ArchangelMadzz said:
You're missing the point, if any of those things were to happen you have to deal with it and move on. You should've expected it. |
Have I claim the contrary? But I think that question mark I added makes it better.
It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.
sc94597 said:
Can a child survive on its own after 9 months? Of course not. Again that is your opinion, not some fact. This is not how science works. As far as I recall any cell is a living being. Although living beings aren't precluded to cells (even though we haven't seen such a being.) In biology the first thing you learn is life can't be easily and quickly defined. It is defined by its characteristics, and self-sustainability without a host isn't one of them. Otherwise countless worms would not be living beings. The law might disagree, but that doesn't mean much, especially as the law is diverse based off places. |
Dude you're really giving me a head ache. You know I mean it can survive biologically without the need of the mother, but no you want me to spell it out, why? I don't know tell me?
No not every cell is a living being. A single celled organism is a living being. I'm not going to scrape off some of your skin cells put it in a petri dish and say 'don't harm, it's alive'
I'm not saying that's the definition of life I'm saying that's the definition science use to determine when a fetus becomes human. and not just developing INTO a human.
There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'
eva01beserk said:
Have I claim the contrary? But I think that question mark I added makes it better. |
Sorry dude, I was being sarcastic.
There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'
sc94597 said:
No it doesn't. That is a belief made by individuals not some objective claim about reality. It is not a scientifically testable nor an objective measurement. It is a label which some people choose to make. Life isn't that simple in science. I personally believe that a unique life is created upon conception (the newly unique genome and development start at this point.) Whether we can call such a being human or not is a different story. Furthermore, the child is still a parasite upon birth. It will not be able to survive without said host. So for that reason is child abandoment justifiable? |
Are you saying a parasite is not a living being?
It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.
A bunch of cells is not the same as a baby.
How can people not comprehend this?
If you remove cells, this is NOT murder.
Technically both a tumor and cancer are cells, people do not decry the removal of cancer or that of a tumor. They are both cells that grow. However they are not technically a life form.
People generally will only have abortions before 24 weeks, because generally, that is when it is safe to do so, as well as the fact that typically there is not a proper life form at that point growing within them.
It is the equivalent of removing your appendix. You are just removing a collection of cells, that have no heart, nor brain.
If you cannot comprehend that their is no heart, or life occurring at the point, your argument is already invalid - why? Because you do not understand human biology. People should not spread hate and propaganda about something that they have no idea about. I do not tell doctors how they should perform surgery in my opinion, because my opinion means shit to them (I do not know how to perform surgery).
This same rule applies for those that abortion is murder. How can you murder something that is not alive? To argue that this is murder is simply wrong.
Also, why should it matter what someone decides to do with body? If you had something growing within you that you do not want, you should have the right to remove it.
If it is not harming anyone, people should be left to their own devices.
The only thing that is being harmed is the perception of those that believe this is murder. They perceive this to be murder, as that is what they have been told or have been led to believe. A little education can go a long way.
There is no morality involved. The immoral thing to do would be controlling others without their consent.
You are forcing them to have a child, despite the fact a child has not even formed yet.
It is one thing to have an opinion, and one thing to be outright wrong with what you are saying.
Eg. In my opinion the world is flat.
naruball said:
2. I'm sure there are many pro-life women. I don't think most are anti-choice, though, especially the non-religious, well-educated ones. 1. I don't think there is a huge difference, but I can't see society accepting killing babies after they're born. As far as I'm concerned, it'd be fine until a certain age (6 months old or something), but I know that very few people would agree with me. The difference for me is the experiences they have, their personality that they have made and the connection they may have built with their parents or people who are taking care of them. Before they are born, for me they are insignificant. After they are born and start changing the world around them in some way, I consider them as people.I remember wathcing an episode of Homeland with a mother trying to drown her infant for a few seconds (until she changed her mind) and I didn't blame her. I would never do it, but I wouldn't judge someone if they did it. |
2. I think that is fair enough. I think it is possible to be anti-abortion while still allowing people the freedom to choose.
1. Depends on the society, to be honest. I think if it were legalized to abandon (but not actively murder) the baby there still would be very few babies who would die as private organizations would come in and help. At the same time I consider it murder to actively try to drown, smother, strangle, etc your baby. I find a lot of the third term abortions methods to be quite disgusting (they tear the babies limbs off, for example.) I don't think that should be acceptable, but if somebody wanted to induce preganancy before it were healthy to do so I wouldn't be so opposed to it.
PRO-DEATH
eva01beserk said:
Are you saying a parasite is not a living being? |
I'm arguing against that. The definition he seems to be using for whether something is life or not is whether or not it is a parasite.
ArchangelMadzz said:
|
Im sorry, Im not good with written sarcasim. Its really hard sometimes :p
It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.
Well. What a clusterfuck aye?
I have gotten more reports about this thread than a bakery has rolls.
I have no problem with this issue getting discussed in general. Its interesting, and topical in a number of Western countries (including my own).
This specific thread however, has devolved into something of an abortion (BOOM).
I am going to lock it, then go through later today and hand out any moderations needed. If anyone wants to either PM to apologise where they know they have stepped out of line, or go back and edit their own posts out - that would be highly unethical, but would save me a lot of time later 
(Donferrari gets a pass because one of his reports contained a hilarious pun).
starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
