PCA has recently begun a paid ad campaign to attack Ron Paul's 2012, and is paying a very large amount to have a top ad. This should tell you that the system has become desperate. PCA however leaves out the fact that some states would surely still have abortion legal in a Ron Paul America, and unlike O'Bama he would never take actions through executive order. Meaning it would go through Congress, and more so the people. Thereby preserving abortion in some states. Pro-choice is still Pro-Paul !
Regardless of weather or not the fetus is considered a "person", it is undeniable that it is a human life. Abortion is ending a human life. It should not matter how developed it is.
@juliewashere88 A tumor is a human life? A tumor is not a homo sapien. tumors are mutated human cells. In nature, through natural selection, things mutate and turn into different species. The same logic could be used to say that humans are canines.
@juliewashere88 Your using the word "human" as an adjective. Therein lies the problem. The fetus is a human (noun) not because it is made of human(adjective) tissue but because it is a member of the human race.
@juliewashere88 I defined a fetus as a human life because it is alive, and it is the offspring of two humans. Humans cells reproduce asexually, so a human cell is not a member of the human race, and therefore is not a human life.
@david52875 Actually, human cells replicate through mitosis, not quite the same as asexual reproduction. Regardless, the cell is human and is alive. How it came into being has no bearing on this fact.
Tell me, what is the difference structurally between a zygote and any other human cell that makes one a person and the others not. I'm not talking about things it has the potential to acquire, what does it have now?
@juliewashere88 The difference is not structural. The zygote is a human(noun) because it is the offspring of two humans. A human follicle, for example, is not a member of the human race (in this case "human race" is a category of living creatures, which are all offspring of other human beings).
@juliewashere88 "What it is is a non-sentient human cell, the same as any other." What I don't understand is why you base the worth of the life of a human based on what they currently have. Your saying what does it have *now*, what it will have later *does not matter*. Well, I happen to disagree. I don't judge the worth of another member of the human race based on it's current stage in the life cycle, but rather, by what it has the opportunity to achieve.
@juliewashere88 America is the land of opportunity, we don't recognize a human's natural rights based on whether a citizen is a member of the middle class, or pays a certain amount of taxes, or their age, so why their sentience? (legal rights are a different story, such as drinking or the right to practice medicine etc., but all natural rights are considered morally universal)
@david52875 Because sentience, not class or taxes, is what makes a person a person. Else why not likewise apply rights to tumors.
And you've still not addressed the pretty obvious point that even among sentient human beings, ACTUAL people, none have the right to the body of another. It turns out the right to autonomy is a natural right too. Fancy that.
@juliewashere88 "Because sentience, not class or taxes, is what makes a person a person." I understand this, and it is what i am ultimately trying to change.
"Else why not likewise apply rights to tumors." because tumors are not a part of our society or a member of our race and it impossible to live peacefully among them.In the natural world, people had the right to rape, murder and steal. However we gave up these rights in order to live peacefully amongst ourselves.
@david52875 My point is, society's current definition of "person" and who we "give" rights is *fundamentally wrong* the same reason we gave up our rights to rape and murder, that we had in the uncivilized world. When society first decided who they would allow amongst them, they did not consider fetuses, because abortion is not an issue. This is what i am trying to change because anybody with any humanity will see what we are doing is wrong and we have to give up certain rights to live peacfully
@david52875 You say that a women has a right to her body, which i respect, but in order to live peacefully, we must give up certain rights that we would otherwise have. The fact is, a fetus SHOULD be given rights just like any human being, and their natural right to life supersedes you right to your body under these circumstances, because they have no malice aforethought and the fact that YOUR ACTIONS created HIM OR HER inside of you.
"The fact is, a fetus SHOULD be given rights just like any human being, and their natural right to life supersedes you right to your body under these circumstances"
Oh, does my right to live supersede your right to your kidneys if I need them?
Oh wait, it turns out the real fact is no one, not even actual human beings, have any rights to the bodies of others. Ever. You would grant a non-person a right no actual person has and at the expense of actual persons.
@juliewashere88 "Oh, does my right to live supersede your right to your kidneys if I need them?" our society is designed to help secure our liberties. Nobody is *taking away* this person's life. You are when you abort a fetus.
"Oh wait, it turns out the real fact is no one, not even actual human beings, have any rights to the bodies of others" as a said before, in our society, rights are taken away as a result of your actions, you are RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS.
@david52875 That's just it, aborting a fetus isn't taking away a person's life. It isn't a person! Even if it was, it wouldn't matter. All abortion does is refuse a fetus use of an actual person's body. The fact that a fetus can not survive that is not anyone's problem.
And abortion IS taking responsibility. You don't have to like it for it to be true.
@juliewashere88 "All abortion does is refuse a fetus use of an actual person's body." It not only does that but it takes away the fetuses right to life, whether it is a person or not, which happens to supersede your right to an abortion.
@juliewashere88 The reason a person has the right to life an, say, a chicken doesn't, is because in the uncivilized world, everything had the right to do anything they wanted. Even rape and murder. that is why society is so necessary. because rape and murder is wrong and infringes upon the rights of others. We give up rights that are morally wrong to secure more important and just ones.
@david52875 Would you quit making shit up for 5 seconds? Murder and rape are not, nor were they ever rights, even if people could get away with them.
It's funny you should say that people give up the imaginary right for rape so as not to infringe upon the rights of others because doing so is morally wrong, when what you advocate is much like rape and infringes upon the rights of others and is still morally wrong.
I'm amazed that you can admit you're wrong, without admitting you're wrong.
@juliewashere88 "Murder and rape are not, nor were they ever rights, even if people could get away with them." remember what I said about legal rights? well they are rights that are taken away under one legal jurisdiction. If their is no legal system, no rights are taken away. Even if this is not your philosophy, it is the one which our society is based off of, and this is an issue of our entire society.
@juliewashere88 'when what you advocate is much like rape and infringes upon the rights of others and is still morally wrong." it is not like rape to suggest that you are responsible for your actions, and that the fetus was a result of your actions.
@juliewashere88 "And yes, I am the sovereign of MY OWN BODY. No one and no thing else has any rights to it. EVER."
when you create a child, you become sovereign of IT TOO.
"What is like rape is forcing yourself upon the body of another without consent."
If you have consensual sex, you are giving your consent.You are not performing your duties as a sovereign, which you became once you became pregnant. Again it is not wrong to be created, BY YOU, into a situation which violate your rights
@juliewashere88 John Locke is widley considered the father of classic liberalism (aka conservatism), and regarded as probably the most influential figure of the enlightenment thinkers. His works were read by the likes of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, john Adams, and Thomas Jefferson.my idea of an uncivilized world was taken from him, and he is one of the most influential people to our founding fathers, who created America on the same concept of rights i have been saying.
@david52875 But since you want to talk about Locke, Locke defines the self as "that conscious thinking thing, (whatever substance, made up of whether spiritual, or material, simple, or compounded, it matters not) which is sensible, or conscious of pleasure and pain, capable of happiness or misery, and so is concerned for itself, as far as that consciousness extends" The Lockean self is therefore a self-aware and self-reflective consciousness that is fixed in a body.
@juliewashere88 That does not mean that a fetus should not have rights.
"and so is concerned for itself," all living things have the instinct of self preservation. and I brought up Locke because you said the rights and the concept of the uncivilized world that I was speaking of, didn't apply to American Society. I was pointing out a person, who was very influential to the people who created this society. and when he defined person, he did not even CONSIDER fetuses, as abortion was not an issue
@david52875 1. Like I said, Locke is irrelevant. 2. Funny thing, a fetus doesn't have an instinct for self preservation. That would require awareness, which it doesn't have. 3. There's no such thing as a spirit, and if you'd like to say there is, you have to prove it. 4. I already told you I am in the Army. How about you pay some attention when I answer your questions, hm?
@juliewashere88 "1. Like I said, Locke is irrelevant." lockes idea of natural and legal rights are not, because abortion is society's issue and to defend it, you need to take into consideration the way society works.
2. Funny thing, a fetus doesn't have an instinct for self preservation. That would require awareness, which it doesn't have" it does not require awareness, only that it tries to save itself IF it thinks it is in potential danger.
@david52875 1. Have you really no sense at all of the difference between a society and an anarchy? 2. Yes it does. And fetuses still don't have that. 3. I only used Locke's quote to point out that even Lockes idea of a self excludes fetuses. Not that Locke matters anyway. 4. It's fine, I just get sick and tired of being accused of not answering questions when I have. It tends to happen a lot.
@juliewashere88 1. society is a social contract between a governed people, and a sovereign, in which the governed give up certain rights in order to secure others. Anarchy is a state in the natural world where a sovereign has stopped doing its job, becomes tyrannical, or in which no society exists.
2. No, even the zygote, would try to protect itself if it were in danger, the difference is, it can't sense if it is or not.
@david52875 3. Again, Locke does matter, because abortion is a social issue, and our society uses Locke's theory of natural rights and society. Yes his other philosophies, such as Tabula rasa don't matter, but his idea of the so called "state of nature" is what our society is based off of.
@juliewashere88 "Anarchy is a state in the natural world where a sovereign has stopped doing its job, becomes tyrannical, or in which no society exists." sorry, I think a better better definition is
Anarchy is a state in when the governed defy the sovereign, possibly because it has stopped doing its job or becomes tyrannica.
@david52875 1. Anarchy is an absence of government. And even people don't have rights to harm others, they just get away with it without laws or law enforcement. 2. That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard. Quit making shit up. 3. Hahahaha. No. See #1. 4. Again, you're the one trying to infringe upon others' rights. "Raping" other people by forcing yourself (via a fetus) upon another person in clear denial of consent. You continue to ignore this.
@juliewashere88 1. According to John Locke's theory of the state of Nature, which our society is based off of either, because of opposing views, 1.people had the right to do anything in the natural world, including rape and murder (which are both horribly wrong)which were taken away when we "signed" the social contract in order to join our society. or 2. we had NO rights in the natural world, only freedoms . And these rights were given to us by society. either way, you have the same rights.
@david52875 1. You do know what a right is, don't you? Perhaps you should look it up. You are mistaking right for ability. 2. This is more accurate and conforms to what I've been saying. The differnece is that since humans are societal animals, there is no natural world for us as a species except for a societal one. 3. Do tumors have a survival instinct? If you're going to bastardize the meaning of survival instinct to mean grow, they do. 4. You're still wrong here. All day long. You fail.
@juliewashere88 "You are mistaking right for ability" as I said in my post where I explain the state of nature I say "or 2. we had NO rights in the natural world, only freedoms . And these rights were given to us by society." here, freedom is synonymous with ability.
@juliewashere88 "2. This is more accurate and conforms to what I've been saying. The difference is that since humans are societal animals, there is no natural world for us as a species except for a societal one." Humans became societal animals the moment they created a society. If it wasn't for "tabula rasa"(another of Lockes ideas), we would still be non-social primates in the natural world where, whether right or ability, would not be existing peacefully with eachother.
@david52875 1. Blady blady blah. You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth. 2. You might want to study human evolution. Our ancestors were social animals long before they were human. Even among other primates, there are societal rules although they're less rigidly defined and enforced.
@juliewashere88 "1. Blady blady blah. You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth"
You're right *I* don't. However, our Society as a whole does have the right to force its members to do things.
" You might want to study human evolution. Our ancestors were social animals long before they were human." maybe, but they did not, from the very beginning, have a social contract between each other, and no sovereign who is the entity that represents them in the natural world.
@david52875 1. Actually, no, it doesn't. 2. A 'social contract' is just a formal government. Guess what? Ours protects the rights of PEOPLE (yes, even the female ones.) 3. I never give up the right to my body. Ever. "...the same rights as you and I, inside of you." Excuse me? NO one has the right to anyone elses' body. 4. Tumors aren't a race. Neither are fetuses. 5. Not one single thing you quoted from the wiki article applies to a fetus. Not one. You fail. Hard.
@juliewashere88 "2. A 'social contract' is just a formal government." No, i you knew the first thing about Thomas Hobbes, who invented that philosophy, or rather discovered it, you would know that the "social contract" is an agreement between the governed and the sovereign
'Ours protects the rights of PEOPLE (yes, even the female ones."
@juliewashere88 "Tumors aren't a race. Neither are fetuses" If you knew about the theory of natural selection, you would know that new species are created by mutation. Tumors are mutated human cells wich reproduce and grow into a tumor.
@david52875 Sorry, did you just say tumors are a race? Really? Wow, you're fucking retarded. You might want to go look up what a race is, as well as what a species is, and while you're at it, learn how evolution actually works.
That was seriously the most retarded quote any anti has ever given me, and that's saying something.
Respond to this video... "You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth."
you gave it that right when, as a member of society, your Actions created another creature, which should have the same rights as you and I, inside of you. If you create something, you are endowing it with certain unalienable rights, and the fact that you created it in a situation that violates your LEGAL rights, does not give you the right to take them away.
Abortion is not a violation of any right, because there is no such thing as the freedom to live inside of another human being against the will of that person.
@juliewashere88 hey julie, I see you're dealing with the dude (david) who wrote on another thread that women who get abortions are "cereal killers", beware!!!
@MrsTardbuster1 "hey julie, I see you're dealing with the dude (david) who wrote on another thread that women who get abortions are "cereal killers", beware!!!"
personal attacks don't justify abortion.
When smart people want to make someone look like an idiot, they do it by disproving what they say. Not by simply declaring "you are an idiot"
@juliewashere88 "Do tumors have a survival instinct? If you're going to bastardize the meaning of survival instinct to mean grow, they do." Even if they don't individually, which I still believe they do, then as a race they do. And again, this is not relevant to our discussion on abortion.
@juliewashere88 from wikipedia: 'Self-preservation is behavior that ensures the survival of an organism. It is ***universal among living organisms***. In some vertebrates, pain and fear are parts of this mechanism. Pain causes discomfort so that the organism is inclined to stop the pain. Fear causes the organism to seek safety and may cause a release of adrenaline, which has the effect of increased strength and heightened senses such as hearing, smell, and sight."
@juliewashere88 2. the fact that it is growing, whether it knows it or not, is showing that that organism, is trying to preserve its life. This also has nothing to do with abortion.
3.Again, either way you look at the concept of the state of nature you have natural right to life, which supersedes the right to your body in this case because, ultimately, it was YOUR actions that created an organism in a situation which violate your rights. In society, you lose rights as a result of your actions
@david52875 Driving is a legal right, like the right to privacy and your body, and , as a result of your ACTIONS (such as driving under the influence of alcohol), can be taken away by society.
@juliewashere88 "1. Anarchy is an absence of government" yes, I agree with you, but I think my definition is more "complete" because if the governed do not give their consent (and this is how government derive their power, the consent of the governed) then their is effectivley no government, and their is a state of anarchy. Also, if the government stops doing its job, becomes tyrannical, etc., it is violating its right to govern and thus, is vanquished.
@juliewashere88 "3. There's no such thing as a spirit, and if you'd like to say there is, you have to prove it." I only said that because you were using Locke's defenition of the self.
" 4. I already told you I am in the Army. How about you pay some attention when I answer your questions, hm?" I'm sorry, i don't recall that. I was away from the computer for a while and it could've gotten lost in other posts, or i just didn't notice. I apoogize
@juliewashere88 He mentions the word spiritual in there. who's to say the fetuses spirit is not capable of thought and reason, and completely sentient? Maybe a fetuses non-sentience is only a result of his current body, which allows him to interact with the natural world? Also, i am not trying to bring religion into this argument, the concept of a spirit is not only a religious one.
@juliewashere88 (this is continued from my last post) Society, as a whole, is just one entity in the uncivilized world. a chicken can not give up its rights, and therefore cannot be a part of society. Trainable animals such as dogs and cats, give up their rights for food, shelter etc. and in return give their master a loyal companion who might help them, like hunting dogs. In a way, their bond is a society, which is why, killing a dog is unacceptable.
@juliewashere88 "non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that," It is more than just that. It is a non-sentient HUMAN, not just human tissue. It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights
@david52875 If you're going to quote me, take enough of the quote to get the point that I was making. "Not only is it completely nonsensical to pretend non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that..." There, I made that honest for you.
As for "It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights" Again, why not tumors?
@juliewashere88 "If you're going to quote me, take enough of the quote to get the point that I was making. " sorry, that was an accident. I meant to post your whole quote.
"It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights" Again, why not tumors?
because tumors do not have the ability to live amongst us peacefully.
@david52875 "because tumors do not have the ability to live amongst us peacefully."
NEITHER DO FETUSES!
For the billionth time, fetuses aren't people, they don't have any rights much less the right to life, no actual person has a right to life that includes the right to some else's body. Don't like it? Tough.
@juliewashere88 "NEITHER DO FETUSES!" the fetus never wronged you. It is not wrong to be created, by you, under circumstances you don't agree with. the fetus would give up it's rights to live amongst you peacefully It happens all the time. You are its mother its protector and ultimately, until it gains other legal ights granted by our society, its master. In a way, the bond between you and the fetus is a society in which you are the sovereign ( read Leviathan by Hobbes), which must do its job.
@david52875 Yes, anyone with humanity can see that what YOU are trying to do is wrong. Not only is it completely nonsensical to pretend non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that, but you do this with the intention of robbing actual human beings, thinking feeling people, of their rights to their own bodies, their peacefulness and even their very lives.
All to make you feel better in your delusion. That's inhuman and just plain wrong. Revolting. Shame on you.
@david52875 WTF. Now you're talking complete nonsense. First of all, you can't change what it means to be a person, nor can you change the fact that a fetus doesn't poses this. You can pretend a fetus is a person all day long, it won't make it true.
Further, no one ever had the right to rape or murder or steal, nor was such a right revoked for the sake of living peacefully. Rather, people have the right to live peacefully and that is a right infringed upon by rape, murder, forced birth, etc.
@juliewashere88 asexual reproduction is Asexual reproduction is reproduction which does not involve meiosis, ploidy reduction, or fertilization. Anyway, that is besides the point of this discussion. "the cell is human and is alive." yes it is human(adjective) but it is not a human (noun)
@david52875 Reproduction, sexual or asexual, involves making a new organism. Human cell replication makes new living cells, but they're part of one organism.
And to make it easier for you to understand, human tissue is alive and human (what with it being human tissue) but is not a person (human being.)
The fetus can not survive outside the woman's body. The woman can survive without the fetus. That makes her the person and the fetus the parasite. Why is this still even a debate?
Women ultimately control the spread of mankind. Deal with the reality of the situation, patriarchal societies! Let this go....please.
I don't care whether you want to classify a fetus as a person or a tumor. In the end, it's a woman's own body and therefor HER rights are the ones that matter. She ultimately gets to decide if that fetus becomes a baby who breathes its own air and eats its own food and makes its own life in its OWN body. Like it or not, no one's god or gov't can do a damn thing if she decides to end her pregnancy legally or not.
As a woman who ALSO proudly served in the US Marine Corps for four years, I shake my head in dismay. I didn't know about this ban on abortions for service women until just now. I thought that DADT was the only reason I needed to feel ashamed of my military, but no. The military is also treating WOMEN as second-class people. Nice.
The word is a LATIN word! Really? Does a tumor have its own genetic chromosomal karyotype? How bout a heartbeat, central nervous sysyem, sex organs, lungs, kidneys??? I mean really? Im embarassed for you at this point. They were CAUGHT and went through proceedings for perscribing this BC, it was not just Yaz or any others that are low dose. It was literally watered down. They were also caught distributing EC for 4X the price that they get it for. They are scummy and fake.
@threebabyms Actually, yes, a tumor can have its own unique DNA if it's composed of mutated cells. My point is that this doesn't make it a person. What makes a person is sentience - which fetus’s lack.
As for the compromised BC and jacked up EC, citation needed.
You work at a CPC? How fitting for a liar.
You can't get away with the same BS with me as you do with the women you manipulate at work because unfortunately for you, I actually DO research. That's how I know you're a liar.
@juliewashere88@juliewashere88 So does your magical tumor have:legs, arms, HEART, kidneys, lungs, central nervous system? you are making a silly comparisson making yourself look extremely foolish.My heart goes out to you, allowing yourself to fall victim to the lies of this pathetic industry. You are supporting the exploitattion of women every time you open your mouth to speak on abortion. I see the truth and abortion is about 1 thing-money.
@juliewashere88 Well the vicious personal attacks just prove that your weak on the actual facts. Does a 3 minute old baby think using logic, thoughts or have "sentience"? Basic biology will tell you that a HUMAN fetus has more in common with a HUMAN BEING than a tumor. A compulsive liar? How so? I honestly don't know how you sleep at night, supporting the millions of deaths that you do. How does one scream for peace and "freedom" but take away the simple right to life?
@threebabyms Vicious personal attacks? You mean like setting up fake clinics to control and manipulate and rob people of their freedom and reduce women to walking incubators without agency?
I support freedom and lives of people who exist and do not place people below what are only potential people.
A fetus is more like a tumor than a person, it's non-sentient human tissue kept alive by a host body- a sentient person who more importantly does not infringe upon anyone's rights merely by existing
@juliewashere88 You still have not addressed my question about a 3 minute old baby?? "Potential people"? So, so we are nonexistant until we are born? Again, this is an extremely weak argument that makes no sense. It is a talking point. How about babies who are born and survive at 23 weeks gestation? Are they still potential humans? Society still supports my side or else abortion would not carry the stigma that it does, sorry but it is WRONG and destroys not protects LIFE.
@threebabyms You twat. A newborn does have sentience, however limited it may be, it's still something a fetus, particularly one that can legally be aborted (you know, the subjuct of our convo?) notably lacks.
More importantly, a newborn does not infringe upon anyone's right bty existing. It no longer requires a host body for life support.
Abortion only carries a stigma because you create that by lying to, harassing, and threatening people.
@juliewashere88 Abortion carries a stigma cuz it's morally WRONG. It ALWAYS will. A fetus feels pain at 20 wks gestation, this is a FACT. The more you write, the more I see you are a complete waste of my time. I will not stup to your 10th grade namecalling level. Have a nice fact-less, numb, "my body, my choice", brainwashed life. The morally right and educated do have a problem with abortion, it ends a LIFE.Continue to support the destruction of our most vulnerable, I will continue to fight it.
@threebabyms Abortion only carries a stigma in the minds of retards because they go out of their way to create that stigma. Those of us who are sane realize that there is absolutely nothing wrong with abortion and everything wrong with raping women as you do.
It's not my fault your brain is so rotted to value non-sentient clumps of tissue over actual human beings you disgusting monster.
@juliewashere88 you provide no facts, or resoning, or evidence. you just try to make pro-life people *feel* bad by comparing them to racists. typical.
@david52875 Rapists. And yes, it is a fact that you are intentionally ignoring a clear denial of consent. You do so even in a comment posted just moments ago.
Oh, and you aren't pro-life, and you aren't kidding anyone. Opposition to legal abortion means complacency in the deaths of women who would die as a result. I'M pro-life the only way an honest and rational person can be - I'm pro-choice.
@david52875 Actually she has a right to abortion anyway. You don't have to like that fact for it to be true.
Incidentally, ALL pregnancies have the potential to be fatal even if no complications are foreseen. Delivery is actually extremely dangerous. The maternal morality rate in the US is well over 10 times higher than that of abortion.
@david52875 I don't, actually. Not that that it's any of your business. Actually, many unprotected pregnancies are the result of contraceptive failure. Even the best aren't fool-proof.
But whether contraception was used and used correctly or not, the fact of the matter does not change. A woman owns her own body exclusively and entirely and always.
If you don't like it, YOU don't have unprotected sex.
Lol who am I kidding, you're no better than a rapist. You probably listen to a "no."
@juliewashere88 The fact is, there are consequences for your actions. Sex is and action, the potential consequences are pregnancy and STDs. You do not have the *right* to not get pregnant after having sex, and the fact that you do really shows just how self-serving you are.
@juliewashere88 Getting your STD treated does not take away a human beings right to live, So no, they should have the right to get their STDs treated.
@david52875 No, they don't. As I said, a fetus is not a human being, nor does it have any rights at all let alone the right to live, nor does any actual human being have a right to live that extends to the right to your body without your consent.
@david52875 I never said a fetus wasn't human. Any human tissue is human. That's all a fetus is. A human being is person. A person is a sentient and sapient being.
@juliewashere88 If your grandmother is in a nursing home and on life support and is completely incapable of thought anymore, is she not a human being?
@david52875 If she's brain-dead, she wouldn't be being kept in a nursing home.
Incidentally, since she'd be brain-dead anyway, she would be taken off of life-support, which in this case is only artificial and not some other person's body.
Oh, and I just love the attempted emotional appeal of bringing up my mother. Sort of demonstrates my earlier point.
@juliewashere88 I wasn't trying to be emotional, i was just trying to give on example. wikipedia defines Sentience as the ability to feel or perceive, wich the unconscious cannot do. I know wikipedia is not the most reliable source but whatever..
@david52875 Actually, the unconscious retain the ability, even if they do not currently use it. Moreover, they have used it before and can again when they regain consciousness. Even people in comas may still hear and feel what goes on around them even if they can not react.
The capacity for sentience and awareness is still present.
@juliewashere88 wilikepdia says "sapience is often defined as wisdom, or the ability of an organism or entity to act with appropriate judgment" one year olds don't have much wisdom or judgement, but there still people
@david52875 Actually they DO, just not on the same level as an adult. The first few years of life are what's called the critical period, that's when a good deal of learning takes place. For instance, infants who aren't taught to interact with others during this time have a lot of trouble learning these basic skills later.
@juliewashere88 basically this argument comes down to how you define something as being a person. What our society needs is an accepted definition. This definition was probably defined along time ago when abortion was not an issue.
@juliewashere88 If you look up Humans on wikipedia(i have wikipedia open in another tab) it says"Humans, known taxonomically as Homo sapiens" a fetus is definitely a homo sapien.
"Humans have a highly developed brain, capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, and problem solving. This mental capability, combined with an erect body carriage that frees the hands for manipulating objects, has allowed humans to make far greater use of tools than any other living species on Earth"
@david52875 ". Other higher-level thought processes of humans, such as self-awareness, rationality and sapience, are considered to be defining features of what constitutes a "person"."
@david52875 You haven't read the UN Declaration of Human Rights, have you? Unfortunately for you, I have. And nowhere does it so much as mention fetuses at all, much less impose upon them any rights.
@david52875 You haven't actually read that declaration have you? Well, unfortunately for you, I have read it.
I don't recall it so much as mentioning fetuses anywhere at all, let alone attempting to impose upon them any right overriding the rights of actual human beings.
Oh, but if you would like to tell me in which article of the declaration it says any of this, be my guest. I'm waiting.
@juliewashere88 Sorry I didn't really type that right. I meant according to wikipedia, humans (and fetuses) are homo sapiens, and that document gives all humans the right to live.
@juliewashere88 " No, I believe a fetus doesn't have rights because it isn't a person." WHY IS IT NOT A PERSON!? don't say "because it isn't sentient", in a just society a HUMAN BEING should be granted rights at the moment it becomes a HUMAN BEING. Your
human beings are not properties.. to say that a human being is somebody else property is a clear sign that they are not really pro-choice, they are against choice, they are pro-slavery and pro-racism.. just tell us the truth babe, you're not pro-choice, you are pro-abortion and anti-choice.
@juliewashere88 a fetus is alive because it responds to stimuli, maintains homeostasis, and has the ability to grow. that is how scientists today define something as "living". it is a human being because it is the offspring of two humans. you could say a baby is not a human being because its skull isn't fully developed, just like you could say a zygot isn't a human being because it's hand is not fully developed.
@david52875 Actually, I pointed that mistake out when it was first posted but for some reason my comment didn't appear.
I just pointed your mistake out because, well, it was funny. Seriously though, it's not really much worse than some of the other nonsense you've posted on purpose.
Antis are almost universally scientifically illiterate. Your comment, typo or not, isn't really out of place.
Making blatantly false statements is just conforming to the standard set by your misogynist peers.
@juliewashere88 I actually half agree with you there. most pro-life people are religious and only try to make pro-choice people feel bad, instead of reasoning and using facts. However, so do pro-choice people.
@david52875 I wasn't even talking about religion, although that is a serious mental handicap for a lot of people. That's not to say that irreligious arguments against abortion are any more rational.
You can see it in your own posts, constantly engaging in they hyperbole of referring to fetuses as 'human beings' and 'unborn' when they're clearly not, and calling abortion 'murder' when it clearly isn't.
Your argument rests on pretending a fetus is a person, and that a woman is less.
@david52875 That's actually not a fact. Abortion isn't convenient and you just pulled that statistic out of your ass anyway.
Not getting raped is not a 'convenience.' Not suffering excruciating pain is not a 'convenience.' Not needlessly risking my life is not a 'convenience.' Not being a walking incubator is not a 'convenience.'
Never mind just how much of an inconvenience (read pain in the ass) it is to obtain an abortion at all, especially for military women.
@juliewashere88 Furthermore, I am 29 yrs old with three small girls. I work, go to school and love my kids all at the same time. I am not a "incubator", 2 of my girls were unplanned, but that did not give me the right to sign some papers and allow some FAKE Dr to kill them for a pretty penny. What is empowering to women is that we can do it all! Work, school, wife, and MOMMY. And do it all well. Abortion is murder, NOT healthcare, thank God that so many REAL Dr.s realize this.
@juliewashere88 That reply just further proves your lack of real critical thinking and how you have been brainwashed by the disgusting pawns who call themselves"pro choice" . Everyone should have a choice, including the HUMAN BEING in utero. Choices should not be taken away from people before they have their own chance to choose. So, once a baby is actually born, magically, it's a human and not a tumor. Your spewed back talking points here are comical.
@threebabyms Fetuses CAN'T choose anything at all! They simply don't have the capacity for any kind of awareness or thought! It isn't even aware of its own existence, let alone able to understand an assess its situation!
But even if it was, it still wouldn't matter because a woman's body is her own exclusively and always and NOBODY ever has a right to her body without her consent. No person has a right to anyone else's body, why should a mere fetus, a non-person, have a right no one else has?
@juliewashere88 A newborn baby does not have that capacity either soooo what is your point? A BABY in utero is SEPERATE, not like an organ, an actual PERSON. Please do not start the " my body my choice" crap. That "non person" inside her is her CHILD. Hers to protect and love. Her RESPONSIBILITY, not hers to dispose of for any reason. That is A HUMAN LIFE, not a "non-person." How heartless, please do not preach about peace and love because KILLING is the exact opposite.
@threebabyms Actually, it does, it's just limited. Still, awareness is awareness.
The non-person inside a WOMAN'S BODY is a fetus, not a child. Fetus or no, child or no, a woman’s body is still hers all day every day and no one and nothing has any right to it without her initial and continued permission.
Yours is the mentality of a rapist monster, forcing yourself on another person's body as nthey clearly and unambiguously say 'no, you cannot use my body.'
@juliewashere88 My house is mine, right? if i start creating human beings inside my house, and then kill them because "i didn't give them consent to live in my house" is that raight at all?
@juliewashere88 A tapeworm is not a human being like an unborn baby is. Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get pregnant. If you have unprotected sex there is a very high chance you will get pregnant. human beings created society and gave up some of there liberties for security, animals didn't. and the fact that you would compare a fetus to a tape worm is disgusting.
@juliewashere88 thats called a typo i meant "Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get a tapeworm."
just the fact that you have to go back and attack a typo i made really says something
@juliewashere88 thats called a typo, i meant "Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get a tapeworm." just the fact that you have to go back and attack a typo i made really says something...
@juliewashere88 you can't create a human being inside your womb then just say it has no right to be there, then kill it. You gave it the right to your body when you had unprotected sex. A fetus is a living thing. It maintains homeostasis, responds to stimuli, and has the ability to grow which is how we define something as living. It is a human being because it was create from two humans reproducing. To say that it just magically turns into a human after however long is just retarded...
Lesbians should not have Children. Nancy is pro-Genocide. (Heil Hitler.) :).
MrFennmeista 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PCA has recently begun a paid ad campaign to attack Ron Paul's 2012, and is paying a very large amount to have a top ad. This should tell you that the system has become desperate. PCA however leaves out the fact that some states would surely still have abortion legal in a Ron Paul America, and unlike O'Bama he would never take actions through executive order. Meaning it would go through Congress, and more so the people. Thereby preserving abortion in some states. Pro-choice is still Pro-Paul !
OneLoveSmile 4 months ago
I thought a debate was supposed to show both sides.
Would love to hear the other side.
shope24 1 year ago
So you define "human" as having human DNA, and a "Human Being" as Having human DNA and being sentient and sapient?
david52875 1 year ago
Regardless of weather or not the fetus is considered a "person", it is undeniable that it is a human life. Abortion is ending a human life. It should not matter how developed it is.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 A tumor is a human life too. Removing it is ending a human life.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 A tumor is a human life? A tumor is not a homo sapien. tumors are mutated human cells. In nature, through natural selection, things mutate and turn into different species. The same logic could be used to say that humans are canines.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 A tumor is alive and it is human. It is not a human being for the same reason a fetus isn't. It isn't sentient.
The rest of your comment on it is WTF.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 Your using the word "human" as an adjective. Therein lies the problem. The fetus is a human (noun) not because it is made of human(adjective) tissue but because it is a member of the human race.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 I defined a fetus as a human life because it is alive, and it is the offspring of two humans. Humans cells reproduce asexually, so a human cell is not a member of the human race, and therefore is not a human life.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually, human cells replicate through mitosis, not quite the same as asexual reproduction. Regardless, the cell is human and is alive. How it came into being has no bearing on this fact.
Tell me, what is the difference structurally between a zygote and any other human cell that makes one a person and the others not. I'm not talking about things it has the potential to acquire, what does it have now?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 The difference is not structural. The zygote is a human(noun) because it is the offspring of two humans. A human follicle, for example, is not a member of the human race (in this case "human race" is a category of living creatures, which are all offspring of other human beings).
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Like I said, what caused it to come into being is of no consequence. What it is is a non-sentient human cell, the same as any other.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "What it is is a non-sentient human cell, the same as any other." What I don't understand is why you base the worth of the life of a human based on what they currently have. Your saying what does it have *now*, what it will have later *does not matter*. Well, I happen to disagree. I don't judge the worth of another member of the human race based on it's current stage in the life cycle, but rather, by what it has the opportunity to achieve.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 America is the land of opportunity, we don't recognize a human's natural rights based on whether a citizen is a member of the middle class, or pays a certain amount of taxes, or their age, so why their sentience? (legal rights are a different story, such as drinking or the right to practice medicine etc., but all natural rights are considered morally universal)
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Because sentience, not class or taxes, is what makes a person a person. Else why not likewise apply rights to tumors.
And you've still not addressed the pretty obvious point that even among sentient human beings, ACTUAL people, none have the right to the body of another. It turns out the right to autonomy is a natural right too. Fancy that.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "Because sentience, not class or taxes, is what makes a person a person." I understand this, and it is what i am ultimately trying to change.
"Else why not likewise apply rights to tumors." because tumors are not a part of our society or a member of our race and it impossible to live peacefully among them.In the natural world, people had the right to rape, murder and steal. However we gave up these rights in order to live peacefully amongst ourselves.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 My point is, society's current definition of "person" and who we "give" rights is *fundamentally wrong* the same reason we gave up our rights to rape and murder, that we had in the uncivilized world. When society first decided who they would allow amongst them, they did not consider fetuses, because abortion is not an issue. This is what i am trying to change because anybody with any humanity will see what we are doing is wrong and we have to give up certain rights to live peacfully
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 You say that a women has a right to her body, which i respect, but in order to live peacefully, we must give up certain rights that we would otherwise have. The fact is, a fetus SHOULD be given rights just like any human being, and their natural right to life supersedes you right to your body under these circumstances, because they have no malice aforethought and the fact that YOUR ACTIONS created HIM OR HER inside of you.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875
"The fact is, a fetus SHOULD be given rights just like any human being, and their natural right to life supersedes you right to your body under these circumstances"
Oh, does my right to live supersede your right to your kidneys if I need them?
Oh wait, it turns out the real fact is no one, not even actual human beings, have any rights to the bodies of others. Ever. You would grant a non-person a right no actual person has and at the expense of actual persons.
Sick. Just sick.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "Oh, does my right to live supersede your right to your kidneys if I need them?" our society is designed to help secure our liberties. Nobody is *taking away* this person's life. You are when you abort a fetus.
"Oh wait, it turns out the real fact is no one, not even actual human beings, have any rights to the bodies of others" as a said before, in our society, rights are taken away as a result of your actions, you are RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 That's just it, aborting a fetus isn't taking away a person's life. It isn't a person! Even if it was, it wouldn't matter. All abortion does is refuse a fetus use of an actual person's body. The fact that a fetus can not survive that is not anyone's problem.
And abortion IS taking responsibility. You don't have to like it for it to be true.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "All abortion does is refuse a fetus use of an actual person's body." It not only does that but it takes away the fetuses right to life, whether it is a person or not, which happens to supersede your right to an abortion.
By the way, what service are you in?
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 The reason a person has the right to life an, say, a chicken doesn't, is because in the uncivilized world, everything had the right to do anything they wanted. Even rape and murder. that is why society is so necessary. because rape and murder is wrong and infringes upon the rights of others. We give up rights that are morally wrong to secure more important and just ones.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Would you quit making shit up for 5 seconds? Murder and rape are not, nor were they ever rights, even if people could get away with them.
It's funny you should say that people give up the imaginary right for rape so as not to infringe upon the rights of others because doing so is morally wrong, when what you advocate is much like rape and infringes upon the rights of others and is still morally wrong.
I'm amazed that you can admit you're wrong, without admitting you're wrong.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "Murder and rape are not, nor were they ever rights, even if people could get away with them." remember what I said about legal rights? well they are rights that are taken away under one legal jurisdiction. If their is no legal system, no rights are taken away. Even if this is not your philosophy, it is the one which our society is based off of, and this is an issue of our entire society.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 'when what you advocate is much like rape and infringes upon the rights of others and is still morally wrong." it is not like rape to suggest that you are responsible for your actions, and that the fetus was a result of your actions.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 What is like rape is forcing yourself upon the body of another without consent.
And abortion IS taking responsibility.
And yes, I am the sovereign of MY OWN BODY. No one and no thing else has any rights to it. EVER.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "And yes, I am the sovereign of MY OWN BODY. No one and no thing else has any rights to it. EVER."
when you create a child, you become sovereign of IT TOO.
"What is like rape is forcing yourself upon the body of another without consent."
If you have consensual sex, you are giving your consent.You are not performing your duties as a sovereign, which you became once you became pregnant. Again it is not wrong to be created, BY YOU, into a situation which violate your rights
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 "when you create a child, you become sovereign of IT TOO."
That's nice. Abortion prevents children from being created.
"If you have consensual sex, you are giving your consent."
Yes, to sex. Nothing more.
Seeking an abortion is pretty clear "I do not consent to this." But like a rapist, you ignore it when your victims say 'no!'
And I don't give two shits about John Locke. Trying to use a famous name doesn't make you right.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 John Locke is widley considered the father of classic liberalism (aka conservatism), and regarded as probably the most influential figure of the enlightenment thinkers. His works were read by the likes of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, john Adams, and Thomas Jefferson.my idea of an uncivilized world was taken from him, and he is one of the most influential people to our founding fathers, who created America on the same concept of rights i have been saying.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 But since you want to talk about Locke, Locke defines the self as "that conscious thinking thing, (whatever substance, made up of whether spiritual, or material, simple, or compounded, it matters not) which is sensible, or conscious of pleasure and pain, capable of happiness or misery, and so is concerned for itself, as far as that consciousness extends" The Lockean self is therefore a self-aware and self-reflective consciousness that is fixed in a body.
Does that sound like a fetus?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 That does not mean that a fetus should not have rights.
"and so is concerned for itself," all living things have the instinct of self preservation. and I brought up Locke because you said the rights and the concept of the uncivilized world that I was speaking of, didn't apply to American Society. I was pointing out a person, who was very influential to the people who created this society. and when he defined person, he did not even CONSIDER fetuses, as abortion was not an issue
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. Like I said, Locke is irrelevant. 2. Funny thing, a fetus doesn't have an instinct for self preservation. That would require awareness, which it doesn't have. 3. There's no such thing as a spirit, and if you'd like to say there is, you have to prove it. 4. I already told you I am in the Army. How about you pay some attention when I answer your questions, hm?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "1. Like I said, Locke is irrelevant." lockes idea of natural and legal rights are not, because abortion is society's issue and to defend it, you need to take into consideration the way society works.
2. Funny thing, a fetus doesn't have an instinct for self preservation. That would require awareness, which it doesn't have" it does not require awareness, only that it tries to save itself IF it thinks it is in potential danger.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. Have you really no sense at all of the difference between a society and an anarchy? 2. Yes it does. And fetuses still don't have that. 3. I only used Locke's quote to point out that even Lockes idea of a self excludes fetuses. Not that Locke matters anyway. 4. It's fine, I just get sick and tired of being accused of not answering questions when I have. It tends to happen a lot.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 1. society is a social contract between a governed people, and a sovereign, in which the governed give up certain rights in order to secure others. Anarchy is a state in the natural world where a sovereign has stopped doing its job, becomes tyrannical, or in which no society exists.
2. No, even the zygote, would try to protect itself if it were in danger, the difference is, it can't sense if it is or not.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 3. Again, Locke does matter, because abortion is a social issue, and our society uses Locke's theory of natural rights and society. Yes his other philosophies, such as Tabula rasa don't matter, but his idea of the so called "state of nature" is what our society is based off of.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "Anarchy is a state in the natural world where a sovereign has stopped doing its job, becomes tyrannical, or in which no society exists." sorry, I think a better better definition is
Anarchy is a state in when the governed defy the sovereign, possibly because it has stopped doing its job or becomes tyrannica.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. Anarchy is an absence of government. And even people don't have rights to harm others, they just get away with it without laws or law enforcement. 2. That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard. Quit making shit up. 3. Hahahaha. No. See #1. 4. Again, you're the one trying to infringe upon others' rights. "Raping" other people by forcing yourself (via a fetus) upon another person in clear denial of consent. You continue to ignore this.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 1. According to John Locke's theory of the state of Nature, which our society is based off of either, because of opposing views, 1.people had the right to do anything in the natural world, including rape and murder (which are both horribly wrong)which were taken away when we "signed" the social contract in order to join our society. or 2. we had NO rights in the natural world, only freedoms . And these rights were given to us by society. either way, you have the same rights.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. You do know what a right is, don't you? Perhaps you should look it up. You are mistaking right for ability. 2. This is more accurate and conforms to what I've been saying. The differnece is that since humans are societal animals, there is no natural world for us as a species except for a societal one. 3. Do tumors have a survival instinct? If you're going to bastardize the meaning of survival instinct to mean grow, they do. 4. You're still wrong here. All day long. You fail.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "You are mistaking right for ability" as I said in my post where I explain the state of nature I say "or 2. we had NO rights in the natural world, only freedoms . And these rights were given to us by society." here, freedom is synonymous with ability.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "2. This is more accurate and conforms to what I've been saying. The difference is that since humans are societal animals, there is no natural world for us as a species except for a societal one." Humans became societal animals the moment they created a society. If it wasn't for "tabula rasa"(another of Lockes ideas), we would still be non-social primates in the natural world where, whether right or ability, would not be existing peacefully with eachother.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. Blady blady blah. You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth. 2. You might want to study human evolution. Our ancestors were social animals long before they were human. Even among other primates, there are societal rules although they're less rigidly defined and enforced.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "1. Blady blady blah. You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth"
You're right *I* don't. However, our Society as a whole does have the right to force its members to do things.
" You might want to study human evolution. Our ancestors were social animals long before they were human." maybe, but they did not, from the very beginning, have a social contract between each other, and no sovereign who is the entity that represents them in the natural world.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 1. Actually, no, it doesn't. 2. A 'social contract' is just a formal government. Guess what? Ours protects the rights of PEOPLE (yes, even the female ones.) 3. I never give up the right to my body. Ever. "...the same rights as you and I, inside of you." Excuse me? NO one has the right to anyone elses' body. 4. Tumors aren't a race. Neither are fetuses. 5. Not one single thing you quoted from the wiki article applies to a fetus. Not one. You fail. Hard.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "2. A 'social contract' is just a formal government." No, i you knew the first thing about Thomas Hobbes, who invented that philosophy, or rather discovered it, you would know that the "social contract" is an agreement between the governed and the sovereign
'Ours protects the rights of PEOPLE (yes, even the female ones."
yes and even unborn ones.
"Tumors aren't a race. Neither are fetuses."
fetuses are a member of the human race.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Ours protects the rights of PEOPLE (yes, even the female ones."
"yes and even unborn ones."
There's no such thing as an unborn person, tardbasket.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "Tumors aren't a race. Neither are fetuses" If you knew about the theory of natural selection, you would know that new species are created by mutation. Tumors are mutated human cells wich reproduce and grow into a tumor.
tumors are a race. you fail. hard
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Sorry, did you just say tumors are a race? Really? Wow, you're fucking retarded. You might want to go look up what a race is, as well as what a species is, and while you're at it, learn how evolution actually works.
That was seriously the most retarded quote any anti has ever given me, and that's saying something.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
Respond to this video... "You still don't have the right to "rape" women with a forced birth."
you gave it that right when, as a member of society, your Actions created another creature, which should have the same rights as you and I, inside of you. If you create something, you are endowing it with certain unalienable rights, and the fact that you created it in a situation that violates your LEGAL rights, does not give you the right to take them away.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875
Abortion is not a violation of any right, because there is no such thing as the freedom to live inside of another human being against the will of that person.
MrsTardbuster1 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 hey julie, I see you're dealing with the dude (david) who wrote on another thread that women who get abortions are "cereal killers", beware!!!
MrsTardbuster1 1 year ago
@MrsTardbuster1 "cereal killers"? Seriously? So abortion kills corn flakes? Good to know.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 ""cereal killers"? Seriously? So abortion kills corn flakes? Good to know."
again the fact that you go back and attack a spelling error reflects your intelligence.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrsTardbuster1 "hey julie, I see you're dealing with the dude (david) who wrote on another thread that women who get abortions are "cereal killers", beware!!!"
personal attacks don't justify abortion.
When smart people want to make someone look like an idiot, they do it by disproving what they say. Not by simply declaring "you are an idiot"
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "Do tumors have a survival instinct? If you're going to bastardize the meaning of survival instinct to mean grow, they do." Even if they don't individually, which I still believe they do, then as a race they do. And again, this is not relevant to our discussion on abortion.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 from wikipedia: 'Self-preservation is behavior that ensures the survival of an organism. It is ***universal among living organisms***. In some vertebrates, pain and fear are parts of this mechanism. Pain causes discomfort so that the organism is inclined to stop the pain. Fear causes the organism to seek safety and may cause a release of adrenaline, which has the effect of increased strength and heightened senses such as hearing, smell, and sight."
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 2. the fact that it is growing, whether it knows it or not, is showing that that organism, is trying to preserve its life. This also has nothing to do with abortion.
3.Again, either way you look at the concept of the state of nature you have natural right to life, which supersedes the right to your body in this case because, ultimately, it was YOUR actions that created an organism in a situation which violate your rights. In society, you lose rights as a result of your actions
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Driving is a legal right, like the right to privacy and your body, and , as a result of your ACTIONS (such as driving under the influence of alcohol), can be taken away by society.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "1. Anarchy is an absence of government" yes, I agree with you, but I think my definition is more "complete" because if the governed do not give their consent (and this is how government derive their power, the consent of the governed) then their is effectivley no government, and their is a state of anarchy. Also, if the government stops doing its job, becomes tyrannical, etc., it is violating its right to govern and thus, is vanquished.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "3. There's no such thing as a spirit, and if you'd like to say there is, you have to prove it." I only said that because you were using Locke's defenition of the self.
" 4. I already told you I am in the Army. How about you pay some attention when I answer your questions, hm?" I'm sorry, i don't recall that. I was away from the computer for a while and it could've gotten lost in other posts, or i just didn't notice. I apoogize
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 He mentions the word spiritual in there. who's to say the fetuses spirit is not capable of thought and reason, and completely sentient? Maybe a fetuses non-sentience is only a result of his current body, which allows him to interact with the natural world? Also, i am not trying to bring religion into this argument, the concept of a spirit is not only a religious one.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 And by the way, what branch of the military are you in?
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 (this is continued from my last post) Society, as a whole, is just one entity in the uncivilized world. a chicken can not give up its rights, and therefore cannot be a part of society. Trainable animals such as dogs and cats, give up their rights for food, shelter etc. and in return give their master a loyal companion who might help them, like hunting dogs. In a way, their bond is a society, which is why, killing a dog is unacceptable.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Also, somebody is marking your posts as spam, so I unspammed it. don't think it's me doing that.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that," It is more than just that. It is a non-sentient HUMAN, not just human tissue. It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875 If you're going to quote me, take enough of the quote to get the point that I was making. "Not only is it completely nonsensical to pretend non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that..." There, I made that honest for you.
As for "It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights" Again, why not tumors?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "If you're going to quote me, take enough of the quote to get the point that I was making. " sorry, that was an accident. I meant to post your whole quote.
"It is in no way nonsensical to think that all living things who have the ability to live amongst ourselves in our society peacefully have rights" Again, why not tumors?
because tumors do not have the ability to live amongst us peacefully.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875 "because tumors do not have the ability to live amongst us peacefully."
NEITHER DO FETUSES!
For the billionth time, fetuses aren't people, they don't have any rights much less the right to life, no actual person has a right to life that includes the right to some else's body. Don't like it? Tough.
Army.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 "NEITHER DO FETUSES!" the fetus never wronged you. It is not wrong to be created, by you, under circumstances you don't agree with. the fetus would give up it's rights to live amongst you peacefully It happens all the time. You are its mother its protector and ultimately, until it gains other legal ights granted by our society, its master. In a way, the bond between you and the fetus is a society in which you are the sovereign ( read Leviathan by Hobbes), which must do its job.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Yes, anyone with humanity can see that what YOU are trying to do is wrong. Not only is it completely nonsensical to pretend non-sentient tissue is anything more than just that, but you do this with the intention of robbing actual human beings, thinking feeling people, of their rights to their own bodies, their peacefulness and even their very lives.
All to make you feel better in your delusion. That's inhuman and just plain wrong. Revolting. Shame on you.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@david52875 WTF. Now you're talking complete nonsense. First of all, you can't change what it means to be a person, nor can you change the fact that a fetus doesn't poses this. You can pretend a fetus is a person all day long, it won't make it true.
Further, no one ever had the right to rape or murder or steal, nor was such a right revoked for the sake of living peacefully. Rather, people have the right to live peacefully and that is a right infringed upon by rape, murder, forced birth, etc.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 asexual reproduction is Asexual reproduction is reproduction which does not involve meiosis, ploidy reduction, or fertilization. Anyway, that is besides the point of this discussion. "the cell is human and is alive." yes it is human(adjective) but it is not a human (noun)
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Reproduction, sexual or asexual, involves making a new organism. Human cell replication makes new living cells, but they're part of one organism.
And to make it easier for you to understand, human tissue is alive and human (what with it being human tissue) but is not a person (human being.)
juliewashere88 1 year ago
(continued because I've become long-winded)
The fetus can not survive outside the woman's body. The woman can survive without the fetus. That makes her the person and the fetus the parasite. Why is this still even a debate?
Women ultimately control the spread of mankind. Deal with the reality of the situation, patriarchal societies! Let this go....please.
fiestydragn 1 year ago
And in response to the debate below:
I don't care whether you want to classify a fetus as a person or a tumor. In the end, it's a woman's own body and therefor HER rights are the ones that matter. She ultimately gets to decide if that fetus becomes a baby who breathes its own air and eats its own food and makes its own life in its OWN body. Like it or not, no one's god or gov't can do a damn thing if she decides to end her pregnancy legally or not.
fiestydragn 1 year ago
As a woman who ALSO proudly served in the US Marine Corps for four years, I shake my head in dismay. I didn't know about this ban on abortions for service women until just now. I thought that DADT was the only reason I needed to feel ashamed of my military, but no. The military is also treating WOMEN as second-class people. Nice.
fiestydragn 1 year ago
The word is a LATIN word! Really? Does a tumor have its own genetic chromosomal karyotype? How bout a heartbeat, central nervous sysyem, sex organs, lungs, kidneys??? I mean really? Im embarassed for you at this point. They were CAUGHT and went through proceedings for perscribing this BC, it was not just Yaz or any others that are low dose. It was literally watered down. They were also caught distributing EC for 4X the price that they get it for. They are scummy and fake.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Actually, yes, a tumor can have its own unique DNA if it's composed of mutated cells. My point is that this doesn't make it a person. What makes a person is sentience - which fetus’s lack.
As for the compromised BC and jacked up EC, citation needed.
You work at a CPC? How fitting for a liar.
You can't get away with the same BS with me as you do with the women you manipulate at work because unfortunately for you, I actually DO research. That's how I know you're a liar.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 @juliewashere88 So does your magical tumor have:legs, arms, HEART, kidneys, lungs, central nervous system? you are making a silly comparisson making yourself look extremely foolish.My heart goes out to you, allowing yourself to fall victim to the lies of this pathetic industry. You are supporting the exploitattion of women every time you open your mouth to speak on abortion. I see the truth and abortion is about 1 thing-money.
Blood Money trailer. PP at their best.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Does a fetus have sentience, thoughts, or feelings? No? Because people do.
You're dumb as a stump and a compulsive liar. But I guess that just makes you all the more suited for your job.
You know what exploits women? Lying to them, as you do. Forcing them to be nothing more than walking incubators, rather than autonomous human beings.
I don't know how you even sleep at night. You disgust me.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Well the vicious personal attacks just prove that your weak on the actual facts. Does a 3 minute old baby think using logic, thoughts or have "sentience"? Basic biology will tell you that a HUMAN fetus has more in common with a HUMAN BEING than a tumor. A compulsive liar? How so? I honestly don't know how you sleep at night, supporting the millions of deaths that you do. How does one scream for peace and "freedom" but take away the simple right to life?
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Vicious personal attacks? You mean like setting up fake clinics to control and manipulate and rob people of their freedom and reduce women to walking incubators without agency?
I support freedom and lives of people who exist and do not place people below what are only potential people.
A fetus is more like a tumor than a person, it's non-sentient human tissue kept alive by a host body- a sentient person who more importantly does not infringe upon anyone's rights merely by existing
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 You still have not addressed my question about a 3 minute old baby?? "Potential people"? So, so we are nonexistant until we are born? Again, this is an extremely weak argument that makes no sense. It is a talking point. How about babies who are born and survive at 23 weeks gestation? Are they still potential humans? Society still supports my side or else abortion would not carry the stigma that it does, sorry but it is WRONG and destroys not protects LIFE.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms You twat. A newborn does have sentience, however limited it may be, it's still something a fetus, particularly one that can legally be aborted (you know, the subjuct of our convo?) notably lacks.
More importantly, a newborn does not infringe upon anyone's right bty existing. It no longer requires a host body for life support.
Abortion only carries a stigma because you create that by lying to, harassing, and threatening people.
The sane have no problem with abortion.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Abortion carries a stigma cuz it's morally WRONG. It ALWAYS will. A fetus feels pain at 20 wks gestation, this is a FACT. The more you write, the more I see you are a complete waste of my time. I will not stup to your 10th grade namecalling level. Have a nice fact-less, numb, "my body, my choice", brainwashed life. The morally right and educated do have a problem with abortion, it ends a LIFE.Continue to support the destruction of our most vulnerable, I will continue to fight it.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Abortion only carries a stigma in the minds of retards because they go out of their way to create that stigma. Those of us who are sane realize that there is absolutely nothing wrong with abortion and everything wrong with raping women as you do.
It's not my fault your brain is so rotted to value non-sentient clumps of tissue over actual human beings you disgusting monster.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 you provide no facts, or resoning, or evidence. you just try to make pro-life people *feel* bad by comparing them to racists. typical.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Rapists. And yes, it is a fact that you are intentionally ignoring a clear denial of consent. You do so even in a comment posted just moments ago.
Oh, and you aren't pro-life, and you aren't kidding anyone. Opposition to legal abortion means complacency in the deaths of women who would die as a result. I'M pro-life the only way an honest and rational person can be - I'm pro-choice.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 If the womans life is in danger, than she should have the right to an abortion.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually she has a right to abortion anyway. You don't have to like that fact for it to be true.
Incidentally, ALL pregnancies have the potential to be fatal even if no complications are foreseen. Delivery is actually extremely dangerous. The maternal morality rate in the US is well over 10 times higher than that of abortion.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 If your so worried about that, DONT HAVE UNPROTECTED SEX
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 I don't, actually. Not that that it's any of your business. Actually, many unprotected pregnancies are the result of contraceptive failure. Even the best aren't fool-proof.
But whether contraception was used and used correctly or not, the fact of the matter does not change. A woman owns her own body exclusively and entirely and always.
If you don't like it, YOU don't have unprotected sex.
Lol who am I kidding, you're no better than a rapist. You probably listen to a "no."
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 The fact is, there are consequences for your actions. Sex is and action, the potential consequences are pregnancy and STDs. You do not have the *right* to not get pregnant after having sex, and the fact that you do really shows just how self-serving you are.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Oh, should women not have the right to get their STDs treated either?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Getting your STD treated does not take away a human beings right to live, So no, they should have the right to get their STDs treated.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Getting an abortion doesn't take away a human being's right to live either.
The truth is, with birth control or not, when people have sex, they risk pregnancy. I say again, they risk pregnancy. Not parenthood.
A possible consequence of having sex is pregnancy whereupon the person may either terminate it or not. Either way, they've dealt with the consequence.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 they deal with the consequence by taking away another human beings right to live?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 No, they don't. As I said, a fetus is not a human being, nor does it have any rights at all let alone the right to live, nor does any actual human being have a right to live that extends to the right to your body without your consent.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 If you are going to say a fetus is not a human, give a reason, or at least a definition, like I did.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 I never said a fetus wasn't human. Any human tissue is human. That's all a fetus is. A human being is person. A person is a sentient and sapient being.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 So, flakes of dandruf are human?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 They're human tissue. Although, if I'm not mistaken, dandruff is dead skin cells.
Still human tissue though. Like a fetus.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 So, if im right, youre saying that fetuses are not people because they are not sentient, correct?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Close. Being a person requires having the capacity for sentience and sapience. Even the unconscious still posses that.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 If your grandmother is in a nursing home and on life support and is completely incapable of thought anymore, is she not a human being?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 If she's brain-dead, she wouldn't be being kept in a nursing home.
Incidentally, since she'd be brain-dead anyway, she would be taken off of life-support, which in this case is only artificial and not some other person's body.
Oh, and I just love the attempted emotional appeal of bringing up my mother. Sort of demonstrates my earlier point.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 I wasn't trying to be emotional, i was just trying to give on example. wikipedia defines Sentience as the ability to feel or perceive, wich the unconscious cannot do. I know wikipedia is not the most reliable source but whatever..
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually, the unconscious retain the ability, even if they do not currently use it. Moreover, they have used it before and can again when they regain consciousness. Even people in comas may still hear and feel what goes on around them even if they can not react.
The capacity for sentience and awareness is still present.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 wilikepdia says "sapience is often defined as wisdom, or the ability of an organism or entity to act with appropriate judgment" one year olds don't have much wisdom or judgement, but there still people
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually they DO, just not on the same level as an adult. The first few years of life are what's called the critical period, that's when a good deal of learning takes place. For instance, infants who aren't taught to interact with others during this time have a lot of trouble learning these basic skills later.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 basically this argument comes down to how you define something as being a person. What our society needs is an accepted definition. This definition was probably defined along time ago when abortion was not an issue.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Yes, indeed it was. It was at birth, actually.
It's antis who try desperately to change it now.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 If you look up Humans on wikipedia(i have wikipedia open in another tab) it says"Humans, known taxonomically as Homo sapiens" a fetus is definitely a homo sapien.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Read the rest of the page
"Humans have a highly developed brain, capable of abstract reasoning, language, introspection, and problem solving. This mental capability, combined with an erect body carriage that frees the hands for manipulating objects, has allowed humans to make far greater use of tools than any other living species on Earth"
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@david52875 ". Other higher-level thought processes of humans, such as self-awareness, rationality and sapience, are considered to be defining features of what constitutes a "person"."
From the same Wikipedia page. Fancy that.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 keyword there is "considered"
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 also, the UN adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. According to that, fetuses are humans and have rights
david52875 1 year ago
Comment removed
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875 You haven't read the UN Declaration of Human Rights, have you? Unfortunately for you, I have. And nowhere does it so much as mention fetuses at all, much less impose upon them any rights.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@david52875 You haven't actually read that declaration have you? Well, unfortunately for you, I have read it.
I don't recall it so much as mentioning fetuses anywhere at all, let alone attempting to impose upon them any right overriding the rights of actual human beings.
Oh, but if you would like to tell me in which article of the declaration it says any of this, be my guest. I'm waiting.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Sorry I didn't really type that right. I meant according to wikipedia, humans (and fetuses) are homo sapiens, and that document gives all humans the right to live.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Yes, all HUMAN BEINGS. No where does the declaration state that this includes fetuses. You made that up.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 just tell me the reason that you think a fetus should not have rights, just because it does not have the ability to reason.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 No, I believe a fetus doesn't have rights because it isn't a person.
However even if it was, no person ever has the right to the body of another without consent. (hence, rape is illegal)
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 " No, I believe a fetus doesn't have rights because it isn't a person." WHY IS IT NOT A PERSON!? don't say "because it isn't sentient", in a just society a HUMAN BEING should be granted rights at the moment it becomes a HUMAN BEING. Your
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88
human beings are not properties.. to say that a human being is somebody else property is a clear sign that they are not really pro-choice, they are against choice, they are pro-slavery and pro-racism.. just tell us the truth babe, you're not pro-choice, you are pro-abortion and anti-choice.
ThunderGodDavid 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 a fetus is alive because it responds to stimuli, maintains homeostasis, and has the ability to grow. that is how scientists today define something as "living". it is a human being because it is the offspring of two humans. you could say a baby is not a human being because its skull isn't fully developed, just like you could say a zygot isn't a human being because it's hand is not fully developed.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually, I pointed that mistake out when it was first posted but for some reason my comment didn't appear.
I just pointed your mistake out because, well, it was funny. Seriously though, it's not really much worse than some of the other nonsense you've posted on purpose.
Antis are almost universally scientifically illiterate. Your comment, typo or not, isn't really out of place.
Making blatantly false statements is just conforming to the standard set by your misogynist peers.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 I actually half agree with you there. most pro-life people are religious and only try to make pro-choice people feel bad, instead of reasoning and using facts. However, so do pro-choice people.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 I wasn't even talking about religion, although that is a serious mental handicap for a lot of people. That's not to say that irreligious arguments against abortion are any more rational.
You can see it in your own posts, constantly engaging in they hyperbole of referring to fetuses as 'human beings' and 'unborn' when they're clearly not, and calling abortion 'murder' when it clearly isn't.
Your argument rests on pretending a fetus is a person, and that a woman is less.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 So tell me, when does the fetus "magically become a human being?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Last I knew, sentience wasn't magic. Impressive, though it is.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 I never said you were talking about religion, i was just pointing out that the majority of pro-life propaganda is religious
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 And I was pointing out that the majority was emotional and irrational.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 "And I was pointing out that the majority was emotional and irrational." I Completely agree with you there.
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 but the fact is, over 99% of abortions are performed for convenience
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 That's actually not a fact. Abortion isn't convenient and you just pulled that statistic out of your ass anyway.
Not getting raped is not a 'convenience.' Not suffering excruciating pain is not a 'convenience.' Not needlessly risking my life is not a 'convenience.' Not being a walking incubator is not a 'convenience.'
Never mind just how much of an inconvenience (read pain in the ass) it is to obtain an abortion at all, especially for military women.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 okay whatever for Birth control then
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 Furthermore, I am 29 yrs old with three small girls. I work, go to school and love my kids all at the same time. I am not a "incubator", 2 of my girls were unplanned, but that did not give me the right to sign some papers and allow some FAKE Dr to kill them for a pretty penny. What is empowering to women is that we can do it all! Work, school, wife, and MOMMY. And do it all well. Abortion is murder, NOT healthcare, thank God that so many REAL Dr.s realize this.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Oh? So you got to choose? Good for you! Would that we all be so empowered by the freedom to choose what we want with our own bodies.
Doctors who perform abortions aren't 'fake doctors' just because you hate freedom.
Abortion is not and cannot be murder and you need only look up the definition of the word to see why.
And I'm not interested in thanking your imaginary friend.
Enjoy life in backwards land.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 That reply just further proves your lack of real critical thinking and how you have been brainwashed by the disgusting pawns who call themselves"pro choice" . Everyone should have a choice, including the HUMAN BEING in utero. Choices should not be taken away from people before they have their own chance to choose. So, once a baby is actually born, magically, it's a human and not a tumor. Your spewed back talking points here are comical.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Fetuses CAN'T choose anything at all! They simply don't have the capacity for any kind of awareness or thought! It isn't even aware of its own existence, let alone able to understand an assess its situation!
But even if it was, it still wouldn't matter because a woman's body is her own exclusively and always and NOBODY ever has a right to her body without her consent. No person has a right to anyone else's body, why should a mere fetus, a non-person, have a right no one else has?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 A newborn baby does not have that capacity either soooo what is your point? A BABY in utero is SEPERATE, not like an organ, an actual PERSON. Please do not start the " my body my choice" crap. That "non person" inside her is her CHILD. Hers to protect and love. Her RESPONSIBILITY, not hers to dispose of for any reason. That is A HUMAN LIFE, not a "non-person." How heartless, please do not preach about peace and love because KILLING is the exact opposite.
threebabyms 1 year ago
@threebabyms Actually, it does, it's just limited. Still, awareness is awareness.
The non-person inside a WOMAN'S BODY is a fetus, not a child. Fetus or no, child or no, a woman’s body is still hers all day every day and no one and nothing has any right to it without her initial and continued permission.
Yours is the mentality of a rapist monster, forcing yourself on another person's body as nthey clearly and unambiguously say 'no, you cannot use my body.'
SICK!
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 The womans body is her's but the fetus' is not.
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Actually, it is, but that's besides the point.
As stated, her body is hers and she gets to decide what goes in and out and how her body will be used. It's hers. Deal with it.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 My house is mine, right? if i start creating human beings inside my house, and then kill them because "i didn't give them consent to live in my house" is that raight at all?
david52875 1 year ago
@david52875 Are they actually human beings and can they be removed from your house without killing them?
Not that bodily rights aught to be conflated with property rights.
Here's a better one. If you eat undercooked meat and get a tapeworm, can you remove it from your body?
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 A tapeworm is not a human being like an unborn baby is. Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get pregnant. If you have unprotected sex there is a very high chance you will get pregnant. human beings created society and gave up some of there liberties for security, animals didn't. and the fact that you would compare a fetus to a tape worm is disgusting.
david52875 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@david52875 A fetus isn't a human being, nor is it an unborn baby (no such thing.)
"Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get pregnant."
I seriously can not stop laughing at this sentence. You fail. Hard.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
@david52875 I STILL can not stop laughing at this.
"Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get pregnant."
Lol. Wow. That's some serious fail right there.
I feel like I'm playing chess with some random stray dog or something.
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 thats called a typo i meant "Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get a tapeworm."
just the fact that you have to go back and attack a typo i made really says something
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 thats called a typo, i meant "Also, unless your retarded and ate the undercooked meat on purpose, there is a very small chance you will get a tapeworm." just the fact that you have to go back and attack a typo i made really says something...
david52875 1 year ago
Comment removed
juliewashere88 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@juliewashere88 youtube is telling me your comment has been removed wtf?
david52875 1 year ago
@juliewashere88 you can't create a human being inside your womb then just say it has no right to be there, then kill it. You gave it the right to your body when you had unprotected sex. A fetus is a living thing. It maintains homeostasis, responds to stimuli, and has the ability to grow which is how we define something as living. It is a human being because it was create from two humans reproducing. To say that it just magically turns into a human after however long is just retarded...
david52875 1 year ago