Re: Obama and abortion

"Beldin the Sorcerer" <beldinyyz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hk_Kj.1573$Xy2.1502@xxxxxxxxxxx

"Dutch" <no@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:SzYKj.36259$Cj7.17725@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Then you are a complete idiot.
No, that's your department.
I understand that the wonder of intelligent life in general is what
occurs AFTER self awareness, not before.

What nonsense, most animals never experience self-awareness yet are
highly intelligent.

And hence not human.

That's not the reason they aren't human, but the point is that they ARE
wondrous and intelligent nonetheless.

Most of what your body does is complex beyond your wildest
imagination without your awareness, that is it's innate intelligence.

No, you simpleminded *** for brains.

Did it take intelligence to come up with that or was it some programming in you? Does it make you feel good to inject these epithets at every possible opportunity? A little emotional jerking-off maybe?

There's no intelligence in genetic programming.
It's a program, by definition.

That depends on one's definition of intelligence. If you mean simply "thinking" then no, but intelligence can mean much more than that. And most thinking doesn't require much intelligence either, as you amply demonstrate.


It may have been designed by intelligence... more likely, by trial and
error.

There's no intelligence at all in it causing matter to divide.

Again you are limiting yourself to narrow definitions of words.


When they pop out functional and interact with the world, THEN they're
pretty special.

How does "popping out" suddenly make them special? it adds nothing to
their innate nature or capabilities.

It allows them to be verified.

We have ultrasound for that.
Nope.
It won't verify the brain works fully.

What do you mean by "fully"? Who decides when it's fully? Abortion is illegal in third trimester, is the brain functioning "fully" then?


Note the second half.... And interact with the world.

The womb is part of the world.
No, it's the mother.

It's also in the world.

Its a safe place to become human, much like a cocoon.

It's in the world, and it's not necessarily safe.

How does a fertilized ovum in a petri dish interact with the world?

About as usefully as you do.

No, I do real well.
It doesn't at all.
But then, you ARE a shithead.

No you don't, you don't interact usefully at all, not here anyway. Repeating knee-jerk arguments and childish insults is not useful interaction.



2 weeks of cell divisions, they don't even rise to the level of mildly
interesting.

Not to someone who is willfully blind.

Not to anyone who ISN'T blind.

Cellular division in reproduction is commonplace.

The miracle of human life is commonplace, makes me wonder what you find
amazing.


Not just human life, you idiot. all life.

That's kinda the point, simpleton.

So life is commonplace therefore not worthy of awe or wonder, or apparently respect. And I'm the simpleton?



Potential is wonderful, hopeful, perhaps inspirational.... but it
isn't THERE yet.

It is there, ALL there, just as the oak tree is all there in the
seedling.

No, and this proves the point of you being a retard.
A seed ISN'T a plant.

Actually that's exactly what it is.
No, retard, that's exactly what it ISN'T.
This is WHY you're a *** for brains, this is WHY you refuse to understand
what this debate is really about.
It isn't about species, it's about quantifiable qualities.

No it is not, that describes (poorly) what you want to make the debate about, it's not true parameters of the debate.


>> No, statistically, they MAY.

98% mean statisically they WILL.

You're a shithead.
And of course, you make up figures as you go along.

Go look at the miscarriage stats cited in the other post.

Then shut the *** up with this 99%, 98% crap you're pulling out of your
ass.

The figure is immaterial, the point is that when a large majority is healthy, that means that statistically fetuses are healthy.



A seed MAY grow into a plant. It isn't one yet.

An onion will eventually turn into a plant. Does this mean we can't eat
it?

Who's point are you arguing?

Yours, idiot.
An onion is a bulb.

Let it grow, it may become a plant.
It isn't one now, so we eat it.

Completely irrelevant.

Can I hang a swing from an acorn, if you plant it in the ground?

Maybe, if I wait long enough. Maybe not.

Is it a tree yet? Just because you plant it?
Of course not.

What that seedling is in reality does not hinge on whether or not you
can see it, are impressed by it, it is convenient for you or entertains
you.

Yes, in reality, it isn't a tree.
See, shithead, 'tree' is a word with a specific meaning.

You are arguing backwards, words are there to serve reality, not the
other way around.

No, fuckhead.
Words DEFINE reality.

Words *attempt* to capture reality, but they never ARE it, they usually fall short in one way or another. The founders of The American Constitution tried to capture the idea of a just society with the words, "All *men* were created equal.." it took centuries to realize that those words were limiting the real essence of the idea.

We aren't asking if a seed is representative of some form of a species of
plant, we're asking if it's a tree or not.

Wrong question, you're arbitrarily limiting the discussion.

And, at that point, it isn't.
It may never become one.

True, but not the point.

This, again, demonstrates your pure stupidity.

Please wipe your keyboard after you jerk off.

That seed may be a member of a species, which the tree is also a member.
That's a different set of definitions.

TREE means certain things.
It DOESN'T mean acorn.

Word, words, words... they aren't real.
Yes, retard, they ARE real.

They are tools to represent thoughts about reality. They fall short.

They are used for concepts, like 'human being' as opposed to biological
questions, like 'species', which IS a matter of cells.

Human beings do not have the authority to arbitrarily define what a human being is. What we may believe a human being to be is subject to revision and debate. It's not a closed book, like rights, some of which we recognize and see as self evident, some about which we debate and disagree, some that have not even been thought of.


Go look at a freshly fertilized ovum and point out the brain, heart,
and lungs.

You didn't stipulate a freshly fertilized ovum in your argument.

*** for brains, you discussed the entire spectrum.

As did you, therefore your position encompasses fetuses which possess
brains, hearts and lungs. My position does not exclude them.

Yes, shithead, it does.
And, moron, you took your position first. I'm refuting your stupidity.

Your claims are that they have things that some of them don't.
Obviously, then, your position DOES exclude them.

No, it doesn't, your argument says they don't and some do.

No, imbecile.
My argument is that they don't have self awareness, and they don't.

Who is they? Define them more specifically.

I can, while presenting mine, present the gaping holes in yours, which
claims life begins at conception.

Yours is OBVIOUSLY false.

No, ironically, it OBVIOUS AS HELL that it is true, and I bet that if you go through Roe v Wade that opinion will be confirmed. Life (of the organism) begins at conception, That is not even worthy of debate.


You claimed they are all human.

They are.

Not in the slightest.

They absolutely are.

Nope. No evidence of it at all.
Cells in a freezer, not human beings.

You changed the subject.


No, we've shown your hopeless.

Give 20 attributes of a human being.

*** off.

Ok, there's one. Anger/emotion.

No anger, no emotion, a directive aimed at a presumptuous fool who thinks he can play 20 questions and get answers.


19 more....

Dutch, I have the only tool needed : a brain capable of rational
thought.
The one thing required above all else to be human... and the one thing a
fetus clearly doesn't have when it begins cellular division.

Not all humans are capable of rational thought. For example, I find you
sorely lacking in that department.


Well, yes, but you're a simpleminded idiot.

You must run out of jism once in a while, or do you these little jerk-offs never dry up?


Are you
conceding that as soon as organs become visible under a microscope
that the fetus become a human?

Of course not.

Then possession of a healthy human heart, lungs, brain, and a myriad of
other parts does not mean they are a human? How bizarre.

A) They aren't healthy or fully formed when 'visible'.

The majority are healthy

So what? They aren't fully formed, they may never be.

You may never make it until the weekend, so what?


B) the brain isn't remotely capable of self awareness there.

It soon will be, therefore you should leave it to develop, the same
chance you got.

Don't bring 'should' into this.

What???

Should is irrelevent.

Your entire argument is founded on a should, you said so yourself in a rare moment of honesty when you told me you were a passionate supporter of choice.

If my mother had aborted me, I wouldn't be here to debate this with you.
That doesn't change the debate; some other rational adult would make these
points instead.

You're not being rational, you just think you are.

It ISN'T human.

Yes it is.

Dogs aren't human; I don't think we 'should' put them to
sleep just because we can't afford to pay for their upkeep, but life isn't
fair or easy.

Non sequitur

C) The brain may never be.

You may not live until next weekend, that doesn't mean I can kill you.

I'm currently a human.
Should I cease to be, you can.

Your argument was that because a fetus *may* not make it, which is true, therefore that somehow is relevant to how we view it. Why then should I not view you as dispensible since you may not make it either?

Your arguments appear rational to you but they aren't, and that's likely why you jerk off twenty times a post.

Are you conceding that without any of them, they can't be human?

We know they have them, they're just not visible yet. That has been
proven billions of times.

No, shithead.
They aren't THERE, they are likely to be created.

Damn right, very likely indeed.
Doesn't make them human.
Likely isn't a lock.

The weekend, not a lock.

I busted out a a tourney with two morons sucking out when I was way ahead
the last two pots I played.

Yet you're still a better poker player.

Humans (and indeed all creatures) aren't some fucking balloon you
inflate. Cells grow, divide, and create.

Eventually a brain gets formed, we hope.

Hopefully that brain works well enough to cause self awareness.

All a virtual guarantee, just like you making it until the weekend..

Not in the slightest.

Let's give you ANOTHER cite :
http://www.uptodate.com/patients/content/topic.do?topicKey=pregnan/5386#

INCIDENCE — Miscarriage in early pregnancy is very common. Studies show
that about 10 to 20 percent of women who know they are pregnant have a
miscarriage some time before 20 weeks of pregnancy; 80 percent of these
occur in the first 12 weeks. But the actual rate of miscarriage is even
higher since many women have very early miscarriages without ever
realizing that they are pregnant. One study that followed women's hormone
levels every day in order to detect very early pregnancy found a total
pregnancy loss rate of 31 percent.

CAUSES — Many different factors can lead to miscarriage, and it is
difficult to say with certainty what causes a particular miscarriage to
occur. One or more problems with the pregnancy can be found in a
significant percentage of early miscarriages.

As an example, in 1/3 of miscarriages occurring before 8 weeks, there is a
pregnancy sac but no embryo inside. This means the egg was fertilized and
the cells began to divide, but an embryo did not develop. In other cases,
the embryo develops but it is abnormal. Chromosomal abnormalities, in
particular, are common. One study found that of 8841 miscarriages, 41
percent had chromosomal abnormalities.

In some cases, medical conditions in the mother, such as uncontrolled
diabetes, or structural problems in the reproductive tract, such as
uterine fibroids, can lead to miscarriage. (See "Patient information: Care
during pregnancy for women with type 1 or 2 diabetes" and see "Patient
information: Fibroids").



Oh, what the hell.
Here's ANOTHER cite.
http://www.conceptionconnection.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=8990&sid=cc90947589db2bc846a2f61a56bfe4d4

Chemical Pregnancy

A chemical pregnancy is the term given to a pregnancy that ends very early
in the first trimester. Chemical pregnancies are confirmed by testing for
hCG, the hormones that indicate the presence of a pregnancy. These
hormones are typically detected by a urine or blood pregnancy test.
However, within weeks, these hCG levels begin to drop rapidly, signifying
an end to the pregnancy. As a result, your baby and his amniotic sac
cannot be seen on an ultrasound and a miscarriage takes place.

It is believed that chemical pregnancies occur when the fetus dies
immediately after conception. This happens before the embryo has a chance
to implant in your uterus where it can grow and develop. Like a stillbirth
or molar pregnancy, chemical pregnancies can be very upsetting for the
couple involved.

How Common is a Chemical Pregnancy?

Unfortunately, chemical pregnancies are actually quite common. In fact,
between 50% and 60% of all first-time pregnancies are thought to end in
miscarriage. A large majority of these can be attributed to chemical
pregnancies.

When it comes to chemical pregnancies, many women don’t even realize that
they have experienced one. This is because the vast majority of these
miscarriages occur within the initial six weeks of pregnancy. During this
time, typical signs of pregnancy are not always present just yet and a
missed period may not have happened yet, making it somewhat unlikely for
most women to take a pregnancy test. As a result, many women don’t even
know that they were pregnant in the first place.

However, because pregnancy tests are becoming increasingly sensitive, it
is now possible for women to detect pregnancy up to 3 days before their
period is due. As a result, more and more women are able to recognize
their pregnancies ahead of time, making it more likely that women will
detect a chemical pregnancy.

Just because it might not work out doesn't change our fundamental moral/ethical relationship with it. Choosing to deliberately take a life is a decision that should be entered into consciously and honestly, without rationalizations. That way there is less likelihood of remorse or guilt later on.


How did that transformation happen?

How does an acorn become a tree?

It grows, until it reaches the point where it fits the definition of a
tree.

It you kill it before the seedling breaks ground what have you done?
What if that was the last seedling of that genus of oak?

You've killed the species.
You haven't killed a tree.

What if you place great value on that species?

That's irrelevent to the question "Is it a tree".

That's not an important question, as much as you want it to be.

If you throw out the multitude of fertilized ovum stored in freezers in
fertility clinics, you're disposing human cells. You aren't killing
people.

Frozen embryos, one of the side issues here.

No, one of the major issues.

No, a peripheral issue to the primary one.

Since we know that the fertilized ovum will develop every one of
these organs then the template for them already exists in the fetus
after conception.

NO! *** for brains!

Yes
Yes, you're a *** for brains.
No, we don't know a fetus will do these things.

Yes we do, just as we know that you will make it the weekend with
sufficient assurance to value your life.

It is far more likely I will be alive next year than any random fetus
conceived tonight will be carried to term.

Lucky you, but what if you were in some more perilous situation, would that make your life any less precious? I don't think so, it would simply mean that your life is fraught with danger.

We DON'T know this will happen.

Yes we do.
No, you hopeless retard, we don't.
We have innumerable counterexamples.

No we don't, we have a relatively small number of examples.


You've demonstrated you can't be trusted with numbers.

Another diversion.


Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't.

It WILL happen, statistically unless there is injury or disease, that
we know from billions of trials.

No, *** for brains.
Injury, disease, or any number of other factors can alter a fetus or
kill it.

As it can to you, before the weekend.

Much less likely.

The example shows that likelihood of survival is not critical to who you are and what you are worth as a being.

That's one of the MAJOR points in this, you fuckhead.

It is, and it establishes my point.

No, it establishes that you're too stupid to even discuss this topic.

No, that's your problem.
I'm kicking your ass.

I'm sure you probably believe that, with responses like "no fuckhead". You likely get that feeling of rightness every time you jerk-off in the post.





That "template for development" that exists in a fetus is the same
one that exists in you, it's what makes you a living human organism.

NO fuckhead.

Yes.

What makes me a human being is a brain capable of reasoning

Infants are incapable of reasoning.

There have been arguments made that they aren't developed fully into
humans.

That's brilliant, so kill them.
No, we suspect they can. But some people think not.

You "suspect"? You're not sure? That's refreshing.


The problem is, they might be able to reason, but can't speak yet so we
can't understand it.

Like fetuses.
No, we know fetuses can't reason.

We know no such thing.

They don't have fully formed brains until virtually birth. Indeed, they
start off with 0 brain cells.

Who says that reasoning requires a fully formed brain? Brains continue to develop throughout childhood and teen years.

So this point doesn't work.

It works perfectly.
How do 0 brain cells work, shithead?

I don't know how any of it works, nobody does. Only a few clever people try to put it into words, you are not one of them.


They are human beings. Human
intelligence as with all organisms permeates every cell of your body,
your brain is just one part of that.

No, you complete retard.

There is no intelligence in ANY cell.
The intelligence comes from the brain cells working together.

Every cell posesses intelligence, a white blood cell does not require
instructions from the brain in order to attack intruders in the
bloodstream. A liver cell.. you get the picture..

No intelligence.
Programming.
Your computer isn't intelligent.

A computer is simply a dumb machine, it doesn't learn, grow, develop, adapt, change, human cells do.

The software isn't intelligent.
The software DEVELOPER is intelligent.

Your essential life force/energy, the reason you are alive, the REAL YOU, not this little jerk-off twerp, THAT is the software and the developer, the REAL intelligence.


encapsulated in a body made up (at least somewhat) of human DNA.

Your body is merely a continuation of what it was when you were only a
few days from conception. Your life-force is the same as it was.

metaphysical bull***.
There's no 'life force'.

Why am I bothering with such a dimwit?
Because you love yourself.

I do? Why would that make me want to deal with a nitwit? More likely self-loathing.

I'm bothering with you because I pity retards.

Whew... you must need a nap after all that jerking-off.


.

Loading