex You really are a dumbshit. EAch time this abomination is attached to an appropriations bill it is re-argued to allow for exceptions such as rape, incest or where the pregnant woman's life is in danger.
Then again, it's not like I expect you to be capable of dealing with reality in any manner what so ever as you still insist in calling me a liberal. I know that since I'm not goosestepping to your bigotted beat I must be a liberal but really?
@xSamWaynex The "Hyde Amendmet" is redefined each time an appropriations bill comes up. Take 2009 for example. Public Law 111-8 SEC. 507. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are appropriated in this Act, shall be expended for any abortion.
Since Planned Parenthood derives it's funding from Public Law 91-572 which was signed by Nixon in 1970 the Hyde Amdt means fuckall to them.
cont- Thus clearly subverting the intended purposes of the Hyde Amendment. This would fall under the "severe economic and social regimentation." Therefore it is an example of how the liberal democrats are more like fascists than conservative democrats. This is the third time I have brought up something that you didn't even know about, and yet you still try to argue like you know it all.
@muzzster1970 A fetus is a fetus - not a child. It's a collection of cells which will become a child after a certain point in time (it's disputed when exactly). Killing a cell (i.e. earliest possible abortion) vs killing a conscious human being are different things.
PS That's if you're not a religious nutcake who believes in things which don't exist like the soul. Now, if you believe anything on faith, well what's the point of arguing about facts with me?
@IvanAndreevich fully developed or not, a human fetus is still a living organism. As it stands we give dogs and cats more rights, which is fine. I don't think people should be able to just go around killing dogs at will. Whether you believe it's just a fetus or consider it a human being, the thing should at least have a the same rights we give our pets.
@StickaMationstudios By that definition a skin cell is a living organism. It has all the genetic material to create a unique human being, too. You kill a million every time you scratch your hand.
| Whether you believe it's just a fetus or consider it a human being, the thing should at least have a the same rights we give our pets.
I definitely agree that a viable late term fetus should have a good measure of rights.
@IvanAndreevich I believe life starts at conception, no if or buts. 2 cells or a billion, you're killing an innocent human being-his/her stage of development is irrelevant. Your argument is an excuse for irresponsibility and furthers the moral decay of society. Facts? Please provide the factual proof that the soul doesn't exist. Sadly, Atheists lack discernment but not superciliousness.
Today's society is fucked up. If you want to get an abortion, go get one, if you don't then don't but there is no need to impose your views on others who may see differently.
@Striker51z Ahhhh, the usual 15 year old response about masturbation. Boy, you sure are a smart one. You know what... I think I'll just try and let you figure that one out. I'd rather not dignify such a retarded comment, with an actual response.
And I was referring to the "murder" accepted by the liberals. So since it's wrong to impose your personal beliefs on other people, we should make it legal for me to go club a 7 year old to death if he pisses me off. Right?
@mgsfan15 A 7 year old being clubbed to death doesn't even offer a decent representation of the logic on my side since the fetus doesn't really begin living it's life untill it leaves the womb(assuming it's properly delivered). In reality, no matter which way you go you're imposing your view on someone but there should still be some choice involved in it because you may have a situation where the condom broke and you really can't afford to have a kid.
@Striker51z Well, to a large amount of people, life begins at conception.
And if someone can't afford to raise a kid, well, I know of this FOOL PROOF way of stopping it from happening. Don't have sex. Don't wanna give it up? Get birth control. That didn't work? You got pregnant?!?!?! Take responsibility for your actions and get a job so you can pay for the baby. Pretty simple.
@mgsfan15 Not all people can do that and kids end can end up in bad homes because their parents didn't really want them. I'm not very knowledgable on fostering the child but I would guess that you would be paying child care. And again, what if you can't afford to keep the child?Then you're just making more people homeless. Besides, an abortion would be much less painful for the child if it's done while its still a fetus as opposed to being shoved in a freezer.
@Striker51z Do you know how many stupid 'what if?' scenarios anybody can drum up? The point is people need to grow the fuck up and take responsibility for there actions. If you don't want or can't afford to have a child then it's pretty damn simple to stop that from happening. ISN'T IT? The point of sex is to create life. Don't want any part in it? Stop whoring around. It's pretty simple.
@mgsfan15 Or you get a condom it becomes into something about creating pleasure as opposed to life. And who are you to judge as to wiether a mother can keep her baby or not? It's their baby so they should what ever they damn well please.
Okay then, if you say so. In that case we need to make it legal to kill any baby over 9 months old. This is injustice happening when a mother can't kill her baby. It's her child for crying out loud. If it's okay to kill anything that's in the womb, then it's okay to kill it at any time after it exits the womb.Logic is awesome!
@mgsfan15 You're logic in flawed as is everyone's logic(mine too). A fetus and sperm are not necissarly really complete human beings. Them being in the same group, if it's wrong to kill a fetus then it's going to be wrong to masterbate or ever have sex it's self because you're denying all those sperm cells a life they can life. You can't necissarly say that a fetus is the same thing as a baby because a fetus doesn't breath. Well, thats just my view of the logic behind you're arguement.
@Striker51z A fetus isn't just a sperm cell. Imagine you found out that when your own mother found out she was pregnant she was going to abort you. Would you tell her 'Well, that's ok mom, I might have died in the womb or been autistic or something, anyway.'
@mgsfan15 Again, it's not our choice to make, its really up to the mother as to what to do with her baby and if she wants an abortion then I'd say let her have it.
@Striker51z Ok then. To be a free society we must allow any mother to kill her child, no matter the childs age. If it's ok for a mother to kill her child in the womb, it's ok to kill it out of the womb. It came from her body after all. I just hope your mother doesn't come home really pissed today, and decides to kill you off. That would be a shame.
@mgsfan15 Also, think about that one for a second. Our economy is shit, I'm having a hard time finding a job at this point, what makes you think that someone else will be able to?
@mgsfan15 Wow. Appeal to the mob. Those people, who believe that life begins at conception, also believe that telepathically accepting a Jewish zombie as their savior will grant them eternal life.
@mgsfan15 Wrong again fucktard. First off, while I am atheist I was born Jewish. 2nd, I pretty much distrust all politicians and want to see stronger state rights. I hate Marx.
If I had to chose a particular political view it would be classical liberalism which was that of George Washington and other founding fathers.
@KamekoBruns- I am an agnostic myself, so you not believing in Jesus doesn't really bother me in the slightest. However your arrogance about it kind of does. The fact that you don't believe in the biological truth that life begins at conception however bothers me to no end. Human life begins at conception. There is no debate on this point whatsoever from purely a scientific standpoint. The unification of a human sperm cell, and a human egg are the very beginnings of all human life.
@xSamWaynex "Human life begins at conception. There is no debate on this point whatsoever from purely a scientific standpoint." Really? I found plenty of debate. In 2006 the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Ethics published an opinion which said “If the preimplantation embryo is left or maintained outside the uterus, it cannot develop into a human being.” Hmmm....so it's alive but it's not human? I'm cool with killing non-humans.
It is alive and it is human. Both of those are irrefutable. The natural place for the growth of an embryo is inside the womb. When taken out of it's natural environment for growth of course it wouldn't survive. However a fish out of water is still a fish is it not? Also physicians when under oath testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that life does indeed begin at conception. Two of the noted physicians were Dr. Alfred Bongioanni, and Dr. Jerome LeJeune.
@xSamWaynex "It is alive and it is human. Both of those are irrefutable" Where did you get your PhD from? Can you tell the difference between an 3 day old cell cluster with that or an marsupial? No, you can't.
You are arguing from a position of emotion, not knowledge, which means your argument is essentially worthless. The very fact hat we can both cite experts who support our claims proves there is not this grand consensus you earlier claimed. 1/2
No I can't, in fact almost all life that starts out on this planet looks similar at the beginning stages. I don't have a PhD, but unless you DO have one then that point is completely moot. And with your lack of understanding of basic biology I'd say it's safe to say you don't have a PhD. I am in no way arguing from a point of emotion and to say I am is pure rhetoric. You just got through saying that we both have evidence to back up our arguments AFTER you said I was going on emotion
@xSamWaynex Biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate. In fact, Suzanne Holland, Ph.D., bioethicist; chair, Religion Department, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Wash. openly admits that not only do we not know when life ends we absolutely do not know when it begins.
Some comments they made to the Senate Judiciary Committee were "I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…" Dr. Bongioanni. Dr. LeJeune stated "after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being." He then went on to say "it is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence." Are you saying these men perjured themselves for the Senate?
@xSamWaynex No, I'm saying these men spoke of their personal opinion as there is no consensus as to when life begins or when it ends. You can argue this as much as you want but again, that fact that you have Dr's who support your claim while I have Dr's who support mine merely proves the fact that there is no universal agreement on when exactly life begins.
If it was as ironclad as you claim it is they why aren't there two charges of murder brought when a pregnant woman is killed?
The majority of physicians agree that life begins at conception. Although as you stated there are doctors who still don't agree with this. Therefore I will bend on this issue but only on those grounds. Now, as to your claim that two charges of murder aren't brought up when a pregnant woman is killed do you not remember the Scott Peterson case? There are also several states that recognize fetal homicide, and anyone who kills a pregnant woman is charged with two counts of murder.
38 states to be exact. That's right 38 states recognize fetal homicide. At least 20 states have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy.
Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic said at the same committee meeting: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception." Did all these physicians commit perjury? Or were they just being honest unlike you?
@xSamWaynex Listen fuckstick, I will gladly stipulate that a number of Dr's believe life begins at conception if you are also willing to agree that an equal number of Dr's disagree.
As for your experts, this was testimony given in 1981. Perhaps the scientific view has changed since then?
Lastly, the only one here being dishonest is you, either directly or through massive ignorance I cannot determine but I don't care.
You're a mindless little troll no longer worth my attention.
I already stipulated that in my last comment. However YOU said I was the one being emotional, but you are the one who is resorting to name calling. How could this be? If I'm the emotional one in this debate then wouldn't I be the one calling you names? Also the testimony was given in 1981, and since then things have become even more clear. Thus why MOST Dr's agree that life begins at conception.
@xSamWaynex You really are that thick, aren't you? Simply put there is not consensus on when exactly life begins. No one perjured themselves because no one offered up testimony you stupid shit. All those Drs did was give their OPINION because that's all they have. On both sides of the fence there is only OPINION. Based on your opinion every embryo that dies in the process of invitrofertilization is a murder.
I asked you about the perjury a few comments back and yet you bring it up again in this one? Anyway I'm not "thick" like you claim, as I have already said that I would bend on the issue of consensus of when life begins, remember? When it comes to IVF you are simply jumping to conclusions. Since we never discussed it at all how can you be so sure that I would call it murder? Not all human life that ends is murder. In fact IVF is trying to ENSURE human life, not take it.
@xSamWaynex So lemme see if I got this right....life begins at conception so abortion is murder but conception brought about by IVF is not life so if those embryos die it's not murder.
Got it.
I'm gonna go back to my original stance that you're a hypocrite. Either that or just intellectually dishonest and will simply create paramteres to your argument to benefit you.
Good day. I'm dne with your stupidity. I'll let you have the last word.
Never said abortion was murder so your point is moot. You never asked me my personal opinion on the subject. While I disagree with abortion on demand, abortion is legal right now, and therefore the act itself would not be murder. As far as you claiming me to be a hypocrite, you couldn't be further from the truth. You jumped to conclusions about my personal beliefs.
Not to mention IVF is legal, and in order for it to even be considered murder the procedure would first have to ILLEGAL, since murder is an ILLEGAL act. So, you prove nothing at all by bringing it up, yet you ask am I seriously that stupid?........
Actually no. I am against abortion on demand because it is the taking of a human life. IVF on the other hand is trying to ensure human life. When a woman is having trouble conceiving they implant her with multiple fertilized eggs. She doesn't go out and KILL those fertilized eggs, although some may be lost due to miscarriage. A miscarriage and an abortion are two separate things. And if you were being honest you could admit this too.
@xSamWaynex "I am against abortion on demand because it is the taking of a human life. IVF on the other hand is trying to ensure human life." Uh, you do realize that with IVF many more lives are created (by your definition) than are actually born. You do know this, right? At least 6-8 fertilizations take place and only one is born so up to 7 lives (by your definition) are lost for one life. That's a net loss dumbass.
Yes I do understand this. The difference is ALL of the eggs are implanted in the hopes that they will grow inside the womb. While some of them may miscarry that is not a purposeful act. ABORTION is indeed a purposeful act, which is where the difference lies. I made this perfectly clear with my last comment, but obviously you don't comprehend things very well unless they go with your view of things. As far as only 1 being born out of 7 did you not hear about the octo mom?
@xSamWaynex Well, it's quite clear that you do NOT understand this moron because with IVF not all the fertilized eggs are implanted. Seriously, this is like talking to a fucking mental patient. With IVF several eggs are fertilized and only the most promising are implanted. The rest are frozen and eventually die. This is where the desire to process embryonic stems cells comes from. The embryos are going to be destroyed anyway so why not harvest.
@KamekoBruns 2/2 As for "Octomom" those 8 kids came from "eight embryos left over from her previous IVF treatments". Now, seeing as how "Octomom" was out of millions of women who undergo IVF that means that there are at least 8 million fertilized eggs which end up being destroyed.
Seriously, you are so fucking stupid I can only think that you ate lead paint chips.
Millions of fertilized eggs are destroyed but your argument is "Octomom"?
I never said that millions of fertilized eggs were killed by IVF. I simply told you that IVF is trying to ENSURE human life, where as ABORTION is actually taking human life. Also I clearly told you that miscarriages, which happen very often in both IVF and non IVF patients, are completely different than abortions. Abortions are a purposeful act, miscarriages are something that no one can for see.
@xSamWaynex "I never said that millions of fertilized eggs were killed by IVF" I KNOW YOU NEVER SAID IT BECAUSE I SAID IT!
Last time I'm explaining this so pay attention. With IVF between 6-8 eggs are removed and fertilized. 1-2 fertilized eggs are put back. This results in at least one birth.
Now do the math. Assume 1MM patients. That's up to 8MM eggs fertilized and a max of 2MM births. How many fertilized eggs are destroyed? 6MM which is MORE than was created.
"I KNOW YOU NEVER SAID IT BECAUSE I SAID IT!" Then why the hell did you say I said it? Also this entire time you CLEARLY said just 1 egg was implanted, now you are changing it to 1-2 after I gave you the website to look up. That right there CLEARLY shows you had no idea what the hell you were talking about before hand. As far as the numbers I never disputed the numbers, I simply said that while they were human life they were not viable outside the womb. Pay attention please.
@xSamWaynex "Also this entire time you CLEARLY said just 1 egg was implanted, now you are changing it to 1-2 after I gave you the website to look up." You are seriously fucking delusional.
You posted your cite 15 minutes ago.
I posted this "With IVF between 6-8 eggs are removed and fertilized. 1-2 fertilized eggs are put back." 21 minutes ago.
I posted "With IVF several eggs are fertilized and only the most promising are implanted." 48 minutes ago.
Firstly my clock says something entirely different than yours, as mine says I have mine at 19 minutes where as your was 16 minutes ago but oh well. In any case I'm not done, as you also clearly called me an idiot for even suggesting that more than one egg was implanted at a time. I can provide a quote from several of your comments if need be. So really the only delusional person here is the one who thought that one 1 egg was implanted at a time......which was you.....but oh well.
@xSamWaynex "Let's go over this AGAIN! Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted. This results in one or two children being born. The other eggs are destroyed."
That's from 43 minutes ago.
It's quite clear that I have been saying 1-2 fertilized eggs are implanted.
"Learn to read hillbilly" You said that your first claim was 21 minutes ago, now suddenly it was done 43 minutes ago, care to go back even further to make yourself SEEM right? So let me just call it like I see it, you are an intellectually inferior douchebag who cannot admit when he is wrong. Let me guess you are a liberal right?
Let's get this straight okay, I haven't made fun of you so how about you try being civil instead of insulting? Now onto my rebuttal. With IVF women aren't just implanted with the fertilized eggs they are given hormones to help the process along. Those hormones often attribute to the number of pregnancies as well. Kind of like identical twins, they are known as monozygotic, meaning they develop from ONE zygote, which is ONE fertilized egg.
@xSamWaynex I'm making fun of you because you're a completley clueless simpleton who doesn't have the slightest fucking clue what you're talking about and yet you're pretending like you know everything.
I mean, how fucking stupid do you have to think that EVERY egg fertilized via IVF is implanted back into the womb?
And hormones are only used in special cases.
FUCK!
Stop posting bullshit you have no fucking clue about.
I'm not pretending like I know everything at all. But if you truly feel this way I can't stop you. I have done my research where as you haven't. You said that life couldn't begin at conception because a person who kills a pregnant woman isn't charged with two murders. I proved you wrong on that one, remember Scott Peterson, and the 38 states that all have fetal homicide laws? I also never said that EVERY egg was implanted I said that multiple eggs were implanted.
@xSamWaynex "You said that life couldn't begin at conception because a person who kills a pregnant woman isn't charged with two murders." Strawmanning again? I never said anything even remotely close to that. What I said was if life began at conception why aren't there two murder charges when a pregnant mother is killed?
"If it was as ironclad as you claim it is they why aren't there two charges of murder brought when a pregnant woman is killed?" is exactly what you said. Which is exactly what I claimed you to say. People are charged with murder by the way, and there are 38 states who have fetal homicide laws, 20 of them are from the beginnings of pregnancy as well. I already told you this but oh well, you still won't admit you were wrong. Typical douchebaggery.
Which is true. This is what caused the cases of the octo mom and Kate Goslyn, as well as a few other women that I can name if you really want me to. You basically got mad and threw a tantrum and called me names instead of manning up and admitting you had made a mistake. Hormones aren't just used in "special cases" either man, they are ALWAYS used as they are required. Also prenatal vitamins specifically designed for the treatments. Do some damn research please.
@xSamWaynex I haven't made any mistakes. Just look at the fucking numbers. Up to 50 eggs fertilized. Up to two eggs implanted. That leaves 48 fertilized eggs destroyed. In order for the process to break even each woman who goes through IVF would have to deliver 50 kids in each pregnancy. So instead of Octomom you would have 50-mom.
How does allowing 48 to die in order to bring forth 2 lives "ensure" life as you claim IVF does?
Man up already and admit your argument is bullshit.
Talk about manning up, you just said you haven't made ANY mistakes when I just pointed out two that anyone who can read can see for themselves. Now, what you seem to be dismissing is that the implantation of fertilized eggs through IVF is meant to ENSURE life via reproduction. Women who have no other option can now have children that they might not have been able to have any other way. IF that isn't "ensuring life" in your opinion then you would have to be a dumbass.
The hormones can often stimulate the process in which monozygotic twins are formed, and therefore cause more than one set of identical twins to come from IVF, which is actually pretty common among multiple birth pregnancies due to IVF. Research this please before you try insulting someone. As far as stem cell research adult stem cells are often more vast and more productive. So why not use them instead?
Or how about Kate Goslin? Or the multitude of other women who have had IVF, and ended up having multiple children? I guess they don't matter because it clearly proves your numbers wrong. Even IF only 1 survived, and the other 7 miscarried, it once again wasn't a purposeful act by the mother that lead to the death of the embryo/fetus. Abortion on the other hand is once a purposeful act that leads to the death of the embryo/fetus. There in, AGAIN, lies the difference. Understand yet?
@xSamWaynex "Abortion on the other hand is once a purposeful act that leads to the death of the embryo/fetus." SO IS IVF YOU IMBECILIC TOAD! Holy fuck! Let's go over this AGAIN! Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted. This results in one or two children being born. The other eggs are destroyed.
Now, according to you life begins at conception which is when the egg is fertilized.
So why is abortion BAD but destroying fertilized eggs that were not implanted OK?
NO IVF IS NOT!! Once again though MISCARRIAGES may occur, this is not a purposeful act. Abortion is a purposeful act. As far as destroying the rest of the fertilized eggs I never said anything about them now did I? You ONCE AGAIN jumped to conclusions. Do I want the fertilized eggs to be destroyed? NO, because they do constitute human life. However, if they aren't implanted in time they will die anyway because they are not viable outside the womb.
@xSamWaynex "Once again though MISCARRIAGES may occur, this is not a purposeful act." groan....I'm not talking about miscarriages you inept gibbering baboon! I'm talking about the fertilized eggs which are never implanted back into the woman and brought to term. Is the lightbulb even beginning to flicker on yet? 1/2
How the hell are you not getting this? I already told you YES they are human life and YES I would rather they not be destroyed. I have a strong moral objection to their destruction. However, they aren't viable outside the womb, and therefore are like fish out of water. This is pretty simple to understand when not taken out of context to make yourself SEEM right. That's a pretty douchey thing to do by the way. I haven't taken anything you said out of context.
@xSamWaynex "She doesn't go out and KILL those fertilized eggs, although some may be lost due to miscarriage. A miscarriage and an abortion are two separate things." I just realized I'm arguing with someone who is completely ignorant of the fact. You truly have zero fucking clue what you're talking about. You're so fucking clueless you actually think that women are intentionally impregnated with multiple fertilized eggs.
Really I'm stupid then explain to me this. IF IVF doesn't implant more than one egg at a time why is it routine for them to implant TWO blastocysts at a time. Two is a larger number than one right? And two blastocysts come from two different eggs right? And this is just the latest form of IVF. Before this they used to implant several eggs at one time to insure that a pregnancy occurred, however this ended up creating women like Kate Goslin and the Octomom I spoke of earlier.
@xSamWaynex "IF IVF doesn't implant more than one egg at a time why is it routine for them to implant TWO blastocysts at a time." See, this is why I treat you with contempt and consider you to be an intellectually dishonest piece of shit. "Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted." I've clearly and in multiple instances said that 1-2 eggs are implanted.
No you haven't you only said this AFTER I gave you the website to refer to. Anyone who can read can go back and look through the comments. You called me an idiot for saying that more than ONE egg was implanted. Then after I proved that to be false, you changed your story, and now act like you had been saying that the whole time. I am not being intellectually dishonest, that lies clearly on your shoulders.
@xSamWaynex I called you an idiot for saying they were ALL implanted you fuckstick.
I mean, you posted your link now 22 minutes ago and yet 41 minutes ago I posted the link to "3D animation of how IVF works" and clear as day said "Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back"
41 minutes ago happened before 21 minutes ago asshat.
I never said ALL were implanted I clearly said MULTIPLE, and what's the deal with you calling me a "fuckstick" are you into "fucksticks?" I mean if you are then have at it, but honestly I think it's a risky fetish. As far as your timing goes, your CLEARLY said that you first said it 21 minutes ago, then you said 43 minutes not 41. Now you change the time to 41 minutes. Can you even read those numbers or are you making them up like you've made up a bunch of other shit?
In case you were wondering where I got this information you can read all about it on ivfnj(.)com/blog/2011/03/21/how-many-embryos-are-implanted-in-ivf-patients-51239
@xSamWaynex Thanks for sealing the coffin on your own argument. From your cite above "We take anywhere between 4 eggs and 50 eggs." & "...no more than two [embryos] need to be placed in the womb.
So if we assume this clinic is responsible for treating 1MM women that means that 50MM eggs can be fertilized with only a MAXIMUM of 2MM being implanted.
That leads to a MAXIMUM of 2MM births and 48MM deaths.
"Please kill yourself." There we go, that's the typical douchebag thing to say. There now you can say I called you a name. In any case, the numbers were never in question. I had already addressed the subject. I have said multiple times now that they are human life, and I would rather they not be destroyed. I then said that they were like fish out of water, and would not live outside the womb. I never ONCE said anything about any of this being "worthwhile." Way to jump to conclusions
@xSamWaynex "I never ONCE said anything about any of this being "worthwhile." See, you're just a slimy person really. Are you like this in real life?
You have said, multiple times, that the purpose of IVF is to ENSURE human life which one would assume to be a worthwhile venture.
Either way, you have stopped being an amusement for me and now it's really like abusing a mentally retarded child though you're not as cute. Back to irrelevance you go.
How is what I said showing me to be a slimy person? I never once said that the destruction of millions of fertilized eggs was "worthwhile" which is what you clearly implied through your previous statement. I said it wasn't worthwhile and now you call me slimy? You really are messed up ya know that? And how dare you make fun of "retarded" children you egotistical bigoted douchebag.
@xSamWaynex Because I take pity on you I felt I would share these with you:
3D animation of how IVF works - watch?v=GeigYib39Rs (Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back)
"(Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back)" One or TWO huh? I thought it was just one at a time? That's what you said. In fact you called me an idiot for saying they put more than one at a time remember? But I guess when you say it it's different huh?
@xSamWaynex As for my arrogance, the doucebag in this video was beyond arrogant and so was mgsfan but I guess you're okay with their arrogance because they're on your side of the fence, right?
You are correct Klavan can be arrogant at times. But two wrongs don't make a right. Therefore you can't say your arrogance was acceptable based on someone else arrogance. It was wrong for everyone involved to be arrogant. The one thing I'm not is a hypocrite. But if it makes you feel better to think I am then by all means be my guest.
@xSamWaynex "But two wrongs don't make a right." No, but three rights do make a left.
"Therefore you can't say your arrogance was acceptable based on someone else arrogance." And I said that where?
"The one thing I'm not is a hypocrite." Fine. You're not a hypocrite. You're just an intellectual dishonest, strawman using shitbag who couldn't keep their facts straight to save their life.
Sorry just saw this one it was marked as spam, and I had to uncover it. In any case you basically said that they were arrogant first, thus making your arrogance okay. Also you called me an intellectually dishonest, strawman using shitbag. Wasn't it you who said my argument was based on emotions? Well I haven't called you names, yet you have continuously done this to me. This would show that you were ANGRY, which is an EMOTION. Your argument is definitely based on your emotions.
@xSamWaynex "Your argument is definitely based on your emotions."
I know! I never once said something as arrogant as life beginning at conception was "irrefutable"
"In any case you basically said that they were arrogant first, thus making your arrogance okay." Again, wrong. Just because you infer something from my words don't project your ignorance onto me.
And for the record, saying you use strawman arguments does not require emotion.
"I know! I never once said something as arrogant as life beginning at conception was "irrefutable" I know! You claimed the exact opposite, and only yielded after presented with doctors who said that life began at conception. As far as the rest of what you said okay it's "contempt" which is still emotionally based, and therefore my point still stands. As far as you accusing me of using strawman arguments....what exactly did I say that could be credited as a "straw man" argument?
@xSamWaynex I haven't yielded anything jackass. You said that the proof that life begins at conception is "irrefutable". I openly still deny that or are you trying to argue that each human pregnancy is life springing from inanimate matter?
What the hell are you talking about? I said that life begins at conception. You said there was no way to know. Then I provided you with evidence to the contrary and we both decided to yield on the point. So yes you did yield, as did I. Now, as far as "life springing from inanimate matter?" Why the hell would I make such a claim? I've already stated where life comes from. You disagree with me about when, but you can't disagree about where.
@xSamWaynex Uh, dead fucking wrong. What I said was "I will gladly stipulate that a number of Dr's believe life begins at conception ...." I never once agreed that life begins at fertilization.
Look, if you are okay with fertilized eggs from IVF not being implanted and thus destroyed but you're not ok with abortion that's totally cool. All it means is that you have decided that a fertilized egg in the womb is "alive" and out of the womb it's not.
I never said you did agree that life began at fertilization. I said that we both conceded to the fact that there were dr's on both sides of the argument. THAT is what we agreed to. As far as the rest of your comment you couldn't be more wrong. I have clearly stated that YES it is alive, but it isn't VIABLE outside the womb. A womb is needed for the fertilized egg to mature. Without this womb it is basically the same as a fish out of water. I remember I used this phrase earlier....
@xSamWaynex "I have clearly stated that YES it is alive, but it isn't VIABLE outside the womb."
So then explain to me the irrefutable difference between an unfertilized egg not being implanted and a 25 day old cell cluster being aborted. Is it simply due to its location in the womb? If so the you are totally capricious with your decision to place more importance on life in the womb then without.
If both are equally worthy then you must oppose IVF as it kills far more than creates.
How many times must I say this BOTH ARE HUMAN LIFE. However the womb is needed for that life to continue. Therefore without the womb they are like fish out of water. That is the FOURTH time I have stated this now. You call me stupid, yet you can't grasp this more than simple enough concept? As far as IVF I have said before that it's whole mission is to ENSURE life. It is the last option for many women who haven't been able to get pregnant.
I do not place more importance on either. I have clearly said that I believe both to be human life, and neither should be destroyed. So how can you infer anything else from that other than what is plainly stated? As far as ensuring life goes IVF ensures life because it provides the opportunity for women to become mothers who would not have had the chance otherwise. Therefore they are able to actually lend to the propagation of the species through reproduction.
The scenarios behind ABORTION, and IVF are completely different as well. IVF is used to try and create life, where as abortion is meant for the sole purpose of snuffing it out. While IVF may end up killing more fertilized eggs, which again I am against, this doesn't make abortion anymore right. The implantation of the egg during IVF is meant to ensure life, keep that in mind please. THIS is the only reason I am actually for IVF in certain circumstances.
@soldierrulz Sorry, I can't argue with an idiot. Much like your 3rd grade teacher, I've wasted too much time with you. Go back to your xbox. GTA awaits.
@InformantNet Straw man fallacy? It's uninformed people like you who when presented with an excellent argument that you start to hurl insults like this. This is how I always know that the intelligent part of the discussion is over. When a Liberal doesn't have an intelligent argument, they insult. Typical.
@soldierrulz "Straw man fallacy" is not an insult, it simply points out the illogic of your argument. When you use an unequal example - a "straw man" - and attack it as the equivalent, your argument fails. An insult would be if I said you were an idiot, a misogynist and a fascist. p.s. the entire Matthew quote doesn't change its meaning.
@InformantNet Oh, I forgot, one last thing. If you dare to quote the bible to me, quote it in it's entirety. Matthew 7:1-2. “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you." I have no problem with God judging me on this issue because I would never have a child murdered in the womb or otherwise.
@InformantNet And what exactly do you refer to as this? An encouragement?!? Like I said, the official end of the intelligent part of the discussion is over when one party insults the other. Like I said, insults = typical Liberal. Goodbye.
@soldierrulz Another straw man fallacy. But even if one agreed with your analogy - you'd need to be a ignorant of history - that doesn't mean that my belief is evil or immoral or even wrong. One can still be wrong and the other right. Your pedantic comeback = fail.
@NoNameC68 Right wingers are also usually pro-death penalty. Not everyone believes that aborting a zygote, embryo or fetus is murder, but however you slice it, the state killing an actual living person is.
@InformantNet Funny how you think that someone who has taken someone else's right to life, an unalienable right mind you, has the right to live. I'm sorry, but I don't think that a criminal has rights as a person after committing a crime such as murder. A wise man once said, "it's better to keep ones mouth closed and thought a fool than to open their mouth and remove all doubt."
@soldierrulz What you "think" is completely irrelevant, and the fact that you "think" it means that it is completely subjective. Doesn't Matthew 7 say to "judge not lest ye be judged"? Reconcile that, if you can. Regarding your wise man, you should take his advice. Regarding your other comment, sorry, but my morals actually come from my own life experience, not a "party line." But the answer to your question is Yes, a living person has the right to live, a fetus does not.
@InformantNet You can call an unborn child whatever name you so choose to call it. It's still a life. And an innocent one at that. A criminal who has admitted to or was caught in the act of committing murder has taken a life, therefore, has lost their right to life. You do realize that all you Libs make the same argument about unborn children in this day and age that the Democrats made about slavery in the 1800's, right?
@ianmaphet So funny that all you Rightists say the same thing. I actually watched the whole video before I commented. But, way to tow the party line! Seriously.
I'm all for a womans right to choose to murder her unborn baby through abortion, but only if when she is in the process of getting that abortion they go ahead and tie her tubes at the same time=this procedure will take away any future need for using abortion as birth control;
If HE can be told by feminists to "keep his dick in his pants and his zipper up", SHE should be told to "keep her knickers up and her knees together". Her choice, just like his choice.
THough I do agree on the woman's right tho choose to terminate a pregancy at an early stage, the general fear that it'll be used to soften the conciquence of irresponsible behavior.
In so many words, "Why the f$#@ didn't they just wear a condom? Should the unborn child pay for a pair of idiots mistake!?" Today, when sex is becoming viewed as a recreational passtime rather than essentail procreative function and means to strengthen marriages, abortion will always be look down upon.
Overall, it's a strawman argument. Be better than that, Andrew Klavan.
IvanAndreevich 1 day ago
@IvanAndreevich Not really. He nailed it. Spot on.
MandragGanon 1 day ago
I like the abortions are "way up" from when it was illegal and the official number was 0... The US reached it abortion peak, as a percent of population in ~1980, since then the number has almost halved. So, if there ever was an "abortion culture" it is already half dead... And perhaps there are more single parent families, but unlike in the 1960s when a father could beat is wife and children for the LOLz, now people can divorce a rise children on there own.
Loathomar 3 days ago
Id still prefer those "to high to remember protection" people having abortions though. Seriously, even Andrew Klavan can agree.
Greggah 3 days ago
Well this is the most biased video I've seen in a while.
iambored456 4 days ago
So, if women have the right to do whatever they want with their bodies, when will they legalize prostitution?
xlucim 4 days ago
Juvenile reasoning trying to plug a crater size hole in ever losing argument of the radical Reich.
Simpleton rhetorics for the impressionable minded people. What a surprise coming from yet another elitist Conservative media with childish name.
Mutually exclusive premises to infer a self-proclaimed conclusion. Time to torch your diploma.
ninuxy 4 days ago
Gotta love conservative distortions. Roe v Wade had nothing to do with murdering Jr morons. It had everything to do with the only two people being involved in a medical decision being the patient and the Dr.
You idiots can't be opposed to govt involvement in medical care AND be opposed to Roe v Wade.
Well, you can.
It's just dishonest to do so.
KamekoBruns 5 days ago
I love how you Righties will happily spew out invective like you bought it in bulk, but when someone dares to challenge your so-called "facts" they're "rude." This guy's Channel is nothing but the hot air, reactionary, divisive rants of an extreme, but dishonest ideologue. And his fans & followers are intellectually deprived and misinformed robots & zombies that, sadly, make up the bulk of the Republican party. What you don't realize is that Andrew Klaven is one of the elite 1%. It's sad.
InformantNet 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@InformantNet And what you don't realize is that it was the "elite 1%" that built this country moron. Yes, Klaven is a douchebag but that majority of the right are "misinformed robots & zombies"? Really? You've personally met a majority of Republicans or are you just spewing bullshit rhetoric like that miserable cunt Jeanne Garafalo who said that anyone who disagrees with Obummer is a racist?
KamekoBruns 3 days ago
"A woman may kill her children at any time..."
Yeah he pretty much lost me right there.
Anyway thats an hour of my life I'm never gonna get back listening to this stupid cunt and his videos.
:(
arklowrockz 6 days ago
If you are watching this you are blessed; not Aborted!
dntpokdabear 1 week ago
A fetus is not sentient until after 3 months in the womb. So why can we not abort a fetus that is less than 3 months old?
Don't tell me it has the potential to become a living person. That same logic applies to each individual sperm.
Ilikemustard 1 week ago
@Ilikemustard no it doesn't a zygote is complete human at it's earliest stage, whereas a sperm cell or an egg cell is half, and not in the right place to develop anyway. Sperm cells die on their own after not being used, and periods come and go every month, this happens naturally, killing babies in the womb preventing the natural progression of life is COMPLETELY different. Your logic is fundamentally flawed.
turdrhinofiend 1 week ago
@turdrhinofiend
Define what a "complete human" is for me.
Ilikemustard 1 week ago
@Ilikemustard notice I said "complete human at it's earliest stage" not just complete human, what I meant is that cell has all the data required to grow and become a human, whereas sperm cells and egg cells do not. Clearly I am not saying that a zygote IS a talking breathing human being yet, however the development and size of the human is irrelevant as to whether or not he/she should have rights, babies are less developed and smaller than pensioners but both are "complete humans".
turdrhinofiend 1 week ago
@turdrhinofiend
A single sperm has just as much "data" as a zygote.
You may claim that it isn't yet a human because it requires a fertile egg in order to grow into a human. Well a zygote requires a uterus in order to grow into a human.
Ilikemustard 1 week ago
How dare you hold us responsible for our own actions? This is America, where our forefathers fought and died to give us freedom from things like consequences and responsibility. If you really want to do something useful, why not raise some money to cure VD so that the rest of us can have irresponsible sex?
Orenotter 1 week ago 7
Liberals are severely screwed up people. They will fight tooth and nail for the exeucution of innocent, unborn children yet vehemently oppose capital punishment of violent psychopaths, pedophiles and rapists.
muzzster1970 1 week ago 17
@muzzster1970 Pedophilia is a mental disorder. You do not execute the mentally handicapped. Well, maybe you do. Rape, while an atrocious crime, does not kill anyone. Are you now advocating that we kill criminals who do not commit pre-meditated murder?
What's next in your draconian little world?
100 lashes for jay-walking?
KamekoBruns 5 days ago
@KamekoBruns God help the world if you ever had child, and he/she was interfered with by a pedo-what then? Go and speak to victims of rape about their life sentences of truamatic hell. Geez you're thick, I already told you what I advocate. Please feel free to hold their hands in prison. Leftists are all talk, symbolism and bleeding heart stupidity. Liberalism is the real mental disorder. Again, you see nothing wrong with executing the innocent unborn. Buffoon.
muzzster1970 5 days ago
@muzzster1970 I have a kid and I would not want a pedo murdered. I would want them put away from society where they cannot harm another. I work with rape victims and victims of domestic abuse. Judging by your claim of "life sentences" they do not.
Anyone who can call a fetus that cannot live outside of the womb a child is the real buffoon.
And I'm no leftist. I know that because I do not goosestep to your beat you think I am but you're wrong.
KamekoBruns 5 days ago
@KamekoBruns You should've deleted you prior inane, leftist rants before posting a response you bare faced liar. Please stop insulting victims of serious, unspeakable crimes.
muzzster1970 4 days ago
@muzzster1970 Yes, yes, yes. Because I don't fly the confederate flag, hate homosexuals or fuck my sister I'm a "leftist".
You're such a fucking moron it pathetic.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
@KamekoBruns nobody gives a shit what you do asshole.fuck y
tonybigman3 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tonybigman3 And yet you cared enough to bother telling me? Curious.
KamekoBruns 3 days ago
@KamekoBruns Your impudence is breathtaking. You are completely unhinged and need help. God help us if you can vote and breed.
muzzster1970 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzzster1970 Speaking my mind is offensively bold? Wow. You truly are a fascist and prove yet again that anyone who does not goosestep to your particular world view must be stamped down into submission.
When you're ready to move the conversation to something beyond ad hominem attacks you let me know, till then stay happy under that bridge munching on your favorite sheep.
KamekoBruns 3 days ago
@KamekoBruns- Did you really just call someone a fascist, which is the go to word for liberals and leftists by the way, and then say "When you're ready to move the conversation to something beyond ad hominem attacks you let me know"? I can't believe this. THAT is the typical double standard from liberals that many conservatives have come to deal with. You guys throw out rhetoric and use the term fascist, and bigot, without knowing what the words mean. Educate yourself please!!
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex You again? What are you? Stalking me? Seriously, get a life moron.
And I know perfectly well what I was talking about assmaggot.
"forcible suppression of opposition" That's what I was referring to.
No please go back to playing with your own feces.
KamekoBruns 3 days ago
Fascism="a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
From the definition, which comes from Merriam Webster's by the way, it would seem that through sheer implementation that liberal democrats fall more into fascism that conservatives republicans. Especially in terms of "severe economic and social regimentation." Look at the public option plan. Look at how much taxes have been raised under democrats. Look at how much funding has gone to places like Planned Parenthood even though it is a clear subversion of the Hyde Amendment.
xSamWaynex 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex Here we go again. You're incoherently rambling on about shit that has nothing to do with the fucking conversation. I'm talking to one person and you're making it like I'm talking about an entire group.
Hyde Amendment? What in fucks name are you talking about? Please, if you want to be part of the conversation try to stay on point.
The only thing I was discussing here was this Muzzster the Moron. Nothing else.
KamekoBruns 3 days ago
@KamekoBruns- You really don't know what the Hyde Amendment is? IF you did then you would know that it is indeed on topic as well. You accused someone of being a fascist when in actuality the laws and policies that have been enacted by liberal democrats fit more into fascism than those of conservative republicans. For instance the Hyde Amendment states that no federal funding will go toward abortion on demand. However almost 487 million dollars was given to planned parenthood.
xSamWaynex 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex No, that is not on the topic since that is not in anyway what I was fucking talking about asshat. Once again, you see an orange and call it a monkey. As for the Hyde Amdt, you are, once again, only partly correct yet mostly wrong. The Hyde Amendment applies ONLY to those funds appropriated for the Dept of Health and Human Services. I really can't keep doing this with you. You are so incredibly stupid you're almost retarded.
KamekoBruns 1 day ago
@KamekoBruns- Obviously you have no idea what the Hyde Amendment was even for as you inaccurately stated its purpose. The Hyde Amendment does not ONLY apply to those funds appropriated for the department of health and human resources, as the wording of the amendment itself CLEARLY says that NO federal funding shall go toward abortions. It NEVER states which department it is talking about in anyway. It CLEARLY says that NO federal funding, that means from ANYWHERE in the federal gov.
xSamWaynex 4 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex You really are a dumbshit. EAch time this abomination is attached to an appropriations bill it is re-argued to allow for exceptions such as rape, incest or where the pregnant woman's life is in danger.
Then again, it's not like I expect you to be capable of dealing with reality in any manner what so ever as you still insist in calling me a liberal. I know that since I'm not goosestepping to your bigotted beat I must be a liberal but really?
KamekoBruns 24 minutes ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex The "Hyde Amendmet" is redefined each time an appropriations bill comes up. Take 2009 for example. Public Law 111-8 SEC. 507. (a) None of the funds appropriated in this Act, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are appropriated in this Act, shall be expended for any abortion.
Since Planned Parenthood derives it's funding from Public Law 91-572 which was signed by Nixon in 1970 the Hyde Amdt means fuckall to them.
Once again, you're a fucking moron.
KamekoBruns 19 minutes ago
cont- Thus clearly subverting the intended purposes of the Hyde Amendment. This would fall under the "severe economic and social regimentation." Therefore it is an example of how the liberal democrats are more like fascists than conservative democrats. This is the third time I have brought up something that you didn't even know about, and yet you still try to argue like you know it all.
xSamWaynex 1 day ago
@muzzster1970 A fetus is a fetus - not a child. It's a collection of cells which will become a child after a certain point in time (it's disputed when exactly). Killing a cell (i.e. earliest possible abortion) vs killing a conscious human being are different things.
PS That's if you're not a religious nutcake who believes in things which don't exist like the soul. Now, if you believe anything on faith, well what's the point of arguing about facts with me?
IvanAndreevich 1 day ago
@IvanAndreevich fully developed or not, a human fetus is still a living organism. As it stands we give dogs and cats more rights, which is fine. I don't think people should be able to just go around killing dogs at will. Whether you believe it's just a fetus or consider it a human being, the thing should at least have a the same rights we give our pets.
StickaMationstudios 23 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StickaMationstudios By that definition a skin cell is a living organism. It has all the genetic material to create a unique human being, too. You kill a million every time you scratch your hand.
| Whether you believe it's just a fetus or consider it a human being, the thing should at least have a the same rights we give our pets.
I definitely agree that a viable late term fetus should have a good measure of rights.
IvanAndreevich 18 hours ago
@IvanAndreevich I believe life starts at conception, no if or buts. 2 cells or a billion, you're killing an innocent human being-his/her stage of development is irrelevant. Your argument is an excuse for irresponsibility and furthers the moral decay of society. Facts? Please provide the factual proof that the soul doesn't exist. Sadly, Atheists lack discernment but not superciliousness.
muzzster1970 7 hours ago
Today's society is fucked up. If you want to get an abortion, go get one, if you don't then don't but there is no need to impose your views on others who may see differently.
Striker51z 1 week ago
@Striker51z Ok, no need to impose our beliefs of wrong on other people...Lets legalize murder! :D
mgsfan15 1 week ago
@mgsfan15 So if abortion is murder then you must consider male masterbation genocide.
Striker51z 1 week ago
@Striker51z Ahhhh, the usual 15 year old response about masturbation. Boy, you sure are a smart one. You know what... I think I'll just try and let you figure that one out. I'd rather not dignify such a retarded comment, with an actual response.
And I was referring to the "murder" accepted by the liberals. So since it's wrong to impose your personal beliefs on other people, we should make it legal for me to go club a 7 year old to death if he pisses me off. Right?
mgsfan15 1 week ago
@mgsfan15 A 7 year old being clubbed to death doesn't even offer a decent representation of the logic on my side since the fetus doesn't really begin living it's life untill it leaves the womb(assuming it's properly delivered). In reality, no matter which way you go you're imposing your view on someone but there should still be some choice involved in it because you may have a situation where the condom broke and you really can't afford to have a kid.
Striker51z 1 week ago
@Striker51z Well, to a large amount of people, life begins at conception.
And if someone can't afford to raise a kid, well, I know of this FOOL PROOF way of stopping it from happening. Don't have sex. Don't wanna give it up? Get birth control. That didn't work? You got pregnant?!?!?! Take responsibility for your actions and get a job so you can pay for the baby. Pretty simple.
mgsfan15 6 days ago
@mgsfan15 Not all people can do that and kids end can end up in bad homes because their parents didn't really want them. I'm not very knowledgable on fostering the child but I would guess that you would be paying child care. And again, what if you can't afford to keep the child?Then you're just making more people homeless. Besides, an abortion would be much less painful for the child if it's done while its still a fetus as opposed to being shoved in a freezer.
Striker51z 6 days ago
@Striker51z Do you know how many stupid 'what if?' scenarios anybody can drum up? The point is people need to grow the fuck up and take responsibility for there actions. If you don't want or can't afford to have a child then it's pretty damn simple to stop that from happening. ISN'T IT? The point of sex is to create life. Don't want any part in it? Stop whoring around. It's pretty simple.
mgsfan15 5 days ago
@mgsfan15 Or you get a condom it becomes into something about creating pleasure as opposed to life. And who are you to judge as to wiether a mother can keep her baby or not? It's their baby so they should what ever they damn well please.
Striker51z 5 days ago
@Striker51z A condom doesn't change what sex is.
Okay then, if you say so. In that case we need to make it legal to kill any baby over 9 months old. This is injustice happening when a mother can't kill her baby. It's her child for crying out loud. If it's okay to kill anything that's in the womb, then it's okay to kill it at any time after it exits the womb.Logic is awesome!
mgsfan15 5 days ago
@mgsfan15 You're logic in flawed as is everyone's logic(mine too). A fetus and sperm are not necissarly really complete human beings. Them being in the same group, if it's wrong to kill a fetus then it's going to be wrong to masterbate or ever have sex it's self because you're denying all those sperm cells a life they can life. You can't necissarly say that a fetus is the same thing as a baby because a fetus doesn't breath. Well, thats just my view of the logic behind you're arguement.
Striker51z 5 days ago
@Striker51z A fetus isn't just a sperm cell. Imagine you found out that when your own mother found out she was pregnant she was going to abort you. Would you tell her 'Well, that's ok mom, I might have died in the womb or been autistic or something, anyway.'
mgsfan15 5 days ago
@mgsfan15 We all die at some point in time
Striker51z 5 days ago
@Striker51z Yeah, we all die at some point. That doesn't mean some lives should be snuffed out before they experience the joy of life.
mgsfan15 5 days ago
@mgsfan15 Again, it's not our choice to make, its really up to the mother as to what to do with her baby and if she wants an abortion then I'd say let her have it.
Striker51z 5 days ago
@Striker51z Ok then. To be a free society we must allow any mother to kill her child, no matter the childs age. If it's ok for a mother to kill her child in the womb, it's ok to kill it out of the womb. It came from her body after all. I just hope your mother doesn't come home really pissed today, and decides to kill you off. That would be a shame.
mgsfan15 4 days ago
@mgsfan15 Also, think about that one for a second. Our economy is shit, I'm having a hard time finding a job at this point, what makes you think that someone else will be able to?
Striker51z 6 days ago
@mgsfan15 Wow. Appeal to the mob. Those people, who believe that life begins at conception, also believe that telepathically accepting a Jewish zombie as their savior will grant them eternal life.
KamekoBruns 5 days ago
@KamekoBruns And you people, the retarded, Marxist, anti-american, lazy, Jew hating bastards think that politicians are your savior. Good for you.
mgsfan15 5 days ago
@mgsfan15 Wrong again fucktard. First off, while I am atheist I was born Jewish. 2nd, I pretty much distrust all politicians and want to see stronger state rights. I hate Marx.
If I had to chose a particular political view it would be classical liberalism which was that of George Washington and other founding fathers.
It must suck to be you.
KamekoBruns 5 days ago
@KamekoBruns- I am an agnostic myself, so you not believing in Jesus doesn't really bother me in the slightest. However your arrogance about it kind of does. The fact that you don't believe in the biological truth that life begins at conception however bothers me to no end. Human life begins at conception. There is no debate on this point whatsoever from purely a scientific standpoint. The unification of a human sperm cell, and a human egg are the very beginnings of all human life.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "Human life begins at conception. There is no debate on this point whatsoever from purely a scientific standpoint." Really? I found plenty of debate. In 2006 the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Ethics published an opinion which said “If the preimplantation embryo is left or maintained outside the uterus, it cannot develop into a human being.” Hmmm....so it's alive but it's not human? I'm cool with killing non-humans.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
It is alive and it is human. Both of those are irrefutable. The natural place for the growth of an embryo is inside the womb. When taken out of it's natural environment for growth of course it wouldn't survive. However a fish out of water is still a fish is it not? Also physicians when under oath testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee that life does indeed begin at conception. Two of the noted physicians were Dr. Alfred Bongioanni, and Dr. Jerome LeJeune.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "It is alive and it is human. Both of those are irrefutable" Where did you get your PhD from? Can you tell the difference between an 3 day old cell cluster with that or an marsupial? No, you can't.
You are arguing from a position of emotion, not knowledge, which means your argument is essentially worthless. The very fact hat we can both cite experts who support our claims proves there is not this grand consensus you earlier claimed. 1/2
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
No I can't, in fact almost all life that starts out on this planet looks similar at the beginning stages. I don't have a PhD, but unless you DO have one then that point is completely moot. And with your lack of understanding of basic biology I'd say it's safe to say you don't have a PhD. I am in no way arguing from a point of emotion and to say I am is pure rhetoric. You just got through saying that we both have evidence to back up our arguments AFTER you said I was going on emotion
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Biologist Scott Gilbert, an expert in human development, tells us that there are at least four distinct moments that can be thought of as the beginning of human life. Each can be said to be biologically accurate. In fact, Suzanne Holland, Ph.D., bioethicist; chair, Religion Department, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, Wash. openly admits that not only do we not know when life ends we absolutely do not know when it begins.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Some comments they made to the Senate Judiciary Committee were "I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…" Dr. Bongioanni. Dr. LeJeune stated "after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being." He then went on to say "it is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence." Are you saying these men perjured themselves for the Senate?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex No, I'm saying these men spoke of their personal opinion as there is no consensus as to when life begins or when it ends. You can argue this as much as you want but again, that fact that you have Dr's who support your claim while I have Dr's who support mine merely proves the fact that there is no universal agreement on when exactly life begins.
If it was as ironclad as you claim it is they why aren't there two charges of murder brought when a pregnant woman is killed?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
The majority of physicians agree that life begins at conception. Although as you stated there are doctors who still don't agree with this. Therefore I will bend on this issue but only on those grounds. Now, as to your claim that two charges of murder aren't brought up when a pregnant woman is killed do you not remember the Scott Peterson case? There are also several states that recognize fetal homicide, and anyone who kills a pregnant woman is charged with two counts of murder.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
38 states to be exact. That's right 38 states recognize fetal homicide. At least 20 states have fetal homicide laws that apply to the earliest stages of pregnancy.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic said at the same committee meeting: “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School: “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception." Did all these physicians commit perjury? Or were they just being honest unlike you?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Listen fuckstick, I will gladly stipulate that a number of Dr's believe life begins at conception if you are also willing to agree that an equal number of Dr's disagree.
As for your experts, this was testimony given in 1981. Perhaps the scientific view has changed since then?
Lastly, the only one here being dishonest is you, either directly or through massive ignorance I cannot determine but I don't care.
You're a mindless little troll no longer worth my attention.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I already stipulated that in my last comment. However YOU said I was the one being emotional, but you are the one who is resorting to name calling. How could this be? If I'm the emotional one in this debate then wouldn't I be the one calling you names? Also the testimony was given in 1981, and since then things have become even more clear. Thus why MOST Dr's agree that life begins at conception.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Would you like me to name some of these Dr's or are you just going to continue to dismiss what I have to say and call me a troll?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex You really are that thick, aren't you? Simply put there is not consensus on when exactly life begins. No one perjured themselves because no one offered up testimony you stupid shit. All those Drs did was give their OPINION because that's all they have. On both sides of the fence there is only OPINION. Based on your opinion every embryo that dies in the process of invitrofertilization is a murder.
Are you seriously that stupid?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I asked you about the perjury a few comments back and yet you bring it up again in this one? Anyway I'm not "thick" like you claim, as I have already said that I would bend on the issue of consensus of when life begins, remember? When it comes to IVF you are simply jumping to conclusions. Since we never discussed it at all how can you be so sure that I would call it murder? Not all human life that ends is murder. In fact IVF is trying to ENSURE human life, not take it.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex So lemme see if I got this right....life begins at conception so abortion is murder but conception brought about by IVF is not life so if those embryos die it's not murder.
Got it.
I'm gonna go back to my original stance that you're a hypocrite. Either that or just intellectually dishonest and will simply create paramteres to your argument to benefit you.
Good day. I'm dne with your stupidity. I'll let you have the last word.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Never said abortion was murder so your point is moot. You never asked me my personal opinion on the subject. While I disagree with abortion on demand, abortion is legal right now, and therefore the act itself would not be murder. As far as you claiming me to be a hypocrite, you couldn't be further from the truth. You jumped to conclusions about my personal beliefs.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Not to mention IVF is legal, and in order for it to even be considered murder the procedure would first have to ILLEGAL, since murder is an ILLEGAL act. So, you prove nothing at all by bringing it up, yet you ask am I seriously that stupid?........
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Well, abortion is likewise legal so you shold have no problem with it, right?
mkaithxbai!
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Actually no. I am against abortion on demand because it is the taking of a human life. IVF on the other hand is trying to ensure human life. When a woman is having trouble conceiving they implant her with multiple fertilized eggs. She doesn't go out and KILL those fertilized eggs, although some may be lost due to miscarriage. A miscarriage and an abortion are two separate things. And if you were being honest you could admit this too.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "I am against abortion on demand because it is the taking of a human life. IVF on the other hand is trying to ensure human life." Uh, you do realize that with IVF many more lives are created (by your definition) than are actually born. You do know this, right? At least 6-8 fertilizations take place and only one is born so up to 7 lives (by your definition) are lost for one life. That's a net loss dumbass.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Yes I do understand this. The difference is ALL of the eggs are implanted in the hopes that they will grow inside the womb. While some of them may miscarry that is not a purposeful act. ABORTION is indeed a purposeful act, which is where the difference lies. I made this perfectly clear with my last comment, but obviously you don't comprehend things very well unless they go with your view of things. As far as only 1 being born out of 7 did you not hear about the octo mom?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Well, it's quite clear that you do NOT understand this moron because with IVF not all the fertilized eggs are implanted. Seriously, this is like talking to a fucking mental patient. With IVF several eggs are fertilized and only the most promising are implanted. The rest are frozen and eventually die. This is where the desire to process embryonic stems cells comes from. The embryos are going to be destroyed anyway so why not harvest.
You really are a fucking moron. 1/2
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
@KamekoBruns 2/2 As for "Octomom" those 8 kids came from "eight embryos left over from her previous IVF treatments". Now, seeing as how "Octomom" was out of millions of women who undergo IVF that means that there are at least 8 million fertilized eggs which end up being destroyed.
Seriously, you are so fucking stupid I can only think that you ate lead paint chips.
Millions of fertilized eggs are destroyed but your argument is "Octomom"?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I never said that millions of fertilized eggs were killed by IVF. I simply told you that IVF is trying to ENSURE human life, where as ABORTION is actually taking human life. Also I clearly told you that miscarriages, which happen very often in both IVF and non IVF patients, are completely different than abortions. Abortions are a purposeful act, miscarriages are something that no one can for see.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "I never said that millions of fertilized eggs were killed by IVF" I KNOW YOU NEVER SAID IT BECAUSE I SAID IT!
Last time I'm explaining this so pay attention. With IVF between 6-8 eggs are removed and fertilized. 1-2 fertilized eggs are put back. This results in at least one birth.
Now do the math. Assume 1MM patients. That's up to 8MM eggs fertilized and a max of 2MM births. How many fertilized eggs are destroyed? 6MM which is MORE than was created.
Fucking asshole!
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
"I KNOW YOU NEVER SAID IT BECAUSE I SAID IT!" Then why the hell did you say I said it? Also this entire time you CLEARLY said just 1 egg was implanted, now you are changing it to 1-2 after I gave you the website to look up. That right there CLEARLY shows you had no idea what the hell you were talking about before hand. As far as the numbers I never disputed the numbers, I simply said that while they were human life they were not viable outside the womb. Pay attention please.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "Also this entire time you CLEARLY said just 1 egg was implanted, now you are changing it to 1-2 after I gave you the website to look up." You are seriously fucking delusional.
You posted your cite 15 minutes ago.
I posted this "With IVF between 6-8 eggs are removed and fertilized. 1-2 fertilized eggs are put back." 21 minutes ago.
I posted "With IVF several eggs are fertilized and only the most promising are implanted." 48 minutes ago.
So yeah, you're done.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Firstly my clock says something entirely different than yours, as mine says I have mine at 19 minutes where as your was 16 minutes ago but oh well. In any case I'm not done, as you also clearly called me an idiot for even suggesting that more than one egg was implanted at a time. I can provide a quote from several of your comments if need be. So really the only delusional person here is the one who thought that one 1 egg was implanted at a time......which was you.....but oh well.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex "Let's go over this AGAIN! Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted. This results in one or two children being born. The other eggs are destroyed."
That's from 43 minutes ago.
It's quite clear that I have been saying 1-2 fertilized eggs are implanted.
Learn to read hillbilly.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Learn to read hillbilly" You said that your first claim was 21 minutes ago, now suddenly it was done 43 minutes ago, care to go back even further to make yourself SEEM right? So let me just call it like I see it, you are an intellectually inferior douchebag who cannot admit when he is wrong. Let me guess you are a liberal right?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Let's get this straight okay, I haven't made fun of you so how about you try being civil instead of insulting? Now onto my rebuttal. With IVF women aren't just implanted with the fertilized eggs they are given hormones to help the process along. Those hormones often attribute to the number of pregnancies as well. Kind of like identical twins, they are known as monozygotic, meaning they develop from ONE zygote, which is ONE fertilized egg.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex I'm making fun of you because you're a completley clueless simpleton who doesn't have the slightest fucking clue what you're talking about and yet you're pretending like you know everything.
I mean, how fucking stupid do you have to think that EVERY egg fertilized via IVF is implanted back into the womb?
And hormones are only used in special cases.
FUCK!
Stop posting bullshit you have no fucking clue about.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I'm not pretending like I know everything at all. But if you truly feel this way I can't stop you. I have done my research where as you haven't. You said that life couldn't begin at conception because a person who kills a pregnant woman isn't charged with two murders. I proved you wrong on that one, remember Scott Peterson, and the 38 states that all have fetal homicide laws? I also never said that EVERY egg was implanted I said that multiple eggs were implanted.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "You said that life couldn't begin at conception because a person who kills a pregnant woman isn't charged with two murders." Strawmanning again? I never said anything even remotely close to that. What I said was if life began at conception why aren't there two murder charges when a pregnant mother is killed?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
"If it was as ironclad as you claim it is they why aren't there two charges of murder brought when a pregnant woman is killed?" is exactly what you said. Which is exactly what I claimed you to say. People are charged with murder by the way, and there are 38 states who have fetal homicide laws, 20 of them are from the beginnings of pregnancy as well. I already told you this but oh well, you still won't admit you were wrong. Typical douchebaggery.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Which is true. This is what caused the cases of the octo mom and Kate Goslyn, as well as a few other women that I can name if you really want me to. You basically got mad and threw a tantrum and called me names instead of manning up and admitting you had made a mistake. Hormones aren't just used in "special cases" either man, they are ALWAYS used as they are required. Also prenatal vitamins specifically designed for the treatments. Do some damn research please.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex I haven't made any mistakes. Just look at the fucking numbers. Up to 50 eggs fertilized. Up to two eggs implanted. That leaves 48 fertilized eggs destroyed. In order for the process to break even each woman who goes through IVF would have to deliver 50 kids in each pregnancy. So instead of Octomom you would have 50-mom.
How does allowing 48 to die in order to bring forth 2 lives "ensure" life as you claim IVF does?
Man up already and admit your argument is bullshit.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Talk about manning up, you just said you haven't made ANY mistakes when I just pointed out two that anyone who can read can see for themselves. Now, what you seem to be dismissing is that the implantation of fertilized eggs through IVF is meant to ENSURE life via reproduction. Women who have no other option can now have children that they might not have been able to have any other way. IF that isn't "ensuring life" in your opinion then you would have to be a dumbass.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
The hormones can often stimulate the process in which monozygotic twins are formed, and therefore cause more than one set of identical twins to come from IVF, which is actually pretty common among multiple birth pregnancies due to IVF. Research this please before you try insulting someone. As far as stem cell research adult stem cells are often more vast and more productive. So why not use them instead?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Or how about Kate Goslin? Or the multitude of other women who have had IVF, and ended up having multiple children? I guess they don't matter because it clearly proves your numbers wrong. Even IF only 1 survived, and the other 7 miscarried, it once again wasn't a purposeful act by the mother that lead to the death of the embryo/fetus. Abortion on the other hand is once a purposeful act that leads to the death of the embryo/fetus. There in, AGAIN, lies the difference. Understand yet?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "Abortion on the other hand is once a purposeful act that leads to the death of the embryo/fetus." SO IS IVF YOU IMBECILIC TOAD! Holy fuck! Let's go over this AGAIN! Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted. This results in one or two children being born. The other eggs are destroyed.
Now, according to you life begins at conception which is when the egg is fertilized.
So why is abortion BAD but destroying fertilized eggs that were not implanted OK?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
NO IVF IS NOT!! Once again though MISCARRIAGES may occur, this is not a purposeful act. Abortion is a purposeful act. As far as destroying the rest of the fertilized eggs I never said anything about them now did I? You ONCE AGAIN jumped to conclusions. Do I want the fertilized eggs to be destroyed? NO, because they do constitute human life. However, if they aren't implanted in time they will die anyway because they are not viable outside the womb.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "Once again though MISCARRIAGES may occur, this is not a purposeful act." groan....I'm not talking about miscarriages you inept gibbering baboon! I'm talking about the fertilized eggs which are never implanted back into the woman and brought to term. Is the lightbulb even beginning to flicker on yet? 1/2
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Not only have I not jumped to a conclusion you even validate what I said. Here they are side-by-side
Me-So why is abortion BAD but destroying fertilized eggs that were not implanted OK?
You-However, if they aren't implanted in time they will die anyway because they are not viable outside the womb.
Seems to me from your statement that you are not overly concerned with preserving the unused fertilized eggs. Rather capricious of you.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
How the hell are you not getting this? I already told you YES they are human life and YES I would rather they not be destroyed. I have a strong moral objection to their destruction. However, they aren't viable outside the womb, and therefore are like fish out of water. This is pretty simple to understand when not taken out of context to make yourself SEEM right. That's a pretty douchey thing to do by the way. I haven't taken anything you said out of context.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "She doesn't go out and KILL those fertilized eggs, although some may be lost due to miscarriage. A miscarriage and an abortion are two separate things." I just realized I'm arguing with someone who is completely ignorant of the fact. You truly have zero fucking clue what you're talking about. You're so fucking clueless you actually think that women are intentionally impregnated with multiple fertilized eggs.
You are so fucking stupid it's pathetic.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Really I'm stupid then explain to me this. IF IVF doesn't implant more than one egg at a time why is it routine for them to implant TWO blastocysts at a time. Two is a larger number than one right? And two blastocysts come from two different eggs right? And this is just the latest form of IVF. Before this they used to implant several eggs at one time to insure that a pregnancy occurred, however this ended up creating women like Kate Goslin and the Octomom I spoke of earlier.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "IF IVF doesn't implant more than one egg at a time why is it routine for them to implant TWO blastocysts at a time." See, this is why I treat you with contempt and consider you to be an intellectually dishonest piece of shit. "Multiple eggs are fertilized. Only one or two are implanted." I've clearly and in multiple instances said that 1-2 eggs are implanted.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
No you haven't you only said this AFTER I gave you the website to refer to. Anyone who can read can go back and look through the comments. You called me an idiot for saying that more than ONE egg was implanted. Then after I proved that to be false, you changed your story, and now act like you had been saying that the whole time. I am not being intellectually dishonest, that lies clearly on your shoulders.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex I called you an idiot for saying they were ALL implanted you fuckstick.
I mean, you posted your link now 22 minutes ago and yet 41 minutes ago I posted the link to "3D animation of how IVF works" and clear as day said "Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back"
41 minutes ago happened before 21 minutes ago asshat.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I never said ALL were implanted I clearly said MULTIPLE, and what's the deal with you calling me a "fuckstick" are you into "fucksticks?" I mean if you are then have at it, but honestly I think it's a risky fetish. As far as your timing goes, your CLEARLY said that you first said it 21 minutes ago, then you said 43 minutes not 41. Now you change the time to 41 minutes. Can you even read those numbers or are you making them up like you've made up a bunch of other shit?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
In case you were wondering where I got this information you can read all about it on ivfnj(.)com/blog/2011/03/21/how-many-embryos-are-implanted-in-ivf-patients-51239
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Thanks for sealing the coffin on your own argument. From your cite above "We take anywhere between 4 eggs and 50 eggs." & "...no more than two [embryos] need to be placed in the womb.
So if we assume this clinic is responsible for treating 1MM women that means that 50MM eggs can be fertilized with only a MAXIMUM of 2MM being implanted.
That leads to a MAXIMUM of 2MM births and 48MM deaths.
This is worthwhile to you?
Please kill yourself.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
"Please kill yourself." There we go, that's the typical douchebag thing to say. There now you can say I called you a name. In any case, the numbers were never in question. I had already addressed the subject. I have said multiple times now that they are human life, and I would rather they not be destroyed. I then said that they were like fish out of water, and would not live outside the womb. I never ONCE said anything about any of this being "worthwhile." Way to jump to conclusions
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex "I never ONCE said anything about any of this being "worthwhile." See, you're just a slimy person really. Are you like this in real life?
You have said, multiple times, that the purpose of IVF is to ENSURE human life which one would assume to be a worthwhile venture.
Either way, you have stopped being an amusement for me and now it's really like abusing a mentally retarded child though you're not as cute. Back to irrelevance you go.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
How is what I said showing me to be a slimy person? I never once said that the destruction of millions of fertilized eggs was "worthwhile" which is what you clearly implied through your previous statement. I said it wasn't worthwhile and now you call me slimy? You really are messed up ya know that? And how dare you make fun of "retarded" children you egotistical bigoted douchebag.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Because I take pity on you I felt I would share these with you:
3D animation of how IVF works - watch?v=GeigYib39Rs (Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back)
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"(Pay special attention to where it says that IVF removes several eggs for fertilization and puts one or two back)" One or TWO huh? I thought it was just one at a time? That's what you said. In fact you called me an idiot for saying they put more than one at a time remember? But I guess when you say it it's different huh?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex As for my arrogance, the doucebag in this video was beyond arrogant and so was mgsfan but I guess you're okay with their arrogance because they're on your side of the fence, right?
Hypocritical twat.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
You are correct Klavan can be arrogant at times. But two wrongs don't make a right. Therefore you can't say your arrogance was acceptable based on someone else arrogance. It was wrong for everyone involved to be arrogant. The one thing I'm not is a hypocrite. But if it makes you feel better to think I am then by all means be my guest.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xSamWaynex "But two wrongs don't make a right." No, but three rights do make a left.
"Therefore you can't say your arrogance was acceptable based on someone else arrogance." And I said that where?
"The one thing I'm not is a hypocrite." Fine. You're not a hypocrite. You're just an intellectual dishonest, strawman using shitbag who couldn't keep their facts straight to save their life.
But you're DEFINITELY not a hypocrite!
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
Sorry just saw this one it was marked as spam, and I had to uncover it. In any case you basically said that they were arrogant first, thus making your arrogance okay. Also you called me an intellectually dishonest, strawman using shitbag. Wasn't it you who said my argument was based on emotions? Well I haven't called you names, yet you have continuously done this to me. This would show that you were ANGRY, which is an EMOTION. Your argument is definitely based on your emotions.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "Your argument is definitely based on your emotions."
I know! I never once said something as arrogant as life beginning at conception was "irrefutable"
"In any case you basically said that they were arrogant first, thus making your arrogance okay." Again, wrong. Just because you infer something from my words don't project your ignorance onto me.
And for the record, saying you use strawman arguments does not require emotion.
Lastly, it's not anger. It's contempt.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
"I know! I never once said something as arrogant as life beginning at conception was "irrefutable" I know! You claimed the exact opposite, and only yielded after presented with doctors who said that life began at conception. As far as the rest of what you said okay it's "contempt" which is still emotionally based, and therefore my point still stands. As far as you accusing me of using strawman arguments....what exactly did I say that could be credited as a "straw man" argument?
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex I haven't yielded anything jackass. You said that the proof that life begins at conception is "irrefutable". I openly still deny that or are you trying to argue that each human pregnancy is life springing from inanimate matter?
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
What the hell are you talking about? I said that life begins at conception. You said there was no way to know. Then I provided you with evidence to the contrary and we both decided to yield on the point. So yes you did yield, as did I. Now, as far as "life springing from inanimate matter?" Why the hell would I make such a claim? I've already stated where life comes from. You disagree with me about when, but you can't disagree about where.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex Uh, dead fucking wrong. What I said was "I will gladly stipulate that a number of Dr's believe life begins at conception ...." I never once agreed that life begins at fertilization.
Look, if you are okay with fertilized eggs from IVF not being implanted and thus destroyed but you're not ok with abortion that's totally cool. All it means is that you have decided that a fertilized egg in the womb is "alive" and out of the womb it's not.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I never said you did agree that life began at fertilization. I said that we both conceded to the fact that there were dr's on both sides of the argument. THAT is what we agreed to. As far as the rest of your comment you couldn't be more wrong. I have clearly stated that YES it is alive, but it isn't VIABLE outside the womb. A womb is needed for the fertilized egg to mature. Without this womb it is basically the same as a fish out of water. I remember I used this phrase earlier....
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex "I have clearly stated that YES it is alive, but it isn't VIABLE outside the womb."
So then explain to me the irrefutable difference between an unfertilized egg not being implanted and a 25 day old cell cluster being aborted. Is it simply due to its location in the womb? If so the you are totally capricious with your decision to place more importance on life in the womb then without.
If both are equally worthy then you must oppose IVF as it kills far more than creates.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
How many times must I say this BOTH ARE HUMAN LIFE. However the womb is needed for that life to continue. Therefore without the womb they are like fish out of water. That is the FOURTH time I have stated this now. You call me stupid, yet you can't grasp this more than simple enough concept? As far as IVF I have said before that it's whole mission is to ENSURE life. It is the last option for many women who haven't been able to get pregnant.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@xSamWaynex And I acknoledge that you believe they are both life. I also acknolwedge that you place more importance on life inside the womb than out.
And how can IVF ENSURE life if it results in a net loss? I don't get that.
Far more eggs are fertilized than are brought to term so that's a net loss and yet it ensures life? Your logic is flawed my mentally retarded friend.
KamekoBruns 4 days ago
I do not place more importance on either. I have clearly said that I believe both to be human life, and neither should be destroyed. So how can you infer anything else from that other than what is plainly stated? As far as ensuring life goes IVF ensures life because it provides the opportunity for women to become mothers who would not have had the chance otherwise. Therefore they are able to actually lend to the propagation of the species through reproduction.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
Reproduction is needed to insure the propagation of the species. Maybe you didn't know that, but I'm hoping you did.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
The scenarios behind ABORTION, and IVF are completely different as well. IVF is used to try and create life, where as abortion is meant for the sole purpose of snuffing it out. While IVF may end up killing more fertilized eggs, which again I am against, this doesn't make abortion anymore right. The implantation of the egg during IVF is meant to ensure life, keep that in mind please. THIS is the only reason I am actually for IVF in certain circumstances.
xSamWaynex 4 days ago
@soldierrulz Sorry, I can't argue with an idiot. Much like your 3rd grade teacher, I've wasted too much time with you. Go back to your xbox. GTA awaits.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@InformantNet Straw man fallacy? It's uninformed people like you who when presented with an excellent argument that you start to hurl insults like this. This is how I always know that the intelligent part of the discussion is over. When a Liberal doesn't have an intelligent argument, they insult. Typical.
soldierrulz 1 week ago
@soldierrulz "Straw man fallacy" is not an insult, it simply points out the illogic of your argument. When you use an unequal example - a "straw man" - and attack it as the equivalent, your argument fails. An insult would be if I said you were an idiot, a misogynist and a fascist. p.s. the entire Matthew quote doesn't change its meaning.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@InformantNet Oh, I forgot, one last thing. If you dare to quote the bible to me, quote it in it's entirety. Matthew 7:1-2. “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you." I have no problem with God judging me on this issue because I would never have a child murdered in the womb or otherwise.
soldierrulz 1 week ago
@InformantNet And what exactly do you refer to as this? An encouragement?!? Like I said, the official end of the intelligent part of the discussion is over when one party insults the other. Like I said, insults = typical Liberal. Goodbye.
soldierrulz 6 days ago
@soldierrulz Another straw man fallacy. But even if one agreed with your analogy - you'd need to be a ignorant of history - that doesn't mean that my belief is evil or immoral or even wrong. One can still be wrong and the other right. Your pedantic comeback = fail.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@NoNameC68 Right wingers are also usually pro-death penalty. Not everyone believes that aborting a zygote, embryo or fetus is murder, but however you slice it, the state killing an actual living person is.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@InformantNet Funny how you think that someone who has taken someone else's right to life, an unalienable right mind you, has the right to live. I'm sorry, but I don't think that a criminal has rights as a person after committing a crime such as murder. A wise man once said, "it's better to keep ones mouth closed and thought a fool than to open their mouth and remove all doubt."
soldierrulz 1 week ago
@soldierrulz What you "think" is completely irrelevant, and the fact that you "think" it means that it is completely subjective. Doesn't Matthew 7 say to "judge not lest ye be judged"? Reconcile that, if you can. Regarding your wise man, you should take his advice. Regarding your other comment, sorry, but my morals actually come from my own life experience, not a "party line." But the answer to your question is Yes, a living person has the right to live, a fetus does not.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@InformantNet You can call an unborn child whatever name you so choose to call it. It's still a life. And an innocent one at that. A criminal who has admitted to or was caught in the act of committing murder has taken a life, therefore, has lost their right to life. You do realize that all you Libs make the same argument about unborn children in this day and age that the Democrats made about slavery in the 1800's, right?
soldierrulz 1 week ago
@ianmaphet So funny that all you Rightists say the same thing. I actually watched the whole video before I commented. But, way to tow the party line! Seriously.
InformantNet 1 week ago
@InformantNet If you can tell me you don't tow the party line, I will become a Liberal right now! Hypocrite.
soldierrulz 1 week ago
This video is pretty rediculous... I thought it was going to be an adult based argument, not some cheap-shot banter with no substance... I'm out
railroadtrash09 1 week ago
I'm all for a womans right to choose to murder her unborn baby through abortion, but only if when she is in the process of getting that abortion they go ahead and tie her tubes at the same time=this procedure will take away any future need for using abortion as birth control;
pugdogy 1 week ago
If HE can be told by feminists to "keep his dick in his pants and his zipper up", SHE should be told to "keep her knickers up and her knees together". Her choice, just like his choice.
AVMamfortas 1 week ago
THough I do agree on the woman's right tho choose to terminate a pregancy at an early stage, the general fear that it'll be used to soften the conciquence of irresponsible behavior.
In so many words, "Why the f$#@ didn't they just wear a condom? Should the unborn child pay for a pair of idiots mistake!?" Today, when sex is becoming viewed as a recreational passtime rather than essentail procreative function and means to strengthen marriages, abortion will always be look down upon.
MavHunter20XX 2 weeks ago
@MavHunter20XX murder is murder no matter what stage of life.. those aren't just a "clump of cell".. those are human babies.
lovellespice 1 week ago
@lovellespice So how would you feel if women were the only ones allowed to vote on this issue? Which dirrection do you think it'll go?
MavHunter20XX 1 week ago
Haha...you can be as sarcastic as you want, I'm still pro-choice.
eggyolksam 2 weeks ago
He's full of shit, but I still watch these cause he's funny.
darkmater4tm