Here we go again!! The following in red is an exact copy of your post...an exact copy....Are you denying you made that post!!!???? PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST. See, YOU saying I said that doesn't make it true....without proof I said that you look to be a L---.....
I think you just misinterpreted what I was saying and I never said fetus. Let's just say that we do agree it's human. Now all we have to agree upon is when does it in fact have rights, a right to life. You came into this conversation where I was talking about the "magic vagina theory". That's why there was confusion. I thought you were defending this argument.
HOW could I misinterpret the following: PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" It'd be hard for you to deny you posted this....are you denying it? How could it be misinterpreted?? FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST.
There is a relationship - and the fallacious argument given in the vid does not change this. If one claims one cares about "innocent life" as is so often heard from lifers -and then they show complete disregard for innocent life - this is obvious hypocrisy. The diabetes foundation is not out there claiming to be working on cancer. The Diabetes foundation is not out there trying to justifying forcing some religious or personal belief on another person through physical violence - on the basis of the claim "its innocent life". That the Diabetes foundation does not work on cancer does not change the fact that those who claim to care so much for innocent life - but then then work against policies to help innocent life - are hypocrites. The Diabetes foundation does not actively work against cancer research.
I don't think you understand my last post. I thought you were defending the other post. But really, does it it even matter to you if their human or not? I killed two spiders in my bathroom yesterday. Poor spiders didn't deserve to die just because of their location. Likewise, children shouldn't be killed because of their location.
And pro-lifers don't work against welfare of children or any of the conditions they might suffer from. But pro-choicers would rather kill you like the spider in the bathroom. Human life in the womb is no different than a bug
FoxHastings said: ↑ HOW could I misinterpret the following: PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" It'd be hard for you to deny you posted this....are you denying it? How could it be misinterpreted?? FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST. AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" ????? The word is "they're" (not their) and yes it does as my many , many posts refuting your "misinterpretation" of my post proves. It makes it obvious to anyone that I never said a fetus wasn't human which shows I care that it is human. QUIT TRYING TO PUT YOUR "ERROR" ON ME, IT'S ALL ON YOU. And they aren't so what's your problem? (Besides trying to get out of facing the FACT that you "misrepresented" what I posted?)
WRONG. Anti-Choicers are predominantly Republican and the Republicans are ALWAYS trying to cut funding to entities that aid CHILDREN, BORN CHILDREN...entities like Welfare, WIC, SNAP, Planned Parenthood....they even HATE the thought of poor kids getting healthy school lunches!!! NO "pro-Choicers want to kill the poster.... Again, NO one said that...except YOU.
I think it's a bit of over kill here. I've already explained the misunderstanding, but really, it's not really wrong anyway because you still are defending abortion. So what does it matter?
Maybe some people don't think this is the proper role of government. They do it through private charities and churches and individual donations.
FoxHastings said: ↑ HOW could I misinterpret the following: PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" It'd be hard for you to deny you posted this....are you denying it? How could it be misinterpreted?? FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST. AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" ????? The word is "they're" (not their) and yes it does as my many , many posts refuting your "misinterpretation" of my post proves. It makes it obvious to anyone that I never said a fetus wasn't human which shows I care that it is human. QUIT TRYING TO PUT YOUR "ERROR" ON ME, IT'S ALL ON YOU. And they aren't so what's your problem? (Besides trying to get out of facing the FACT that you "misrepresented" what I posted?) There was NO "misunderstanding"..... AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" I NEVER SAID IT WASN'T HUMAN AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN I DID. What does that make YOU? " What does it matter ?" ….Lying doesn't matter? I guess to Anti-Choicers …it seems to be all they have... If you keep reposting your "misinterpretation, I will be happy to keep reposting it, too!
YES, it IS the role of government to use taxes to help it's citizens...DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Taxes are not just something for rich people to use.
This is a bizarre claim PN. The first problem is that you are generalizing. You are claiming to know the minds and actions of all Pro-Lifers - Something you can't possibly know so this is logical fallacy - right from the get go. Second - your claim is demonstrably false - all those who are against "Open Borders" - where there are children involved - are acting against the welfare of "innocent children". I can give numerous other examples if you like. The claim you are making is just preposterously false - akin to claiming the Sun did not rise yesterday. You attaching a dumb platitude touted by the Pro-Life Movement - as if refuting this comment refutes the entire movement - it doesn't. I was just pointing out the fact that some of those who make such comments - are in hypocrisy - not that the whole movement is in hypocrisy. This above is also silliness - on many levels. While I am sure there are some pro choicer's that would fall into the category above - most do not. You are also - once again- conflating a human with "Human life". While a Human is "human life" - not all human life qualifies as a human. I know what you mean - I think- but your continued use of incorrect terminology muddies the waters. I would rather kill some forms of "human life" than a spider. When I scratched an itch "human life" was killed. In the act of scratching that itch many living human skin cells were removed and will die as a result. The problem with your claim is that you do not state what kind of human life you are referring to. Zygote -embryo - Fetus in the early state, Fetus in the late stage. Each Pro Choice person is going to view each stage differently - myself included. The problem with many in the anti abort crowd - including those that have attempted to legislate - is that they don't make this distinction. What is the difference between a heart cell - and a zygote - and a spider ? When you get into the technical details - you will find that in many respects a spider is much more like a human than a zygote. The main difference of course is human DNA - and that the zygote has the potential to create a human. What you are doing is projecting that potential into the future as if it exists now - projecting characteristics of a fully formed human to a single human cell. It is true that there is a possibility that over time - this zygote might create an entity that will - over time - achieve more and more characteristics that we associate with being a human. The fact of the matter is that at the zygote stage - these characteristics simply do not exist. Does a zygote love, care for its offspring, have memories, feel pain, experience joy, fear, hope and so on ? No more than the heart cell or skin cells that you killed last time you scratched an itch. A zygote does not have a brain, spinal chord, blood flowing through its veins and so on - it is no more a living human - with respect to the characteristics by which human taxonomy defines "Homo Sapiens" than a heart cell. A spider has far more characteristics that we associate with being human. A spider has thoughts, legs, eyes and so on. If we move up to a Cow - we can include many more things such as the ability to feel pain, to work out problems .. and so on. Sentience and cognition. The idea that "Science" has somehow proven that this single human cell is a Living Human - (and even you opened with the claim that this was not true - but, this is what many on the pro life side claim) - is utter nonsense. Science has proven the reverse at almost every step of the way. Every single thing that is claimed by Lifers with respect to science that shows that a zygote is a human cell - not that the zygote is a living human. There is no claim about the zygote - that is beyond that of a single human cell - except 1) Totipotency, and 2) certain DNA program codes have been activated 1) Totipotency - this is the ability of the zygote - and the 250 or so cells that come after - to produce every other human cell. Most other cells are specialized = only divide to produce that cell. The reason for this is because the DNA in the specialized cells is programmed that way. 2) DNA- The main significant difference between the zygote and other human cells is that the DNA in the zygote cell has the program codes "create a human" activated. It is not that other cells do not have these codes - they do !! - it is just that these codes are not activated. We are getting to the point - if not there already - where we can turn those codes on and create an entire organism from a single cell. What is being claimed by numerous anti aborts is essentially that any cell that has these codes activated is automatically a living human. This is projection - projecting the characteristics of what activating these codes could potentially create - with what exists in the present. While it is true that the zygote has this creative potential - other human cells also have this potential. The difference is that the zygote has these program codes activated and the process of creation has begun. The heart cell is using a certain set of codes in its DNA to perform a certain task. It has other codes to perform other task - it is just utilizing a certain subset of those codes at this point in time. The zygote has the same codes as the heart cell in its DNA - and in fact it can create offspring that are programmed to only use the codes that make that cell a heart cell. The zygote however is programmed to create other cells - heart, blood, bone and so on - every type of cell in the human body. (this is also what stem cells have - which is why stem cell research is so interesting - the zygote and the 250 cells after that are stem cells - these cells form the blastocyst - a hollow sack that will become the home for the embryo - at some point these totipotent blastocyst cells will begin spitting out cells that will form the first cells in the structure of the human - they are the builders - creators - none will ever actually be part of the structure under creation ) This is the "Science".
I'm talking about federal. States can spend the money on whatever the people of that state feel is appropriate.
Sorry if your feelings are hurt. I'm done with this silly subject. Get back on topic and stop with the personal attacks.
FoxHastings said: ↑ HOW could I misinterpret the following: PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" It'd be hard for you to deny you posted this....are you denying it? How could it be misinterpreted?? FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST. AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" ????? The word is "they're" (not their) and yes it does as my many , many posts refuting your "misinterpretation" of my post proves. It makes it obvious to anyone that I never said a fetus wasn't human which shows I care that it is human. QUIT TRYING TO PUT YOUR "ERROR" ON ME, IT'S ALL ON YOU. And they aren't so what's your problem? (Besides trying to get out of facing the FACT that you "misrepresented" what I posted?) There was NO "misunderstanding"..... AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" I NEVER SAID IT WASN'T HUMAN AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN I DID. What does that make YOU? " What does it matter ?" ….Lying doesn't matter? I guess to Anti-Choicers …it seems to be all they have... If you keep reposting your "misinterpretation, I will be happy to keep reposting it, too! Thanks for reposting my post! Just like I never said a fetus wasn't human AS YOU CLAIMED, I never attacked you....seems you're wrong about THAT, TOO!! As you're wrong about my feelings..(.that IS personal )….and what those who have no facts always have to revert to. I don't consider lying as "silly".
FoxHastings said: ↑ YES, it IS the role of government to use taxes to help it's citizens...DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Taxes are not just something for rich people to use. ALL are the same, taxes are used for the citizens of the US...ALL of them.... State or federal taxes are supposed to support the welfare of it's citizens... What did you think taxes were for....to be put in the pockets of the wealthy?
The whole point of being Pro-Life is that you have compassion for the unborn. Many people in this movement are religious. They go to church. They donate to the needy, they help the poor and dis advantaged. Most liberals don't go to church, they don't believe in God. Therefore they don't get involved in charitable endeavors such as these things. Maybe we should be asking what pro-abortion people do for needy children besides using taxpayer money. What do they do for foster care or to promote adoption? Liberals are the ones who don't care about children. Especially those in the womb. They consider them unwanted, they consider them an unwelcome invader. Well this is a good example of why liberals don't care about children. You talk about foreigners, children who are brought here, who's lives are put in peril by their parents or others. We need to stem the flow of these children one because it is not in their interest to bring them on these dangerous journeys and two because we have American children in need. This invasion of migrants takes needed resources away from our children. Liberals don't seem to care about that either. sure which claim is false? I think it's hypocrisy to say you care about children but want to kill the preborn because they are "unwanted". What do liberals do for children who are born and "unwanted"? What di they do for the less fortunate? Liberals are the cause of much of our single family dysfunctional homes because of their government welfare programs. Liberals promote single mothers while denigrating fatherhood. Whether it's a zygote, an embryo or a fetus, liberals will do what they must to dehumanize children preborns to keep their sacred abortion rituals legal. No, I think that's what you keep doing. I have not conflated a zygote with a human life. I explained it quite explicitly in the OP. Life begins at conception. All the other science which question the right of human life in the womb is just more legal and moral posturing. Talk about conflating! A human skin cell compared to a zygote. One has the potential to become a fully developed human being. The other is one of trillions of cells in a human body that constantly replenishes when they expire. A skin cell is not a human being. Maybe pro-choicers should concentrate more on pregnancy prevention? If women would stop having so many unwanted pregnancies this would not be as big an issue. We could eliminate the abortion issue completely if women would be more responsible with contraception. I have trouble making a distinction. What's the difference between a pregnancy that is 2 months along from one that is 2 months and 1 day? What about 3 months and 4? 4 months and 5? How do we draw the line and when? Seem to be confirming my point. Exactly. Now were6on common ground. I agree. Because that's when life begins. I know. We agree. A zygote will once it becomes a fully formed human being. A heart or skin cell never had that potential. That doesn't matter. It will. That's what matters. Now who's conflating again? I don't know who is saying otherwise. I agree with the science. Kind of arrogant of you to lecture us about science as if we don't believe in science.
A few points 1) it is you that was conflating human life with the term "a human" as if they are the same .. not I 2) Your claim that a heart cell does not have that potential is false. (hence the need for the DNA lecture- go back and read). The DNA in the heart cell has the same codes as the Zygote - Same computer - just one is running a different set of instructions. 3) I have not "dehumanized" the zygote .. I have simply presented the scientific facts. Your fallacy is the inference that all things that are human are necessarily equal to people - and thus deserve rights - including the right to life .. this is abject nonsense and hypocrisy on the basis of your arguments thusfar. 4) Your argument boils down to the potential argument - that because there is some potential that a human might be created - that the entity engaged in this creative process deserves rights - including the right to life. The problem is that you have not actually made an argument -meaning - while you claim that rights should be accorded based on "potential" - you have not given rational as to why this claim should be accepted - keeping in mind that you are making a legal -not a moral argument. So then - how does "there is the potential for a human to be created" justify the state violating the individual liberty of women.
If you are against abortion, then you shouldn't have one nor should you be forced to have one against your will.
My legal take is that the Supreme Court made abortion a federal issue when it's not. It's a state issue. States have a 10th Amendment right to all things not relegated to the federal government. The same people making claims that women's rights are violated (there is no mention of abortion in the Constitution) will also try to restrict guns rights which is specifically in the Constitution.
FoxHastings said: ↑ HOW could I misinterpret the following: PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human. Click to expand..."""""""" It'd be hard for you to deny you posted this....are you denying it? How could it be misinterpreted?? FoxHastings:BS !! SHOW EXACTLY WHERE I EVER SAID A HUMAN FETUS IS NOT HUMAN OR ADMIT YOU "MISREPRESENTED" MY POST. AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" ????? The word is "they're" (not their) and yes it does as my many , many posts refuting your "misinterpretation" of my post proves. It makes it obvious to anyone that I never said a fetus wasn't human which shows I care that it is human. QUIT TRYING TO PUT YOUR "ERROR" ON ME, IT'S ALL ON YOU. And they aren't so what's your problem? (Besides trying to get out of facing the FACT that you "misrepresented" what I posted?) There was NO "misunderstanding"..... AGAIN: What is there not to understand about : PatriotNews said: ↑ You keep saying it's not human.""" I NEVER SAID IT WASN'T HUMAN AND YOU HAVE NEVER PROVEN I DID. What does that make YOU? " What does it matter ?" ….Lying doesn't matter? I guess to Anti-Choicers …it seems to be all they have... If you keep reposting your "misinterpretation, I will be happy to keep reposting it, too! Thanks for reposting my post! Just like I never said a fetus wasn't human AS YOU CLAIMED, I never attacked you....seems you're wrong about THAT, TOO!! As you're wrong about my feelings..(.that IS personal )….and what those who have no facts always have to revert to. I don't consider lying as "silly". I am simply posting the post you are quoting...that's not trolling. This could have ended long ago if you had simply admitted that you were wrong and I hadn't said what YOU claimed I had said.. What's worse: Lying or trolling?
