Logic says that if it doesn't look like a human being it isn't one. I see why you make no sense. You can't even grasp the concept of logic. It is only by chance that anything you write has the appearance of reason.
fold wrote:I can't help but wonder... How many of those of you who are so offended by even the mere-thought of "compromise" in dealing with this subject,
have yourselves adopted EVEN ONE child born to an unwed mother, one who decided NOT to have an abortion?
We were foster parents during the 1980's and 1990's, and we helped raise two abandoned kids, both of whom came to us from St. Joseph's Home, a part of Catholic Charities.
And the government allowed them in your custody? And some people say government is not incompetent.Â
However, the fact is JT, that I was directing my question squarely at Jethro, since he is the one who spews his Pat Robertson -esque hatreds and bellitteling accusations at everyone who thinks in any way that there are other ideas besides HIS that could help us all deal with the continuing problem that IS abortion.
If there were no abortions there would not be a problem with them.
He cannot understand that there are people who would give up their own lives rather than "Advise" a woman to get one, yet still believe that whether she does or not, isn't any of THEIR business.
They can tell themselves that but they are simply misguided or morally challenged. Abortion is a moral question that is everybody's business.
Hypocrisy stands at the pinnacle of the sins that liberals most disdain. So it's fair game to compare the free ride they gave to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with their searching the archives to pillory every word ever written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts.
I found this accusation to be quite troubling: Ginsburg called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are "less than 12 years old."
If these accusations are true it makes a good case for Ginsburg being the most liberal justice on the court at anytime.
How many of those of you who are so offended by even the mere-thought of "compromise" in dealing with this subject, have yourselves adopted EVEN ONE child born to an unwed mother, one who decided NOT to have an abortion?
A bit personal, but I have adopted my daughter who was born to an unwed mother (my wife now and this happened before we met). I also married my wife who was pregnant at the time. We had been planning to get married for couple of years at the time she told me she was pregnant. She told me that she would not make me get married, but I was not about to let my son be born without a father, so we sped up the marriage process. Also, I have helped quite a bit with my grandson since his unmarried father is more interested in buying things for himself instead of supporting his son. Hopefully the father will grow up soon and face his responsibilities.
So yes, I am against abortion and doing what little I can to help out.
If you were the moral paragon you claim to be, you'd make certain of their truth before broadcasting the accusations; isn't there something in that book you claim to run your life by about "bearing false witness"?
Now then, Mr. Smartypants, explain to me, logically, how something that cannot be seen with the naked eye and is incapable of existence without 100% life support can be correctly called a "human being."
Now then, Mr. Smartypants, explain to me, logically, how something that cannot be seen with the naked eye and is incapable of existence without 100% life support can be correctly called a "human being."
If you were the moral paragon you claim to be, you'd make certain of their truth before broadcasting the accusations; isn't there something in that book you claim to run your life by about "bearing false witness"?
Oh I think there is enough truth there to warrant a post.
The place I got it from (Westside Pregnancy Resource Center http://www.wprc.org/trimester2.phtml out of West L.A.) claims it is from the 2nd trimester - 18 weeks gestation, 16 since conception. I doubt they are card carrying Vast Right Wing conspirators.
Since you chose the other site, here is what they have to say about a 12 week gestation:
According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects.
Grandpa, you highlighted the part off the description there about fetuses feeling pain; there has been news on that front this week.
A review of about 1,500 scientific studies concludes that it is highly unlikely that fetuses can feel pain before the 29th week of pregnancy — a finding that contradicts several pieces of proposed abortion legislation.
The review, published today in the Journal of the American Medical Assn., comes as Congress and state legislatures are considering bills that would require physicians to tell pregnant women considering abortions that fetuses feel pain and to offer the women anesthesia for the fetuses.
Georgia and Arkansas have implemented such laws and several other states, including California, have considered them.
The federal bill, introduced by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) with 33 co-sponsors, includes a script that physicians would have to read to women seeking an abortion in the fifth month or later. It says: "The Congress of the United States has determined that at this stage of development, an unborn child has the physical structures necessary to experience pain."
A similar bill has been introduced in the House.
The study concludes that, "based on the available evidence, the fetus does not have the functional capacity to experience pain," said Dr. Eleanor A. Drey of UC San Francisco, one of the study's authors.
"That relies on consciousness, and the cortex of those infants is not well enough developed to allow for conscious processing of stimuli" like pain.
"According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects."
This makes perfect sense, that's why we murdered Terri Schiavo. If you can't live without life support, you are abortable! I hope I never get in a car accident with you liberals around here. I don't want to be aborted!
The Department of Consumer Affairs has determined that CSC's screen name constitutes false advertising. Expect a change order in the mail.
I apologize for the post above; it looks like some of my words went into the bitbucket when I was editing the graphic link. Here's what I believe, based on logic and my scientific experience. If you cannot a) see it with the naked eye and b) it cannot live without 100% life support -- note that both conditions must pertain -- it is not a human being. The early-stage embryo in the picture looks like something living, but not human; if you were not told what it was, you'd most likely group it in the phylum Mollusca.
Terri Schiavo was not murdered; Terri Schiavo, her being as opposed to her body, had been dead for fifteen years before most of us ever heard of her.
"The Department of Consumer Affairs has determined that CSC's screen name constitutes false advertising. Expect a change order in the mail."
Common sense goes out the window when subjects like this are discussed. Abortion, assisted suicide, euthanasia. It's not a reflection on anyone here. No one seems to be able to take an objective look at things. You can debate when life begins, ends, whatever. It doesn't seem like that's how matters like this ought to be decided, because they can't to anyone's satisfaction.
Societies make tough choices like this all the time. The successful ones do it without splitting at the seams. I'd like to think the U.S. is a successful one.
It's all about morality. I debate these issues with people in here all the time. That doesn't mean that I am right and you are wrong. It doesn't mean that I have higher morals than others in here, just a different set of morals. Whether I debate with Bill, Rick, or Pieter it's not meant to be a personal attck. We just have differing opinions. I'd buy you guys a round any day of the week, but don't expect me to stop trying to convice you my ideas are best. I would expect you guys to do the same.
My personal beliefs tell me it's a human life form. That's why you'll never hear someone walk up to a pregnant woman and ask "How's the fetus doing?" or "So what are you going to name the zygote?" They ask, How's the baby? Do you know if the baby is a boy or girl?. It's only called a fetus if they are going to abort it.
Now, someone can tell me all day why they think it's just a mass of cells. But I am as strong in my belief that it's not than someone who feels that it is.
Tell me this. If a pregnant woman is murdered, why is the suspect charged with 2 counts of murder ?
 The mother probably wouldn't even know she is pregnant yet. To use that in a discussion on abortion is just silly since abortion wouldn't have even enter the mother's mind yet.
A review of about 1,500 scientific studies concludes that it is highly unlikely that fetuses can feel pain before the 29th week of pregnancy
And here is also a link scientifically proving that the earth is flat:
 My point being that sometimes scientist are wrong.
These 1500 studies conclude that it is "unlikely" but not positively a fact that there is no pain felt.
Also, from your Texas website we learn that at 12 weeks arms and legs move and there is a heartbeat. Something is causing this to happen independently. There must be some form of brain activity for this to happen.
Personally, I would rather err on the side of saving a child's life.
That is a picture after a mere 4 weeks. The mother probably wouldn't even know she is pregnant yet. To use that in a discussion on abortion is just silly since abortion wouldn't have even enter the mother's mind yet.
Early pregnancy test kits detect pregnancy as early as ten days after conception. The CDC says that approximately sixty percent of abortions are performed before eight weeks.
And here is also a link scientifically proving that the earth is flat. My point being that sometimes scientist are wrong.
Show me an actual scientist who belongs to the Flat Earth Society and I'll vote Republican until I die. The stuff on the FES website may use words that scientists use, but it's not science. What makes it "not science"? It begins with the conclusion that the earth is flat and works backward; that's the exact opposite of science.
These 1500 studies conclude that it is "unlikely" but not positively a fact that there is no pain felt.
Again, if you know anything about science, you would know that scientists alays leave the door open for their opinions to change as new evidence comes in. The only facts in science are physical characteristics, like the density of a substance in grams per cubic centimeter.
Also, from your Texas website we learn that at 12 weeks arms and legs move and there is a heartbeat. Something is causing this to happen independently. There must be some form of brain activity for this to happen.
There are a lot of life with heartbeats and the ability to move that don't have anything resembling what we call a "brain." It's not "my" Texas website, by the way; it's clearly one of those "public service" things which are intended not to inform, but to persuade. "Yes, we know you can't afford another child, and your medical history indicates that pregnancy could pose a serious health risk, but before you decide to terminate the pregnancy, here's some things you should know."
If a pregnant woman is murdered, why is the suspect charged with 2 counts of murder ?
There are fetal-homicide laws in 29 of the fifty states, according to this chartfrom two years ago. The stage of gestation varies widely, is different for different types of homicide in some states, in some is vaguely defined and in others not defined at all. I'd prefer a nationwide standard, myself, and I'd place it at the stage of viability outside the womb, about 28 weeks.
According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. It is human and it is a being. That makes the unborn child a human being.jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects. People are human beings no matter whether they are on life support or not. Being able to be self sufficient is not a requirement for being a human being.
Grandpa, you highlighted the part off the description there about fetuses feeling pain; there has been news on that front this week. Biased news. the report is from the Univ. of Calif., San Francisco and one of the "researchers" runs the abortions clinic there. It seems obvious that an unborn child that move and sleep and has a developed organs would feel pain. It is people like you that will grasp at any straw no matter how dubious, to justify killing.
That wasn't funny, in the least. I don't remember if we ever decided not to chide each other about our Children, but there are some things that should be out of bounds, shit-for-brains, and our Children are one such topic.
I wasn't saying anything about your children. I was talking about you.
WASHINGTON -- Sad yet riveting, like a wreck by the side of the road, Cindy Sheehan, a plaything of her own sincerities and other peoples' opportunisms, has already been largely erased from the national memory by new waves of media fickleness in the service of the public's summer ennui. But before she becomes fully relegated to the role of opening act for more durable luminaries at anti-war rallies, prudent Democrats -- those political snail darters, the emblematic endangered species of American politics -- should consider the possibility that, although she was a burr under the president's saddle for several weeks, she is symptomatic of something that in 2008 could cause the Democratic Party a sixth loss in eight presidential elections. That something is a shrillness unlike anything heard, in living memory, from a major tendency within a major party.
Just because a fetus can sensea surgical procedure that an adult would clearly find painful, or even react in a manner that seems to mirrora pain response, doesn't mean the fetus actually experiences pain, the researchers said.
That you reduce what being a human being is to basically a living corpse or a woman's fetus is disgusting... and the best argument for keeping people like you out of other people's business when it comes to making these difficult decisions.
The researchers were analyzing brain development, and when the structures that we know are necessary for the experience of pain develop. They came to the conclusion, after analyzing about 1500 other studies, that those brain structures have not developed until much later in gestation than was previously thought. That's not good enough for jethro, though -- they must have other motives, and they're from --*gasp*--SAN FRANCISCO!!!Tell you what, jethro, why don't you write to JAMA with this proof that they're biased in favor of infanticide; I'd be interested to see what response you get, if any.
I've chased paramecia around a microscope slide with the stage adjustments; they seem to "want" to hide from the bright light, but they are one-celled organisms with no brain. From what he's posted, jethro would probably say that they are exhibiting conscious behavior, but from what we know of consciousness, he'd be wrong.
In today's Journal of the American Medical Association, five researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, review nearly 2,000 studies on the hotly debated questions. They conclude that legislative proposals to allow fetal pain relief during abortion are not justified by scientific evidence.
But their seven-page article has a weakness: It does not mention that one author is an abortion clinic director, while the lead author - Susan J. Lee, a medical student - once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.
That you reduce what being a human being is to basically a living corpse or a woman's fetus is disgusting... and the best argument for keeping people like you out of other people's business when it comes to making these difficult decisions.
The researchers were analyzing brain development, and when the structures that we know are necessary for the experience of pain develop. They analyzed nothing. They apparently chose those studies that supported there agenda. That's not good enough for jethro, though -- they must have other motives, and they're from --*gasp*-- SAN FRANCISCO!!!Tell you what, jethro, why don't you write to JAMA with this proof that they're biased in favor of infanticide; I'd be interested to see what response you get, if any. The people that worked on that report had an agenda. Look it up yourself.
I've chased paramecia around a microscope slide with the stage adjustments; they seem to "want" to hide from the bright light, but they are one-celled organisms with no brain. From what he's posted, jethro would probably say that they are exhibiting conscious behavior, but from what we know of consciousness, he'd be wrong. But you see it, don't you? Isn't that your standard? That is what you wrote. If you can't see it doesn't exist, if you do, it does?
No. By definition it's a fetus. It's a woman's fetus.
Anyone that wasn't so closed minded would consider that everyone walking and talking or posting on these boards began at conception.
I began as a fetus and was entirely my mother's until she gave birth to me. There was no "me" until she gave birth to "me". Until that point, her fetus was a part of her, not a separate human being.
But that doesn't change the fact you began at conception and you were a human being at that point.
No, I became a human being when my mother gave birth to me. I was her fetus until then.
I don't know what caused you to change, but at one time you were a human being!
So, I'm not currently a human being?
Why don't you start by concerning yourself with the born before you start worrying about what's inside a woman's womb?
The human condition is wide ranging.
and you sure are selective about what is worth your concern. You support war that kills many people, including pregnant women. You resist protecting the environment that supports all life, all in the name of greed.
Your cries of "human beings" sound hollow when you don't seem to care about them once they are born.
UCSF obstetrician-gynecologist Eleanor A. Drey, medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, said: "We thought it was critical to include an expert in abortion among the authors. I think my presence... should not serve to politicize a scholarly report."Â
It's people like you and your intolerance that cause wars. No, its idiots like you that let the likes of a Hitler or a Saddam grow. There is no real difference between you and them. You are an extremist fanatic and a fool.
I began as a fetus and was entirely my mother's until she gave birth to me. You were a separate and distinct human being. There was no "me" until she gave birth to "me". There was a you. Granted a more intelligent and reasonable you!  There is always a human being after conception. That is why some women want an abortion, because there is a human being growing within her.  Until that point, her fetus was a part of her, not a separate human being. It is a separate being and that is why some women want to kill it.
But that doesn't change the fact you began at conception and you were a human being at that point.
No, I became a human being when my mother gave birth to me. I was her fetus until then. No you were a human being and being closed minded about and ignoring simple definitions won't change that. Holding your breath until you turn blue doesn't change anything.
I don't know what caused you to change, but at one time you were a human being!
So, I'm not currently a human being? It was a joke! Of course you are a human being, a poor excuse for one, but still a human being.
Why don't you start by concerning yourself with the born before you start worrying about what's inside a woman's womb? I concern myself with right and wrong. Killing human beings, especially defenseless ones, simply because you want to is wrong.
The human condition is wide ranging.
and you sure are selective about what is worth your concern. No. You say that because you want to believe it. It helps you maintain control in your fantasy world.You support war that kills many people, including pregnant women. No, I prefer that people like Saddam would not get power but they do and they must be dealt with.You resist protecting the environment that supports all life, all in the name of greed. Ah your fanaticism controls you. You have no basis to say that specific allegation about me.Â
Your cries of "human beings" sound hollow when you don't seem to care about them once they are born. I care quite a bit, but what makes you think otherwise? Because I simply don't agree with you?
You didn't serve THX. You can't have an opinion....K?....asshole?
Then I don't think you're interested in reducing the number of abortions.
Logic says that if it doesn't look like a human being it isn't one. I see why you make no sense. You can't even grasp the concept of logic. It is only by chance that anything you write has the appearance of reason.
fold wrote:I can't help but wonder... How many of those of you who are
so offended
by even the mere-thought of "compromise" in dealing with this subject,
have yourselves
adopted
EVEN ONE
child born to an unwed mother, one who decided NOT to have an abortion?
We were foster parents during the 1980's and 1990's, and we helped raise two abandoned kids, both of whom came to us from St. Joseph's Home, a part of Catholic Charities.
And the government allowed them in your custody? And some people say government is not incompetent.Â
However, the fact is JT, that I was directing my question
squarely at Jethro,
since he is the one who spews his Pat Robertson
-esque
hatreds and bellitteling accusations at everyone who thinks in any way that there are other ideas besides HIS that could help us all deal with the continuing problem that IS abortion.
If there were no abortions there would not be a problem with them.
He cannot understand that there are people who would give up their own lives rather than "Advise" a woman to get one, yet still believe that whether she does or not, isn't any of THEIR business.
They can tell themselves that but they are simply misguided or morally challenged. Abortion is a moral question that is everybody's business.
Hypocrisy stands at the pinnacle of the sins that liberals most disdain. So it's fair game to compare the free ride they gave to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg with their searching the archives to pillory every word ever written by Supreme Court nominee John Roberts.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/phyllisschlafly/ps20050823.shtml
I found this accusation to be quite troubling: Ginsburg called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are "less than 12 years old."
If these accusations are true it makes a good case for Ginsburg being the most liberal justice on the court at anytime.
How many of those of you who are so offended by even the mere-thought of "compromise" in dealing with this subject, have yourselves adopted EVEN ONE child born to an unwed mother, one who decided NOT to have an abortion?
A bit personal, but I have adopted my daughter who was born to an unwed mother (my wife now and this happened before we met). I also married my wife who was pregnant at the time. We had been planning to get married for couple of years at the time she told me she was pregnant. She told me that she would not make me get married, but I was not about to let my son be born without a father, so we sped up the marriage process. Also, I have helped quite a bit with my grandson since his unmarried father is more interested in buying things for himself instead of supporting his son. Hopefully the father will grow up soon and face his responsibilities.
So yes, I am against abortion and doing what little I can to help out.
If you were the moral paragon you claim to be, you'd make certain of their truth before broadcasting the accusations; isn't there something in that book you claim to run your life by about "bearing false witness"?
Now then, Mr. Smartypants, explain to me, logically, how something that cannot be seen with the naked eye and is incapable of existence without 100% life support can be correctly called a "human being."
Now then, Mr. Smartypants, explain to me, logically, how something that cannot be seen with the naked eye and is incapable of existence without 100% life support can be correctly called a "human being."
If you were the moral paragon you claim to be, you'd make certain of their truth before broadcasting the accusations; isn't there something in that book you claim to run your life by about "bearing false witness"?
Oh I think there is enough truth there to warrant a post.
Grandpa, that photo is a 24-week fetus,
The place I got it from (Westside Pregnancy Resource Center http://www.wprc.org/trimester2.phtml out of West L.A.) claims it is from the 2nd trimester - 18 weeks gestation, 16 since conception. I doubt they are card carrying Vast Right Wing conspirators.
Since you chose the other site, here is what they have to say about a 12 week gestation:
And at 16 weeks:Â
The same photographer took this picture of an 18 week fetus:
http://www.life.com/Life/60th/classic/cv043065.html
According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects.
Grandpa, you highlighted the part off the description there about fetuses feeling pain; there has been news on that front this week.
"According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects."
This makes perfect sense, that's why we murdered Terri Schiavo. If you can't live without life support, you are abortable! I hope I never get in a car accident with you liberals around here. I don't want to be aborted!
We're cold-blooded bastards, CSC. We'd be waiting to pull the plug just 'cause we can.
Hope you don't have that organ doner designation on your drivers license. You'll be salvaged for parts.
The Department of Consumer Affairs has determined that CSC's screen name constitutes false advertising. Expect a change order in the mail.
I apologize for the post above; it looks like some of my words went into the bitbucket when I was editing the graphic link. Here's what I believe, based on logic and my scientific experience. If you cannot a) see it with the naked eye and b) it cannot live without 100% life support -- note that both conditions must pertain -- it is not a human being. The early-stage embryo in the picture looks like something living, but not human; if you were not told what it was, you'd most likely group it in the phylum Mollusca.
Terri Schiavo was not murdered; Terri Schiavo, her being as opposed to her body, had been dead for fifteen years before most of us ever heard of her.
"The Department of Consumer Affairs has determined that CSC's screen name constitutes false advertising. Expect a change order in the mail."
Common sense goes out the window when subjects like this are discussed. Abortion, assisted suicide, euthanasia. It's not a reflection on anyone here. No one seems to be able to take an objective look at things. You can debate when life begins, ends, whatever. It doesn't seem like that's how matters like this ought to be decided, because they can't to anyone's satisfaction.
Societies make tough choices like this all the time. The successful ones do it without splitting at the seams. I'd like to think the U.S. is a successful one.
It's all about morality. I debate these issues with people in here all the time. That doesn't mean that I am right and you are wrong. It doesn't mean that I have higher morals than others in here, just a different set of morals. Whether I debate with Bill, Rick, or Pieter it's not meant to be a personal attck. We just have differing opinions. I'd buy you guys a round any day of the week, but don't expect me to stop trying to convice you my ideas are best. I would expect you guys to do the same.
Well said CSC.
My personal beliefs tell me it's a human life form. That's why you'll never hear someone walk up to a pregnant woman and ask "How's the fetus doing?" or "So what are you going to name the zygote?" They ask, How's the baby? Do you know if the baby is a boy or girl?. It's only called a fetus if they are going to abort it.
Now, someone can tell me all day why they think it's just a mass of cells. But I am as strong in my belief that it's not than someone who feels that it is.
Tell me this. If a pregnant woman is murdered, why is the suspect charged with 2 counts of murder ?
According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being.
That is a picture after a mere 4 weeks.
http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/wrtk/develop/week4.shtm
 The mother probably wouldn't even know she is pregnant yet. To use that in a discussion on abortion is just silly since abortion wouldn't have even enter the mother's mind yet.
A review of about 1,500 scientific studies concludes that it is highly unlikely that fetuses can feel pain before the 29th week of pregnancy
And here is also a link scientifically proving that the earth is flat:
http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm
 My point being that sometimes scientist are wrong.
These 1500 studies conclude that it is "unlikely" but not positively a fact that there is no pain felt.
Also, from your Texas website we learn that at 12 weeks arms and legs move and there is a heartbeat. Something is causing this to happen independently. There must be some form of brain activity for this to happen.
Personally, I would rather err on the side of saving a child's life.
Early pregnancy test kits detect pregnancy as early as ten days after conception. The CDC says that approximately sixty percent of abortions are performed before eight weeks.
Show me an actual scientist who belongs to the Flat Earth Society and I'll vote Republican until I die. The stuff on the FES website may use words that scientists use, but it's not science. What makes it "not science"? It begins with the conclusion that the earth is flat and works backward; that's the exact opposite of science.
Again, if you know anything about science, you would know that scientists alays leave the door open for their opinions to change as new evidence comes in. The only facts in science are physical characteristics, like the density of a substance in grams per cubic centimeter.
There are a lot of life with heartbeats and the ability to move that don't have anything resembling what we call a "brain." It's not "my" Texas website, by the way; it's clearly one of those "public service" things which are intended not to inform, but to persuade. "Yes, we know you can't afford another child, and your medical history indicates that pregnancy could pose a serious health risk, but before you decide to terminate the pregnancy, here's some things you should know."
There are fetal-homicide laws in 29 of the fifty states, according to this chartfrom two years ago. The stage of gestation varies widely, is different for different types of homicide in some states, in some is vaguely defined and in others not defined at all. I'd prefer a nationwide standard, myself, and I'd place it at the stage of viability outside the womb, about 28 weeks.
No one murdered Terri Schiavo.
They shoot horses, don't they?
I didn't read it.
And you didn't get "blasted" Grow a layer of skin forgodsake.
Now that I did, I think you're over reacting.
I saw that more as a jab at you and less to do with your kids.
In case you haven't noticed, personal jabs are allowed here in the political threads.
Unless someone is threatening someone, or posting personal information, I don't really care.
If you have a problem with that, you can talk to the other moderators here, which are Kitch, Ares, Clue Master, OTiS, TMK and Terry V.
It's a pity that they are almost always used as a substitute for reality-based debate.
:-)
According to jethro, this -- less than 1/8thof an inch long, is a human being. It is human and it is a being. That makes the unborn child a human being.jethro is also unable to explain the logic of how something that cannot survive without 100% life support, so he posts dictionary definitions of the two separate words, complete with sound effects. People are human beings no matter whether they are on life support or not. Being able to be self sufficient is not a requirement for being a human being.
Grandpa, you highlighted the part off the description there about fetuses feeling pain; there has been news on that front this week. Biased news. the report is from the Univ. of Calif., San Francisco and one of the "researchers" runs the abortions clinic there. It seems obvious that an unborn child that move and sleep and has a developed organs would feel pain. It is people like you that will grasp at any straw no matter how dubious, to justify killing.
Terri Schiavo was not murdered; Terri Schiavo, her being as opposed to her body, had been dead for fifteen years before most of us ever heard of her.
It doesn't mean that I have higher morals than others in here, just a different set of morals.Â
There is right and wrong. The wrong set of morals is just that -wrong.
That wasn't funny,
in the least.
I don't remember if we ever decided not to chide each other
about our Children,
but there are some things that should be out of bounds,
shit-for-brains,
and our Children are one such topic.
I wasn't saying anything about your children. I was talking about you.
It's a pity that they are almost always used as a substitute for reality-based debate.
WASHINGTON -- Sad yet riveting, like a wreck by the side of the road, Cindy Sheehan, a plaything of her own sincerities and other peoples' opportunisms, has already been largely erased from the national memory by new waves of media fickleness in the service of the public's summer ennui. But before she becomes fully relegated to the role of opening act for more durable luminaries at anti-war rallies, prudent Democrats -- those political snail darters, the emblematic endangered species of American politics -- should consider the possibility that, although she was a burr under the president's saddle for several weeks, she is symptomatic of something that in 2008 could cause the Democratic Party a sixth loss in eight presidential elections. That something is a shrillness unlike anything heard, in living memory, from a major tendency within a major party.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/gw20050825.shtml
A biased article but an interesting paragrapph:
Just because a fetus can sensea surgical procedure that an adult would clearly find painful, or even react in a manner that seems to mirrora pain response, doesn't mean the fetus actually experiences pain, the researchers said.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/08/24/MNGMUEC9O41.DTL&type=health
In pieter's world if you can see it must be real. Isnt' that about what you wrote, pieter?
That you reduce what being a human being is to basically a living corpse or a woman's fetus is disgusting... and the best argument for keeping people like you out of other people's business when it comes to making these difficult decisions.
The researchers were analyzing brain development, and when the structures that we know are necessary for the experience of pain develop. They came to the conclusion, after analyzing about 1500 other studies, that those brain structures have not developed until much later in gestation than was previously thought. That's not good enough for jethro, though -- they must have other motives, and they're from --*gasp*-- SAN FRANCISCO!!!Tell you what, jethro, why don't you write to JAMA with this proof that they're biased in favor of infanticide; I'd be interested to see what response you get, if any.
I've chased paramecia around a microscope slide with the stage adjustments; they seem to "want" to hide from the bright light, but they are one-celled organisms with no brain. From what he's posted, jethro would probably say that they are exhibiting conscious behavior, but from what we know of consciousness, he'd be wrong.
I also find it interesting that the same people ranting about "human life" are the ones supporting war.
Fetal-pain study omits an abortion-rights link
In today's Journal of the American Medical Association, five researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, review nearly 2,000 studies on the hotly debated questions. They conclude that legislative proposals to allow fetal pain relief during abortion are not justified by scientific evidence.
But their seven-page article has a weakness: It does not mention that one author is an abortion clinic director, while the lead author - Susan J. Lee, a medical student - once worked for NARAL Pro-Choice America.
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/fetal_pain/Proabortionlinktostudy.html
That you reduce what being a human being is to basically a living corpse or a woman's fetus is disgusting... and the best argument for keeping people like you out of other people's business when it comes to making these difficult decisions.
I also find it interesting that the same people ranting about "human life" are the ones supporting war.
The researchers were analyzing brain development, and when the structures that we know are necessary for the experience of pain develop. They analyzed nothing. They apparently chose those studies that supported there agenda. That's not good enough for jethro, though -- they must have other motives, and they're from --*gasp*--
SAN FRANCISCO!!!Tell you what, jethro, why don't you write to JAMA with this proof that they're biased in favor of infanticide; I'd be interested to see what response you get, if any. The people that worked on that report had an agenda. Look it up yourself.
I've chased paramecia around a microscope slide with the stage adjustments; they seem to "want" to hide from the bright light, but they are one-celled organisms with no brain. From what he's posted, jethro would probably say that they are exhibiting conscious behavior, but from what we know of consciousness, he'd be wrong. But you see it, don't you? Isn't that your standard? That is what you wrote. If you can't see it doesn't exist, if you do, it does?
No. By definition it's a fetus. It's a woman's fetus.
I began as a fetus and was entirely my mother's until she gave birth to me. There was no "me" until she gave birth to "me". Until that point, her fetus was a part of her, not a separate human being.
No, I became a human being when my mother gave birth to me. I was her fetus until then.
So, I'm not currently a human being?
Why don't you start by concerning yourself with the born before you start worrying about what's inside a woman's womb?
and you sure are selective about what is worth your concern. You support war that kills many people, including pregnant women. You resist protecting the environment that supports all life, all in the name of greed.
Your cries of "human beings" sound hollow when you don't seem to care about them once they are born.
You support it when there are plenty of options.
It's people like you and your intolerance that cause wars. There is no real difference between you and them.
UCSF obstetrician-gynecologist Eleanor A. Drey, medical director of the abortion clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, said: "We thought it was critical to include an expert in abortion among the authors. I think my presence... should not serve to politicize a scholarly report."Â
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/living/health/12458029.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
Yeah sure, Dr. Drey.
It's people like you and your intolerance that cause wars. No, its idiots like you that let the likes of a Hitler or a Saddam grow. There is no real difference between you and them. You are an extremist fanatic and a fool.
crabs: "No. By definition it's a fetus. It's a woman's fetus."
By definition a fetus is a human being.
It's a fetus.
And until it's born, it's none of society's business. It's entirely the mother's.
I began as a fetus and was entirely my mother's until she gave birth to me. You were a separate and distinct human being. There was no "me" until she gave birth to "me". There was a you. Granted a more intelligent and reasonable you!  There is always a human being after conception. That is why some women want an abortion, because there is a human being growing within her.  Until that point, her fetus was a part of her, not a separate human being. It is a separate being and that is why some women want to kill it.
No, I became a human being when my mother gave birth to me. I was her fetus until then. No you were a human being and being closed minded about and ignoring simple definitions won't change that. Holding your breath until you turn blue doesn't change anything.
So, I'm not currently a human being? It was a joke! Of course you are a human being, a poor excuse for one, but still a human being.
Why don't you start by concerning yourself with the born before you start worrying about what's inside a woman's womb? I concern myself with right and wrong. Killing human beings, especially defenseless ones, simply because you want to is wrong.
and you sure are selective about what is worth your concern. No. You say that because you want to believe it. It helps you maintain control in your fantasy world.You support war that kills many people, including pregnant women. No, I prefer that people like Saddam would not get power but they do and they must be dealt with.You resist protecting the environment that supports all life, all in the name of greed. Ah your fanaticism controls you. You have no basis to say that specific allegation about me.Â
Your cries of "human beings" sound hollow when you don't seem to care about them once they are born. I care quite a bit, but what makes you think otherwise? Because I simply don't agree with you?
Nonsense. Saddam is mad at people like you who want to impose your beliefs on the rest of the world.
You and your intolerance and Imperial business manner and religious conceit created people like Saddam.
It's a fetus. It is a human fetus.
And until it's born, it's none of society's business. It's entirely the mother's. How dogmatic of you
Nonsense. Saddam is mad at people like you who want to impose yor beliefs on the rest of the world.
as I thought you see Saddam as a hero.