Added: 3 years ago
From: mattersoftruth
Views: 22,265
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,370)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • maybethey should go ask a biologist. his answer would be: CONCEPTION

    it's an already answered question. theres no debate. they should go read an embryology textbook

  • Hillary, what about the tax dollars of Americans who disagree with you? Oh....you're really not for "choice" after all...

  • The abortion debate isn't about biological life, it's about personhood. If you really think a fertilized egg is a person, or has the right to develop into a person at other people's expense simply by virtue of being a fertilized egg, then that shows a gross lack of philosophical insight on your part.

  • @gingerbreadcorpses That's a sophism. You could use that same sophism for fetuses because they aren't developped in persons either. Still, most people think that's immoral why would that be different for a embryo or even a zygote? Even science says that life begins at conception. I believe this abortion thing is completely arbitrary. Thus, it would be better if it was illegal. Anticonception is there for a reason! One's life is more important than one's money.

  • Liars and hypocrites! Both know perfectly well, as any primary science book states that human LIFE begins at conception.

  • UGGGGHHHHHH WHy do we vote these people in to office????

  • LIFE DOES NOT BEGING AT CONCEPTION LIFE BEGAN MILLIONS OF YEARS AGO CONCEPTION IS JUST A METAMORPHOSIS OF LIFE!

  • ITS ABOVE HIS PAY GRADE... Even as the IMMAM OBAMA is rresident of the USA!

  • Hillary calls herself a "Methodist." What is the traditional theology, creeds, doctrines, of Methodists? Who was Charles n John Wesley? I know for a fact that Hillary and many "Liberal" Methodists nowdays never ask these questions, and thats why they completely contradict traditional Methodist/christianity.

  • Those who prohibit abortion

    MUST be prepared to adopt the results.

    It's the only responsible position.

    To make OTHERS pay for YOUR conscience

    is just another Christian hypocrisy.

  • @Imaginefree69 Did you ever consider that those of us who oppose abortion are those who cannot live with themselves while innocent babies are being murdered?? To be silent in a nation while such atrocities are being committed is no different than standing silently/passively to any other genocide that has occurred in any culture. Whatever happened to responsibility for YOUR CONSCIENCE and BEVAVIORS that may have led to "unplanned births"? Even so, many would be willing to adopt these children.

  • Anyway life doesn't begin at conception. I don't know how anyone could possibly believe that if they knew the science behind it.

  • @Vortex1988 Exactly, you werent jack shit then, you arent jack shit now

  • @charlitunaman2002 I'm sorry, did you have something intelligent to say? Or are you just going to conform to the social norm that says as long as you can insult people you have a valid argument? No one can put forth a valid argument to back up their claims anymore. It's really sad. But I guess that just goes to show how ignorant people like you are.

  • @Vortex1988 Shut up idiot

  • @charlitunaman2002 I guess you're just content proving my point...fine with me.

  • @Vortex1988 Really? Any biologist will tell you that life begins at conception. Isnt a cell life? its moving right? Ever look in a microscope and see a cell? duh. You ignore the facts.

  • @rmrooster01 You don't know many biologists do you? The human body is made up of multiple cells. When you shed dry skin does it kill you? Does it hurt? Just because a cell is being killed doesn't mean that you're hurting or killing anything, except for that cell, which has no consciousness or concept of life, death, or pain.

  • I believe that abortion should be mandatory unless the parents can pass either an IQ test, strength test, or they are good looking enough. It is the only fair way to do things.

  • @gegillam1 How is that fair? Isnt that what HItler believed? He believed that a certain race "Jews" werent ideal so he exterminated 6million of them. Not good looking enough? I thought real beauty came from the heart, not from outward appearences. Some "dumb" people have lots of "commonsense". Likewise, some intelligent people really lack "common sense."

  • Go ask your mother when she thought YOU were a person. Then ask yourself and your wife when you thought your kids were people, then tell your kids what your answer was. Go ahead, tell your kids their lives were nothing when they were conceived, or have your parent admit that to you. What a disgusting civilization we have become. The most dangerous place for a child is in the womb.

  • @charlitunaman2002 So don't get pregnant when you don't want to. It's not that hard.

  • Life does not begin in conception. Life is already there in the form of the egg and the sperm.

    Human life begins when the temporal lobe of the brain is formed because that is the part of the brain that is most influential on our humanity (understanding complex language). So do you have a human when it begins to form or when its complete?

  • So a person who suffers a massive stroke in the temporal lobe is no longer a human?

  • wow.... so many words. but they didn't answer the damn question. Democrats put science first in their beliefs, but completely stray from that SAME science that proves that they're sick murderous Satanists

  • Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr. writes: "The underlying premise in the arguments pro-abortionists give against fetal personhood is that non-persons can change into persons. They are saying that a living being can undergo a radical, essential change in its nature during its lifetime. But there is a logical problem here. If the change was biologically inevitable from conception, given time, then this change is not a change in essential nature. This is because if the being naturally initiates the change,

  • it must be in its nature from the beginning to do so. If it is in its nature to do so, then despite any changes in such characteristics as independence, place of residence, physical development, or demonstration of mental ability, what the being is in later life is what the being is from the beginning of its life. This means that if we are persons with the right to be free from aggression later in life, we are persons even at conception." "A False Assumption," Libertarians for Life,

  • It's never ceased to amaze me how Democrats, who tend to champion themselves as being pro-science, totally disregard science when it doesn't conform to their beliefs.

    Anyway, speaking on beliefs, "I believe that both Obama and Clinton are idiots."

  • such a government intrusion! The government intrudes in everything, why not abortion?

  • Life begins at Conception - Science proves it, not THESE CROOKS like Hillary Clinton, and Obama "searching" and "can't come up with a firm resolution" on when Life begins.

    These people like Obama and Clinton are hypocrites..."put Science in front"...but they are trying to avoid the FACTS that Life begins at Conception.

    And why does it have to be in religious nature for Clinton? Because if it was SCIENCE, Clinton would be BLOWN AWAY!

    P.S.

    I believe in God and I am religious.

  • Weedy, your ignorant, if you say a fetus is lifeless after it is removed---of course it is lifeless because you removed it from the womb, where the fetus gets its support in order to live and die.

    Boy-o, you need to see the whole picture, BEFORE you remove the fetus, the fetus is ALIVE.

  • They say they put "Science" in front but how come they can't make up their minds when life begins?

    Life begins at Conception --- Science proves it.

  • My God, Obama always stutter when it comes to this issue.

    Life begins at conception! - Science proves it.

    Some Pro-choice people's argument on Abortion are ~~religious~~ in nature because if it was ~~scientific~~ they would be BLOWN away! But hey, I believe in God, Abortion isn't just a ~~religious~~ or ~~scientific~~ issue...it's a MORAL issue.

  • PROLIFE PROTESTER MURDERED ON 9/11/09

    Owosso, MI (Life News) -- Local officials and state police are confirming that a pro-life advocate was shot and killed outside a high school in this Michigan town. The person, who is described as well-known but whose identity has not been released, was shot multiple times while protesting abortion outside Owosso High School.

  • YouTube:

    Rabbis Ban Pro-Abortion, Pro-Homosexual Politicians

  • Actually Weed, it happens to be a statement of fact.

    Dead Jews do in fact happen. This is irrefutable fact. Jews, like other carbon based life forms, do in fact die.

    Are you suggesting that they don't?

    That would make about as much sense as anything else you've ever posted.

    You are the one advocating that death shown in:

    watch?v=fEiN6oi4mcE

    Not me.

    You are a disgusting sociopath.

  • "Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government," she said. "They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or sovereign. Mother Teresa

  • Weed, notice how you are unable to refute anything teton99 has posted?

    Information that refutes your laughably stupid position is not spam. It is information that refutes your laughably stupid position.

    Care to address the statements, instead of the person posting the statements?

    You know, in logic, attacking the arguer while ignoring the argument is a well known fallacy. Unless you address the statements you are guilty of ad hominem.

    Which you resort to because your position is flawed.

  • Before you accuse me (falsely by the way) of committing ad hominem, I will point out that the point of the post was responding to your post that teton99 didn't have anything new to add.

    Instead of addressing the statements, you addressed the person making the statements.

    In contrast, I address the fact that you aren't addressing teton99's statements. Your statements do not address teton99's statements.

    My statements point that out.

    So, having addressed your statements it is not ad hominem.

  • Yes, Weeda, dead Jews do in fact happen. This is a fact.

    It does not change the fact that you openly advocate the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    Such as that depicted here:

    watch?v=fEiN6oi4mcE

    Dead human beings happen. However, HOW they happen to become dead human beings is a matter of policy.

    A policy you endorse.

    You openly advocate the intentional killing of innocent human beings. You don't even deny this.

    You are beyond sick.

    You are a Satanist.

  • Not quite Weed.

    Acknowledging that people die is a simple matter of fact. I specifically mentioned Jews because you are a Jew and you callously claimed that "botched abortions happen" as if there were no consequence.

    As if Gianna Jessen's cerebral palsy that she will suffer from for the rest of her life was inconsequential.

    "botched abortions happen"

    "Dead Jews Happen"

    Both are facts.

    The difference is, you advocate abortion, I do not advocate killing anyone.

    You are a servant of Satan.

  • You are dumb, so I have to explain things to you.

    "Dead Jews Happen" is a fact. Jews are people and people die. HOW that happens, however, does matter.

    If they are killed in their mother's womb, this is a travesty that you openly support. Yet killing the same person on the other side of the womb gets your panties all in a bunch.

    Q: Which is more dead?

    A: Both are equally dead.

    The difference?

    I support the right to life of all innocent human beings.

    You, Satan, support killing the unborn.

  • LOL - Ad Hominem Weed - attacking the arguer.

    So there is much explaining required to set you straight.

    Notice you can't address the statements and instead resort to attacking the arguer? Classic logical fallacy of Ad Hominem.

    You can't address the facts.

    While you're busy ignoring truth, take a look at this:

    watch?v=QUr0jCbcPNc

    Now Weed, in a partial birth abortion, the child has his head still in his mother's vagina, but has not taken a breath yet.

    Do you kill it?

    You are indeed sick.

  • You are the one supporting killing children whose arms and legs are outside their mother that have not yet taken a breath.

    You openly advocate the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    The organism being killed is entirely human.

    It is also alive (as evidenced by the fact that its limbs move as it attempts to survive before a pair of scissors are shoved into the base of its skull).

    You claim no breath, no life.

    You lie. The child is alive prior to birth.

    Abortion kills it.

  • @MetaphysicalPolitics I somewhat agree with you friend, its horrific to think that parents who don't want a potential child can cancel out Fate like that. I mean just don't have the damn child man!

    But what if a woman was raped? Should she have this option? Abortion looks bad or good on a case by case basis.

  • @LordKaisen Or what if she got pregnant by accident due to condoms' +/-10-15% failure rate or the pill's 3% failure rate? Or what if neither party was educated about contraception?

    Nobody should be forced by the State to carry a pregnancy to term against her will under any circumstances.

  • Speaking of not addressing the statements, you failed to address the following question:

    If they are killed in their mother's womb, this is a travesty that you openly support. Yet killing the same person on the other side of the womb gets your panties all in a bunch.

    Q: Which is more dead?

    A: Both are equally dead.

    You failed to address that statement weed.

    I support the right to life of all innocent human beings.

    You, Satan, support killing the unborn.

  • Look at it weed:

    watch?v=QUr0jCbcPNc

    Why are you defending this?

    It has not taken a breath yet, so you claim it is not alive.

    If it is not alive, then how is it that the arms and legs move prior to having its brains sucked out, but then they stop moving after the brains get sucked out?

    Because your statements are false. It is alive prior to birth. Breath is not life and you openly support the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    Like Gianna Jessen for example.

  • Washington, DC (Life News)

    On the eve of Super Tuesday, the oldest Orthodox Jewish Rabbinic organization in the country issued a historic declaration on voting and abortion. The Union of Orthodox Rabbis of the U.S. and Canada says Jewish voters should not vote for candidates who support abortion, calling them "antithetical" to Jewish values.

  • Jews For Life is an organization created to reflect the traditional Jewish pro-life perspective on abortion. Our purpose is to provide our readers with the facts about the tragic consequences that have befallen women & our culture since R v. W was enacted into law. Jews For Life maintains that life, both born & unborn, is sacred & worthy of protection. The current so-called 'pro-choice' position of mainstream liberal Jewish organizations is antithetical to the traditional teachings of our faith

  • Weedy says

    "He does not know God any better than anyone else."

    Does this mean you too Weedy, if so then why should we listen to you tell us about God? You seem to be violating you own rules of logic, not that its any surprise. If God doesnt want us to know Him, why did he reveal His name to Moses? That was an invitation to relationship.

  • Weedy says...

    "You have God's word...figure it out for yourself."

    God doesnt sanction abortion, it also goes against the 6th Commandment Thou shall not murder (Talmudic version), murder is the death of an INNOCENT.

    You are also going against the 3 rd Commandment by using Gods name in vain to justifying murdering unborn human beings.

    You are Satans pawn in the Culture of Death

  • Satan: "I do not care if you listen to me or not."

    This is not true and the evidence is the statement itself.

    If you did not care, you would not have bothered to reply to his comment.

    The mere fact that you did reply is evidence that you wanted him to see what you posted.

    If you did not care, you would not have posted anything.

    Like when you were a young teeny bopper running around proclaiming "I don't care what people think of me".

    If you did not care, why would you feel compelled to speak?

  • Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    It is intentional. The victim of the act is a human being. It has human DNA and it is alive.

    Even abortion advocates acknowledge that in an abortion, there is a death. They have their opinions on why that death is an acceptable death, but they freely admit that abortion is death that the unborn does not survive the procedure.

    So, Satan, would that change your opinion if you came to understand that it is killing and death?

  • Yes, it would change your opinion, which is why you are so adamant about denying the death involved in an abortion.

    Because the instant you finally admit that abortion does involve death and it is killing even a religious lunacy like yours requires you to conceded that such innocent death has no justification.

    You lie about death to support an agenda. You start with a conclusion and try to make your premises fit.

    Which requires you to lie about death.

    Satan - who is Gianna Jessen?

  • The Real View of Judaism

    Liberal Jewish organizations brazenly distort Jewish Law to give people the impression that Hashem, our G-d, condones abortion for "choice. Nothing can be further from the truth. G-d created mankind to be fruitful and multiply, and to protect and nurture life, both born and unborn.

    Jews for Life

  • Actually Satan, he seems to know a fair amount of Judaism.

    He is correct on it where you are false.

  • To claim the right to abortion, infanticide and euthanasia, and to recognize that right in law, means to attribute to human freedom a perverse and evil significance: that of an absolute power over others and against others. This is the death of true freedom.

    John Paul II

  • "John Paul" is just a man in a dress. He does not know God any better than anyone else.

  • LOL - funny how I have not mentioned morality!

    Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    The organism being killed is entirely human and very much alive. Abortion kills it.

    Abortion is not guaranteed by the Constitution. There is no Constitutional right to abortion.  Even the jurists that decided in favor of it acknowledge this truth.

    It was a flawed legal decision, not a right.

    And that legal decision ignores the rights of human beings to exist.

    Abortion is a violation.

  • Religious freedom, though guaranteed, is not a factor in the debate on abortion.

    Freedom wins?

    What freedom did the 50,000,000 corpses have?

    They weren't free, they were made dead. They weren't dead, but someone made them dead.

    And you advocate the act of making them dead.

    Abortion has been permitted for less than forty years. It was illegal for more than a century. So you lose by a factor of at least 2 to 1.

    You fear the coming change.

    Which is why you're here.

    You know change awaits.

  • Satan, are you still claiming that an organism in a state of growth, that undergoes chemical metabolism, that exhibits the characteristics of autonomous movement and reacts to stimuli is not alive?

    That's odd.

    The rest of the world is well aware that any organism exhibiting those characteristics is in fact alive.

    And if an organism is alive then you can in fact make it dead.

    Another rhetorical question - how do you define BIOLOGICAL life?

    Do your homework, then we'll start there.

  • Weedys...

    "John Paul" is just a man in a dress. He does not know God any better than anyone else."

    JPII wore a White Cassock. He was highly educated, received his Doctorate & taught at Lublin University in Poland. He was a prolific writer 42 Encyclicals and many books.

    He was very close to God since he was young and devoted his entire life to the Almighty.

    Dont get the words Comprehend & Know confused, no one can comprehend God, but we can know him. He wants it.

  • Hello again Satan.

    You said earlier that the Pope was just a man in a dress.

    Well, given your criteria for men and dresses, Abraham was also a man in a dress given the robes worn back in the day.

  • Ahh yes, Satan, Gianna Jessen.

    You know all about her don't you?

    You were the one that inspired her mother to try to kill her. But you failed. Her mother failed.

    Her mother tried to kill her by using a saline injection abortion to burn her to death in her own mother's womb.

    But Gianna survived. She will live with Cerebral Palsy for the rest of her life due to injuries sustained in the attempt to kill her, but she survived.

    Did her mother have the right to give her Cerebral Palsy?

  • Of course her mother did not have the right to give her daughter Cerebral Palsy.

    But, she did it anyway. With the support of ignorant, lie loving idiots like you, she tried to kill her own daughter and caused injuries that she will suffer from for the rest of her natural life.

    According to you Satan, every woman has the right to torture, maim, dismember and kill their own unborn.

    According to you, every woman can have limbs of her unborn severed off as long as she does this prior to birth.

  • And that raises a very interesting rhetorical question.

    If, as you falsely claim, an unborn is not alive, then there is nothing wrong with torturing a dead organism.

    You therefore approve of having experiments performed on 34 week old fetuses.

    Not necessarily fatal experiments, but doing things like removing their legs and attaching them to their head just for amusement.

    If it isn't alive, you have no recourse for objecting to such experiments.

    If they are "born with life" with no limbs, OK.

  • Again you have painted yourself into a corner Weed.

    Gianna Jessen's mother tried to kill her via a saline abortion. Gianna survived. She has Cerebral Palsy and wil have it for the rest of her life because of that basic human rights violation.

    So your entire "born with life" garbage is debunked by your own words.

    You claimed before there was nothing wrong with anything done to an unborn because it had no life, now you claim you "would have issue".

    No justification exists for harming unborn.

  • Dead Jews happen. That just means the person killing them did a good job - according to your grotesquely flawed logic.

    So Weeda, if you kill someone then that's just God deciding that person should no longer live.

    After all, if it happened, it was just God's will.

    Perhaps you should kill more people so as to not let God's will go undone?

  • Yes, Satan.

    Dead Jews happen - it as callous a thing to say as what it was in response to.

    That is the difference between you and I. I do not advocate killing Jews. In fact I vehemently oppose it. You on the other hand openly advocated the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    "the weak [translation] of describing the feeling movement inside and mistaking that for [qualitative - you screwed that word up again!] human life is not uncommon. It happens"

    "human life . . . it happens"

  • Apparently Weed, in your ignorance and your haste, you missed this quote:

    "I do not advocate killing Jews. In fact I vehemently oppose it."

    But you ADVOCATE killing the unborn. Yes, I showed people that I oppose the intentional killing of innocent human beings - at any stage of development.

    Innocent Jews are innocent human beings and anyone who kills an innocent human being has committed a human rights violation.

    Regardless the level of development of the human being that was killed.

  • Yes, Weeda, I said "Dead Jews happen" and I'll say it again. It happens to be a fact, people die. Nowhere does the acknowledgment of a fact equate to an endorsement.

    You know this. You are lying, lover of lies.

    That is a common characteristic of yours. The facts refute your claims so your only recourse is to lie.

    You are a liar. You are a Satanist.

    Late term abortion is already illegal. You had better get used to that.

    America is now a pro-life majority Satan, you are losing ground.

  • Abortion is a human rights issue. Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    This is not an opinion, but a matter of basic facts.

    Abortion is intentional.

    Abortion is a procedure performed on an innocent organism that has not been found guilty of a crime and is therefore, legally innocent.

    Abortion is a procedure performed on a human being.

    Abortion kills that human being.

  • Having established that an unborn human being is both human and alive, we now move on to the human rights violation.

    The Declaration of Independence states the following:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

  • The 14th Amendment states:

    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

  • But when you look closer, that too, is false.

    Look at the definition for "person":

    "HUMAN INDIVIDUAL" (Merriam-Webster)

    "a human being" (Black's Law Dictionary)

    An unborn human being is both human and an individual. Some argue it is not an individual because it lives in the woman, but this dispute fails because the DNA of the unborn is unique from the woman. DNA evidence is legally admissible in court and people have been both exonerated and incarcerated based on DNA evidence.

  • A very simple proof of this is the current political debate about Guantanamo Bay ("Gitmo").

    Why are some people opposed to moving those detainees from Guantanamo Bay to the United States? Because the instant those detainees set foot on American soil, they have certain rights - the right to life, due process of law, etc. They do not have these rights in Guantanamo Bay which is not American soil.

    This is evidence of the distinction between basic human rights and the rights of citizenship.

  • The legalization of abortion is an example of a liberal court legislating from the judiciary (making up their own laws instead of interpreting the Constitution).

    There is no "right" to abortion. The Constitution never mentions the word or makes any reference to such a procedure.

    Abortion is a human rights violation made legal through a discrepancy in the law, not unlike that which deprived slaves of their basic human rights.

  • Comment removed

  • These are all facts.

    Some dispute the humanity, some the life.

    The humanity dispute fails because the DNA of an egg upon fertilization is entirely human. The law of biogenesis states, more or less, that the species of offspring is identical to the species of ancestry. Therefore, any time two human beings get together to procreate, the only possible outcome is another human being - it can be no other species.

    That is medical, scientific proof that an unborn human being is in fact a human being.

  • The life dispute fails because an unborn human being meets all the criteria for biological life. Even algae and bacteria are life.

    These criteria are:

    Growth (cellular division)

    Metabolism

    Autonomous movement

    Reaction to stimuli

    Every one of those criteria are evidence of life and an unborn human being exhibits every one of those criteria. An unborn human being is therefore alive.

  • To claim otherwise is either dishonesty or ignorance because the facts are that an unborn human being is entirely alive. At no point of its development is it not alive, dead, or not human.

    Having established that an unborn human being is both human and alive, we now move on to the human rights violation.

  • "all men are created equal", "unalienable Rights", "Life"

    Some will say the Declaration of Independence is not law, but merely a letter written to the King of England declaring separation from the kingdom.

    But it does address the entire race of men.

  • "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

    "nor shall any state deprive any person of life"

    "nor shall" "deprive" "any person" "life"

    This statement expresses the protection applicable to "any person" regarding their right to "life".

    Some will tell you the unborn is not a person and thus the statement is not applicable to the unborn.

  • So DNA evidence is respected as conclusive by the American legal system. Therefore, the unborn is unique.

    In the Black's Law dictionary definition, it says "a human being" - "a" meaning singular which supports the Merriam-Webster qualification of individual.

    So the unborn is a human being by virtue of its DNA, and is also an individual by virtue of its DNA (*) and therefore a person.

  • So the unborn is a human being and is also an individual by virtue of its DNA (*) and therefore a person.

    And all rights applicable to a "person", therefore apply to the unborn and the unborn is therefore SUPPOSED to be protected by the 14th Amendment's right to "life" of the Due Process Clause.

    Some will notice that the 14th Amendment starts out by saying "All persons born or naturalized" and claim that means you have to be born to enjoy the protection of the 14th Amendment's rights.

  • But this dispute fails because not all rights are limited to citizens. Some rights are applicable to "any person" and not necessarily citizens. The instant a person sets foot on American soil, they have rights. They are not citizens until they become naturalized and can not vote in American elections for example.

    So there is a clear distinction between basic human rights and the rights of citizens.

  • Closer examination combined with modern scientific facts regarding biology, DNA, life, etc. reveal that an unborn human being does in fact qualify for the protection of the right to life.

    Also, abortion laws were on the books for roughly a century after the 14th Amendment was signed and such laws were present prior to the ratification of the Amendment indicating the authors of the Amendment saw no exclusion of rights for the unborn.

  • So why is abortion legal? For the same reason slavery was legal. It is a discrepancy in the law that permits a human rights violation. Review of the court cases (Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, et al) reveal how this discrepancy happened. The Court failed to realize that the 14th Amendment also applies to the unborn. There was a basic assumption that it did not.

  • Weedy says....

    "I have no problem with experimenting on a fetus once removed from the womb, with no chance at life."

    The Nazis had no problem experimenting with human life either.

    You are a pawn of Satan in the Culture of Death!

  • Weedy says...

    "and Nazi's also breathed air...so of course that makes you one...since you breathe air too...right?"

    Wrong!!!

    What a poor moral equivalence you have made, but I can understand you have to limit you scope of morality to justify your very thin premise of murdering innocent human beings.

    The sun shines on us all as the bible says, good and evil alike. Your ability to understand distinctions and comparisons are very limited indeed.

  • tet: I did not make the faulty moral comparison, you did. I understand comparisons, and that is why I made basically the same level of comparison as you did. If we are to follow your 1+1 = 47 math, you are just as evil as any Nazi because you breathe air like they did.

    A fetus is not a living human being until it is no longer a fetus at all and is born with life. Again, not all fetuses are born with life.

  • "baby": "an extremely young child"

    "child": "an unborn or recently born person".

    14th Amendment:

    "nor shall any state deprive any person of life".

    "any person"

    "child": "unborn . . . person"

    Therefore any unborn human being (person) has the right to life and is protected by the Constitution per the 14th Amendment.

    Much like slavery (Dred Scott, Plessy v. Ferguson), the court legalized the violation of basic human rights.

    Those cases were overturned. 4 SCOTUS justices voted to overturn Roe.

  • LOL - you are an idiot.

    How can you, even in your ridiculous cloud of stupidity, claim that anyone WHO IS QUOTING THE DICTIONARY VERBATIM is "twisting" a quoted definition?

    Had I misquoted the dictionary, you would have a point, but I did not. I quoted it word for word, precisely without distortion or modification.

    child: "an unborn or recently born person"

    Merriam-Webster, 9th Edition.

    Word for word Weed.

    Your lie is debunked. Again. As usual. Yet one more time.

  • You wanting biological truth to be untrue does not make it false, it makes you false.

    Its really simple to see. Take any other mammal and consider the gestation of its young. Prior to birth the unborn mammal is in a state of biological development. It is growing, developing, metabolizing, moving autonomously, and reacting to stimuli.

    It is therefore biologically alive.

    What species it is has no relevance on the fact that it is alive.

    You lying about it does not change this truth.

  • "Humans are not like other animals. We have a soul. "

    Irrelevant. The topic is not faith, it is biological life. Abortion is a medical procedure in the realm of biology, not philosophy or religion. There is no action being taken on a soul, there is no proof upon which decisions can be made in favor of a soul so a soul is irrelevant with respect to law.

    Your Satanic mind has been clouded into that delusion.

    Come up out of the lake of fire and get some fresh air.

  • Weedy...

    "We use cadavers all the time for medical advancement. I am sure that is evil...right?"

    Wrong!!!

    Cadavers unlike unborn babies are dead and show no signs of live, movement, growth, sensation of pain, etc... Plus most people who have given their remains over to science have Consented to it when they were alive.

    Unlike unborn babies that are truly human & alive. They are victims of an evil ideology that disrespects human life in much the same way as the Nazis did.

  • tet: A fetus removed from the womb by abortion also shows no signs of life, movement, growth, or sensations of pain. It is lifeless and would be fine for experimentation, again, only if that experimentation serves some purpose to better life for those who live.

    Again, your opinion of life existing before birth is just that...opinion, and you have nothing to prove otherwise. You have no right to call my belief in God evil, just because it differs from your own.

  • Wrong Weed.

    Here is where you expose both your uncommon ignorance and blatant stupidity for all the world to see.

    The FACT that biological life exists prior to birth is widely know, proven to be true and accepted everywhere but between your wax filled ears.

    Growth

    Metabolism

    Autonomous movement

    Reaction to stimuli

    These are the criteria for biological life and an unborn human being exhibits every one of those criteria.

    Every single one, at every stage of its development.

  • "The only criteria for life is a human soul given by God."

    Prove it.

    Your statement is false. You are lying. You are a lover of lies.

    Your statement is proved false by this simple fact.

    An non-human living organism is a living organism.

    Your false statement claims that a human soul is a criteria for life.

    I want nothing to do with your God. Your God delights in the death of the unborn. Your God has twisted your mind into a disease.

    Your God is Satan. He has deceived you.

  • For you to call unborn life an "opinion" is a lot like you claiming that 2 + 2 = 4 is an opinion.

    Empirically verifiable facts are not opinions.

    Biological life is a verifiable truth.

    If a patient is on the operating table and all of its biological functions cease, they determine time of death to be the point at which the biological functions cease, not the point at which an intangible soul leaves the body.

    An organism is either biologically alive or it is not.

    An empirically verifiable fact.

  • Wrong Weed.

    2 + 2 = 4 is always a true statement - always.

    You might have noticed there is no qualification for WHAT the quantities represent.

    2 men and 2 cats are still 4 objects.

    There is no opinion involved.

    The 4 is not dependent on what the quantities are, just the amount of them.

    It is NEVER an opinion. And it is NEVER a false equation.

    This is more evidence that Satan has clouded your judgment. Were you not unreasonably addicted to stupidity, this would have been obvious to you.

  • In an abortion, you have a biologically verifiable living organism. You can examine its growth rate - even measure it (at a certain stage, the unborn doubles its size every day).

    After the abortion is over, those same cells are no longer growing, dividing, metabolizing, moving, reacting. They go from being living cells with living cellular activity to being dead cells that do nothing but decompose.

    Abortion is intentionally killing an innocent living human being.

    No getting around that fact.

  • Wrong Weed.

    A developing fetus is a human being, and therefore a person. Satan has confused you into trying to deny this truth because he wants your support to kill more unborn human beings.

  • That is a critical difference.

    I can prove, empirically, with hard reliable evidence that biological life exists at the moment of conception.

    You can not prove anything about a soul.

    I can also prove that the Supreme Court decisions to be overturned someday make no mention of soul or religion, but instead refer to the biological term "viability".

    You are wrong on the facts and you are wrong with your claim that the legality of abortion has anything to do with the 1st Amendment.

  • "The Constitution does not require me to prove God exists to believe in him."

    You are an idiot Weeda. I have already told you what ten times now that:

    1) I do not contest that statement.

    2) That statement is irrelevant as abortion law makes no reference to religion.

    Four Supreme Court justices have already voted to overturn Roe.

    And the LAW protects the "right to life" in the 14th Amendment.

    You can not decide for yourself who you can and can not kill.

    You can not kill anyone.

  • The 1st Amendment is never referenced in any abortion case reviewed by the Supreme Court.

    But the 14th Amendment is. So the discrepancy that permits the human rights violation of abortion has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment which is the only Amendment that references religious freedom.

    This debunks you.

    Religious arguments have no relevance with the subject of abortion. Abortion is not a religious ceremony, it is a medical procedure.

    A procedure that intentionally kills the innocent.

  • "We have no law for people to decide to have their nose changed"

    Weed, your statement is a classic example of the Straw Man fallacy. Your analogy is false.

    An abortion is not a procedure that affects the cells of a person carrying a child.

    It is a procedure done on another organism with its own unique, completely human DNA.

    You can list all the medical procedures you want that don't involve someone else.

    That does not change the fact that abortion does involve someone else.

    You failed Satan.

  • Or would you object to such a procedure?

    Is it unlawful for a woman to have her children's limbs amputated while still in the womb?

    If yes, why?

    If not, why not?

    If it is not alive, then you have no objection to severing the limbs, poking out the eyes, cutting off the ears, the nose, etc. then birthing the child so it enters the world like you.

    Deaf, blind, and completely stupid.

    If you do object to such practices, you must concede, it is alive.

    And if it is alive, abortion kills it.

  • But don't take my word for it.

    See for yourself.

    watch?v=e3LhS2io5lk

    Watch the unborn open and close their mouth and move their hand in front of their face - a human hand and a human face - before being dismembered in an abortion.

    Imagine if that was Weeda in his mother's womb.

    Would he be less dead if he were killed weeks after he was born compared to weeks before he was born?

    Or are decomposing cells still decomposing regardless their age?

    This is what you are defending Weeda.

    Look at it.

  • Development IS movement idiot.

    You can not grow without occupying more space.

    Occupying more space is movement.

    Therefore, growth/development IS movement.

    That is your defense?

    Pathetic.

    And a developing unborn human being satisfies EVERY SINGLE criteria for biological life, despite the FACT that to satisfy a definition, you only require ONE criteria!

    You just admitted that movement is development and that development is one symptom of life.

    Therefore any growing, moving organism IS ALIVE.

  • Look foolish one, I am not the one that claimed development and movement were dependent on one another, you are.

    Irrelevant. A zygote satisfies EVERY SINGLE criteria for the definition of biological life. Every one.

    Growth.

    Autonomous movement.

    Metabolism.

    Reaction to stimuli.

    Dead cells do not move. They do not develop, they do not metabolize, they do not react to anything.

    Not every cell in a body begins decomposition at the same exact instant in time.

    But a cell that decomposes is dead.

  • Opinion is irrelevant Weed, which I why I don't waste time on it.

    I instead focus on those pesky little things you can't address like verifiable facts, truth, evidence admissible in court, founding documents, law, constitutional amendments - you know all that big, relevant grown up stuff you can't seem to grasp.

    No court case references coming from you.

    Or definition quotes, or premises, or conclusions, or facts, or truth or sense or anything worthy of being posted on even a YouTube site.

  • Hi again Satan.

    You don't really believe I am asking you questions seeking an answer from a dimwit like you do you?

    Since you still don't get it, I'll explain it to you.

    I already know you lack the capacity to address facts and reasoned logical arguments. My questions to you are rhetorical. They aren't necessarily meant for someone as dumb as you.

    My questions are for anyone reading this forum to expose the flaws in your position and reveal the true nature of abortion.

    Change is coming!

  • Satan, you know this, but others might not so I'll announce it publicly.

    When an unborn is still in the womb and its nervous system is freshly developed, experiments have shown that at this stage, the reaction to stimuli is more dramatic than at any other stage of a human being's life.

    So not only does the unborn feel pain, it has a greater reaction to its environment - it feels MORE PAIN at this stage than any other.

    Like having exposed nerve endings being over stimulated.

  • Hello Satan.

    You have no clue of my beliefs because I have not shared them. They have no relevance with respect to the topic of the intentional killing of innocent human beings that you advocate.

  • I have refuted everything you have said.

    I have not claimed anything about a soul because, being something unprovable, has no relevance.

    And I can prove that "qualitative life" exists in the body prior to birth. The qualitative analysis of a fertilized egg reveals that it is in fact human and by virtue of its development, it is alive.

    Your claim of frustration is simply false. Its not a matter of emotion, but of facts.

    That you are an agent of Satan's will is also a fact.

  • Someone who claims that "feeling movement inside" is "mistaking that for . . . human life" has no room to call anyone anything.

    You wantonly disregard human life as if it were nothing - did not exist.

    You are indeed a Satanist and you are doing his will.

    You openly advocate the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    You are a disgusting vile creature with no respect for life. And you lie about God to advance your culture of death agenda.

    "Weeda happens".

  • Detainees brought to America would have the right to life and due process of law, but not being citizens, would not have the right to vote.

    Which takes us back to the Human Rights violation of abortion. The rights of the 14th Amendment are applicable to "any person" and an unborn human being is a person when the definitions are properly examined.

  • Abortion is a human rights violation made legal through a discrepancy in the law, not unlike that which deprived slaves of their basic human rights.

    Intentionally killing innocent human beings is a violation of the human rights of the human being who is being killed.

    Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    Abortion is therefore a violation of the human rights of the human being who is being killed.

  • So what is it going to be Satan?

    Can you torture an unborn you intend to bring into life?

    Or do you have to recant your every statement and concede that the unborn human being developing in its mother's womb is in fact alive and abortion kills it?

    Torture?

    Or life?

    Abortion is the intentional killing of innocent human beings.

    It is intentional, it is killing and organism that it kills is entirely human.

    Epic fail on your part. All of your lies and you can not escape the torture scenario.

  • Prove it.

    You keep claiming to speak for God. Yet the references you cite debunk your own claims.

    Do not tell me what you think God does.  Quote a verse.

    You do not speak for God.

    Either quote God verbatim, or do not claim he does or did anything.

    Lest you distort His word.

  • Actually Weed, you are guilty of distorting the word He gave. I have not asked you to apologize for anything. Your belief is in lies.

    And nothing about abortion has anything to do with religious freedom.

    You have failed to address the issue of harming the unborn.

    Do you support injuring the unborn?

    Your advocacy for abortion caused GIanna Jessen to have Cerebral Palsy for the rest of her life.

    Perhaps you should apologize to her.