[quote user=EdRoberts] Every time a woman is able to exercise control over her own reproductive system, I can feel my, ah, male appendage getting smaller and smaller. Needless to say, I approve of their religiously-motivated campaign and subtly implied threats of murder or serious bodily harm towards women's heath care providers, because if even a few more women are given subsidized birth control or pelvic exams to check for cancer, I am positive that my "Little Reagan" will shrink away forever. No more happy evenings of toe-tapping in the washrooms in the park... though on the upside, no more tense, dutiful episodes heaving away while my grim-faced mail-order wife recites her Hail Marys. [/quote]
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
EdRoberts wrote:
Every time a woman is able to exercise control over her own reproductive system, I can feel my, ah, male appendage getting smaller and smaller. Needless to say, I approve of their religiously-motivated campaign and subtly implied threats of murder or serious bodily harm towards women's heath care providers, because if even a few more women are given subsidized birth control or pelvic exams to check for cancer, I am positive that my "Little Reagan" will shrink away forever. No more happy evenings of toe-tapping in the washrooms in the park... though on the upside, no more tense, dutiful episodes heaving away while my grim-faced mail-order wife recites her Hail Marys.
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
[quote user=jeuxstine] [quote user=EdRoberts]Every time a woman is able to exercise control over her own reproductive system, I can feel my, ah, male appendage getting smaller and smaller. Needless to say, I approve of their religiously-motivated campaign and subtly implied threats of murder or serious bodily harm towards women's heath care providers, because if even a few more women are given subsidized birth control or pelvic exams to check for cancer, I am positive that my "Little Reagan" will shrink away forever. No more happy evenings of toe-tapping in the washrooms in the park... though on the upside, no more tense, dutiful episodes heaving away while my grim-faced mail-order wife recites her Hail Marys.[/quote]
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy. [/quote]
^
I love you even more when you're on the rag...
BTW, your last avatar was perfect, it captured the snooty, narcissistic, unaware fool in you...gave me a soft-on.
jeuxstine wrote:
EdRoberts wrote:
Every time a woman is able to exercise control over her own reproductive system, I can feel my, ah, male appendage getting smaller and smaller. Needless to say, I approve of their religiously-motivated campaign and subtly implied threats of murder or serious bodily harm towards women's heath care providers, because if even a few more women are given subsidized birth control or pelvic exams to check for cancer, I am positive that my "Little Reagan" will shrink away forever. No more happy evenings of toe-tapping in the washrooms in the park... though on the upside, no more tense, dutiful episodes heaving away while my grim-faced mail-order wife recites her Hail Marys.
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
^
I love you even more when you're on the rag...
BTW, your last avatar was perfect, it captured the snooty, narcissistic, unaware fool in you...gave me a soft-on.
BTW, it does seem a bit pathetic, that a woman needs the government to supply her insurance to cover the nine-dollars a month for birth control pills. I understand that the skank that made all the fuss about it and who will speak at the 'Second Coming,' Obama's convention, is pretty well off and will (it is estimated) make an annual income of $300.000.00 a year after graduation...
Woman's 'health'? Cancer exams? No one, and I mean no one is preventing you, because you are a woman, from cancer screening - damn, you are a fool...
Your "reproductive system"? I don't give a SHIT, what you do with your cunt, and connected parts!!!! However, a BABY, is NOT a part of your body, she is a separate human being.
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Woman's rights? Hmmmm, you do realize don't you, that half of the millions of aborted children each year are girls?
@ Jeuxstine:
BTW, it does seem a bit pathetic, that a woman needs the government to supply her insurance to cover the nine-dollars a month for birth control pills. I understand that the skank that made all the fuss about it and who will speak at the 'Second Coming,' Obama's convention, is pretty well off and will (it is estimated) make an annual income of $300.000.00 a year after graduation...
Woman's 'health'? Cancer exams? No one, and I mean no one is preventing you, because you are a woman, from cancer screening - damn, you are a fool...
Your "reproductive system"? I don't give a SHIT, what you do with your cunt, and connected parts!!!! However, a BABY, is NOT a part of your body, she is a separate human being.
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Woman's rights? Hmmmm, you do realize don't you, that half of the millions of aborted children each year are girls?
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
[/quote]
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
EdRoberts wrote:
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
[quote user=DigitalAntichrist] [quote user=EdRoberts]A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
[/quote]
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. [/quote]
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
DigitalAntichrist wrote:
EdRoberts wrote:
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
[quote user=EdRoberts] [quote user=DigitalAntichrist]Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.[/quote]
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact. [/quote]
When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?
EdRoberts wrote:
DigitalAntichrist wrote:
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?
[quote user=InSOmnIaC]When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?[/quote]
Just to be clear, you mean a grape has the potential to be a vine, so it makes no sense to define "personhood" as the potential to one day be a baby.
I think you could extend that even further. Isn't using a condom the same as preventing a pregnancy and growth into a baby? Shouldn't girls that refuse to put-out be guilty of murder?
Yeah, I don't think potential is a good definition for personhood. I think it lies somewhere in the brain development. There's plenty of evidence that the "person" exists in the brain. Plus, we already accept this definition for the transition from person to death.
InSOmnIaC wrote:
When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?
Just to be clear, you mean a grape has the potential to be a vine, so it makes no sense to define "personhood" as the potential to one day be a baby.
I think you could extend that even further. Isn't using a condom the same as preventing a pregnancy and growth into a baby? Shouldn't girls that refuse to put-out be guilty of murder?
Yeah, I don't think potential is a good definition for personhood. I think it lies somewhere in the brain development. There's plenty of evidence that the "person" exists in the brain. Plus, we already accept this definition for the transition from person to death.
Why do Catholics oppose condoms? I know they historically viewed the "baby" was from the man, and the woman just gave it a good place to grow. So, I suppose the use of condoms would be offensive to them, as they see the end result to be the death of a baby.
Why do Catholics oppose condoms? I know they historically viewed the "baby" was from the man, and the woman just gave it a good place to grow. So, I suppose the use of condoms would be offensive to them, as they see the end result to be the death of a baby.
[quote user=EricManning] Why do Catholics oppose condoms? I know they historically viewed the "baby" was from the man, and the woman just gave it a good place to grow. So, I suppose the use of condoms would be offensive to them, as they see the end result to be the death of a baby. [/quote]
^
Well, the answer is that religion makes no sense. Now, what the hell does your observation have to do with killing babies? Especially, late term abortion. Are you familiar with the procedure? Only a brutal, evil man would perform a late term abortion were the reason only to avoid having a child.
EricManning wrote:
Why do Catholics oppose condoms? I know they historically viewed the "baby" was from the man, and the woman just gave it a good place to grow. So, I suppose the use of condoms would be offensive to them, as they see the end result to be the death of a baby.
^
Well, the answer is that religion makes no sense. Now, what the hell does your observation have to do with killing babies? Especially, late term abortion. Are you familiar with the procedure? Only a brutal, evil man would perform a late term abortion were the reason only to avoid having a child.
[quote user=EdRoberts] [quote user=InSOmnIaC]Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo? [/quote]
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on... [/quote]
......And neither is an EMBRYO.
dumbass
EdRoberts wrote:
InSOmnIaC wrote:
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on...
Well, the Catholic's argument that a "person" is in sperm is no different than claiming the same of an embryo or fetus. Both are just defining "person" as the potential to one day be a viable human.
The Supreme Court wasn't able to accept that definition because it had no objective basis. They explicitly denied the arguments that a fetus / embryo has Constitutional rights... however they did allow for gestation after the second trimester, as there is significant development in characteristics that define us as humans.
As a result, most states do ban late-term abortions automatically. Nobody has abortions by the third trimester.
Of course, late-term abortions are virtually unheard of (somewhere around 0.5%)... only a couple doctors in the entire country perform them, and they need serious medical reasons, after evaluating the risk of life of the mother vs the child.
I personally don't care if there is a law either way, but I think it is probably better to allow a doctor to make the best decision on which life to save.
Well, the Catholic's argument that a "person" is in sperm is no different than claiming the same of an embryo or fetus. Both are just defining "person" as the potential to one day be a viable human.
The Supreme Court wasn't able to accept that definition because it had no objective basis. They explicitly denied the arguments that a fetus / embryo has Constitutional rights... however they did allow for gestation after the second trimester, as there is significant development in characteristics that define us as humans.
As a result, most states do ban late-term abortions automatically. Nobody has abortions by the third trimester.
Of course, late-term abortions are virtually unheard of (somewhere around 0.5%)... only a couple doctors in the entire country perform them, and they need serious medical reasons, after evaluating the risk of life of the mother vs the child.
I personally don't care if there is a law either way, but I think it is probably better to allow a doctor to make the best decision on which life to save.
36
[/quote]
^
Well, be careful - I think by law, you should wait until they are at least 18... Don't wanna see our Jschick on TV doing the Pedo Perp Walk...
^
Well, be careful - I think by law, you should wait until they are at least 18... Don't wanna see our Jschick on TV doing the Pedo Perp Walk...
[/quote]
haha yup. i remember when i had to spring for one. best money i ever spent.
haha yup. i remember when i had to spring for one. best money i ever spent.
[/quote]
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
why ?
why ?
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
[/quote]
^
I love you even more when you're on the rag...
BTW, your last avatar was perfect, it captured the snooty, narcissistic, unaware fool in you...gave me a soft-on.
As if you actually have the brainpower to care about babies, what with all the bestial and incest fantasies swirling slowly in your thick, delusional skull...
Stick to trying to please your skydaddy by calling me an ugly whore, at least you're well-versed and passionate when it comes to juvenile idiocy.
^
I love you even more when you're on the rag...
BTW, your last avatar was perfect, it captured the snooty, narcissistic, unaware fool in you...gave me a soft-on.
BTW, it does seem a bit pathetic, that a woman needs the government to supply her insurance to cover the nine-dollars a month for birth control pills. I understand that the skank that made all the fuss about it and who will speak at the 'Second Coming,' Obama's convention, is pretty well off and will (it is estimated) make an annual income of $300.000.00 a year after graduation...
Woman's 'health'? Cancer exams? No one, and I mean no one is preventing you, because you are a woman, from cancer screening - damn, you are a fool...
Your "reproductive system"? I don't give a SHIT, what you do with your cunt, and connected parts!!!! However, a BABY, is NOT a part of your body, she is a separate human being.
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Woman's rights? Hmmmm, you do realize don't you, that half of the millions of aborted children each year are girls?
BTW, it does seem a bit pathetic, that a woman needs the government to supply her insurance to cover the nine-dollars a month for birth control pills. I understand that the skank that made all the fuss about it and who will speak at the 'Second Coming,' Obama's convention, is pretty well off and will (it is estimated) make an annual income of $300.000.00 a year after graduation...
Woman's 'health'? Cancer exams? No one, and I mean no one is preventing you, because you are a woman, from cancer screening - damn, you are a fool...
Your "reproductive system"? I don't give a SHIT, what you do with your cunt, and connected parts!!!! However, a BABY, is NOT a part of your body, she is a separate human being.
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Woman's rights? Hmmmm, you do realize don't you, that half of the millions of aborted children each year are girls?
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
[/quote]
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
A lot of assholes here profess to be enamored of science. Well, sad to say, the result of BILLIONS of experiments, prove as a scientific fact, that a pregnancy results every single time - when not interfered with - in the birth of a BABY
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
[/quote]
I concur.
I concur.
[/quote]
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
[/quote]
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
Define 'interfered with' ...the human body, through miscarriage, aborts more 'babies' than any other factor. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) occurs in up to 30% of pregnancies (Stovall, 2002). Ed, you keep trying, and failing, at science... ever thought about a career in the APA?
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.[/quote]
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
[/quote]
When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?
"It is estimated that up to half of all fertilized eggs die and are lost (aborted) spontaneously, usually before the woman knows she is pregnant. Among those women who know they are pregnant, the miscarriage rate is about 15-20%. Most miscarriages occur during the first 7 weeks of pregnancy. The rate of miscarriage drops after the baby's heart beat is detected."
Stovall, Thomas G. (2002). "17. Early Pregnancy Loss and Ectopic Pregnancy". In Berek, Jonathan S.. Novak's Gynecology (13 ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
^
You know damn well that I mean 'abortion.'
"Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter."
So, the fact that many billions of pregnancies, have invariably resulted in BABIES - prove by scientific method, that when you perform an abortion, you are destroying a baby. Baby - scientific fact.
When you eat a grape, do you say you killed a vine?
Brainwashed fool
Brainwashed fool
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
[/quote]
I wouldn't be here. Got a harder question now? Perhaps what color is the sky?
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
I wouldn't be here. Got a harder question now? Perhaps what color is the sky?
[quote user=EdRoberts] ^
Brainwashed fool
[/quote]
[quote user=EdRoberts] ^
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
[/quote]
You're talking to yourself again ed.
Brainwashed fool
If your momma had aborted you, what would you be now?
Edit: Would she have ended a human life?
You're talking to yourself again ed.
I wouldn't be here. Got a harder question now? Perhaps what color is the sky?
[/quote]
^
Gee, your talking like a fool really makes a point...
I wouldn't be here. Got a harder question now? Perhaps what color is the sky?
^
Gee, your talking like a fool really makes a point...
Just to be clear, you mean a grape has the potential to be a vine, so it makes no sense to define "personhood" as the potential to one day be a baby.
I think you could extend that even further. Isn't using a condom the same as preventing a pregnancy and growth into a baby? Shouldn't girls that refuse to put-out be guilty of murder?
Yeah, I don't think potential is a good definition for personhood. I think it lies somewhere in the brain development. There's plenty of evidence that the "person" exists in the brain. Plus, we already accept this definition for the transition from person to death.
Just to be clear, you mean a grape has the potential to be a vine, so it makes no sense to define "personhood" as the potential to one day be a baby.
I think you could extend that even further. Isn't using a condom the same as preventing a pregnancy and growth into a baby? Shouldn't girls that refuse to put-out be guilty of murder?
Yeah, I don't think potential is a good definition for personhood. I think it lies somewhere in the brain development. There's plenty of evidence that the "person" exists in the brain. Plus, we already accept this definition for the transition from person to death.
^
Gee, your talking like a fool really makes a point...
[/quote]
As proof just mentioned, your reply is much more applicable to your previous statement.
^
Gee, your talking like a fool really makes a point...
As proof just mentioned, your reply is much more applicable to your previous statement.
[/quote]
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
[/quote]
lol
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
lol
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
[/quote]
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on...
Do you shed a tear when you jizz in a dude's ass and the life of all those sperm is snuffed out in a sea of poo?
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on...
[/quote]
^
Well, the answer is that religion makes no sense. Now, what the hell does your observation have to do with killing babies? Especially, late term abortion. Are you familiar with the procedure? Only a brutal, evil man would perform a late term abortion were the reason only to avoid having a child.
^
Well, the answer is that religion makes no sense. Now, what the hell does your observation have to do with killing babies? Especially, late term abortion. Are you familiar with the procedure? Only a brutal, evil man would perform a late term abortion were the reason only to avoid having a child.
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on...
[/quote]
......And neither is an EMBRYO.
dumbass
^
Sperm is not a baby ya dumb ass...
And be careful, I think you are turning Digital on...
......And neither is an EMBRYO.
dumbass
[/quote]
cos it feels better when you go raw.
cos it feels better when you go raw.
The Supreme Court wasn't able to accept that definition because it had no objective basis. They explicitly denied the arguments that a fetus / embryo has Constitutional rights... however they did allow for gestation after the second trimester, as there is significant development in characteristics that define us as humans.
As a result, most states do ban late-term abortions automatically. Nobody has abortions by the third trimester.
Of course, late-term abortions are virtually unheard of (somewhere around 0.5%)... only a couple doctors in the entire country perform them, and they need serious medical reasons, after evaluating the risk of life of the mother vs the child.
I personally don't care if there is a law either way, but I think it is probably better to allow a doctor to make the best decision on which life to save.
The Supreme Court wasn't able to accept that definition because it had no objective basis. They explicitly denied the arguments that a fetus / embryo has Constitutional rights... however they did allow for gestation after the second trimester, as there is significant development in characteristics that define us as humans.
As a result, most states do ban late-term abortions automatically. Nobody has abortions by the third trimester.
Of course, late-term abortions are virtually unheard of (somewhere around 0.5%)... only a couple doctors in the entire country perform them, and they need serious medical reasons, after evaluating the risk of life of the mother vs the child.
I personally don't care if there is a law either way, but I think it is probably better to allow a doctor to make the best decision on which life to save.