Ease up on that fermented pineapple juice, Duke, and open a biology book. You will find that a fetus, which is a Latin word meaning, "little one", is a living, growing, developing human being separate and distinct from its mother, in whose womb it is residing.Duke said:It's not just about the personality, sh!t-for-brains. The fetus has not been born yet, it is not alive. It is still a part of the womans's body.
Duke
Again, you've completely sidestepped the arguements. Everyone who reads this knows it too.
I find it funny that when you're called names, you're allowed to get angry and become inappropriate.
But when you use derogatory remarks, others who get offended are labeled as "so sensitive."
This guy is such a joke. He's some professor of Philosophy at Boston College
who puts out tons of pro-God books.
He definantly attempts to use logic to come to absurd results, but they really aren't that absurd.
Although it sounds funny because the general human population has two eyes and two feet etc., but really, it comes down to what we possess.
But if control were to be it
Yes, she has 4 eyes, 4 feet, and 20 toes within her skin.
A common arguement is that he doesn't have the control of the baby's functions.
But if control were to be it, do we control much of our own body? We don't control how our hair grows, we don't control our appendicies, we don't control the hormones that are released. We have many things that we don't have any control over. We cannot will things to work or not work. So if control were to determin possession, then that would leave a large hole there...
Is it a dependency on our actions? Because if so, babies in womb are dependant on their carriers for their survival.
Is it a connection? Because the baby is connected to the mother at all times the the umbilical cord.
No, it isn't. There you go again, claiming falsehoods to be facts. Are you ever going to stop doing that?Fantasea said:You will find that a fetus, which is a Latin word meaning, "little one",
Yes,is a living, growing, developing human
No, it isn't. Your claim is incorrect. And it doesn't fit the biological, scientific use of the terminology, which per your insistence of discussing biology, makes you outright lying here. That is unfortunate.being
Also not true. Please cease all those false, aboslutist claims. Your portrayal of your wishful thinking as facts is dishonest. You are insulting us with your dishonesty.separate and distinct from its mother,..
I'm glad to see that you finally understand what goes on in the womb of an expectant mother. The name, itself is not important. Every language has a different word with the same meaning.vergiss said:Ah. So purely because of the Latin root of a word, that obviously makes it a human life equal to yours or mine?
You claim expertise in biology but your statements ring hollow.steen said:No, it isn't. There you go again, claiming falsehoods to be facts. Are you ever going to stop doing that?
Yes,
No, it isn't. Your claim is incorrect. And it doesn't fit the biological, scientific use of the terminology, which per your insistence of discussing biology, makes you outright lying here. That is unfortunate.
Also not true. Please cease all those false, aboslutist claims. Your portrayal of your wishful thinking as facts is dishonest. You are insulting us with your dishonesty.
Ah, another "because I say so" unsubstantiated postulation. Yes, I know you want to claim that you use biological arguiments because that is what you have staked your credibility on, and I understand that unless you challenge when your lies are pointed out, your deception and dishonesty might be exposed.Fantasea said:You claim expertise in biology but your statements ring hollow.
Is there a biological fact lurking in there?steen said:Ah, another "because I say so" unsubstantiated postulation. Yes, I know you want to claim that you use biological arguiments because that is what you have staked your credibility on, and I understand that unless you challenge when your lies are pointed out, your deception and dishonesty might be exposed.
But I had hoped that you would have a little shred of credibility and would be able to admit it when you are caught in lies. But I guess not.
The biological facts are there when I post them. they are not there when you post your lies, so obviously, when I call you on your lies, it is per your lack of biological facts.Fantasea said:Is there a biological fact lurking in there?
Just as I suspected. You have no facts. Just your incessant "moles".steen said:The biological facts are there when I post them. they are not there when you post your lies, so obviously, when I call you on your lies, it is per your lack of biological facts.
Huh??MCcorno89 said:Most people don't know that they are pregnant until about 3 weeks, so havinbg said that the fetus has had little time, but a sufficient amount to develop into what we would describe as the begining of a new life, even with a beating heart.
Really? And how much does people "assume"? And, of course, "baby" is a developmental stage beginning at birth, not at 3 weeks.lori palmer said:hes saying that by three weeks the baby is alot more "human" than people assume.
Your claim is false. We know that until the end of the 26th week of pregnancy, it feels absolutely NOTHING, because the conncetion between the sensory nerves and the brain's cortex have not connected. So your claim has no bearing in reality. In fact, reality directly contradicts your claim. We know for sure that at 3 weeks, there is no feeling or thought of any kind whatsoever. therefore, prolifers claims once again are shown to be all emotional hyperbole and no facts.and NOBODY knows exactly what that baby is feeling.
Well, that is news to me. Not "human"? Are you sure of that claim?yet ya know people are interesting. 200 years ago most people thought it was acceptable to torture slaves because they didnt consider them to be human.
You understand exactly what is being said.steen said:Huh??
What difference does this make? We are dealing with an unborn human child in an early stage of development. Its humanity is not at all dependent upon being able to pass a "test".steen said:We know for sure that at 3 weeks, there is no feeling or thought of any kind whatsoever.
steen,steen said:Really? And how much does people "assume"? And, of course, "baby" is a developmental stage beginning at birth, not at 3 weeks.
Your claim is false. We know that until the end of the 26th week of pregnancy, it feels absolutely NOTHING, because the conncetion between the sensory nerves and the brain's cortex have not connected. So your claim has no bearing in reality. In fact, reality directly contradicts your claim. We know for sure that at 3 weeks, there is no feeling or thought of any kind whatsoever. therefore, prolifers claims once again are shown to be all emotional hyperbole and no facts.
Well, that is news to me. Not "human"? Are you sure of that claim?
MCcorno89 said:Most people don't know that they are pregnant until about 3 weeks, so havinbg said that the fetus has had little time, but a sufficient amount to develop into what we would describe as the begining of a new life, even with a beating heart.
Mocking?Elektra said:How amusing,At 3 weeks you aren't even overdue.In Fact, implantation might not have occured!
I don't get the point if his disjointed and silly remark.Fantasea said:You understand exactly what is being said.
Well, muscle tissue, actually.You agreed earlier that at three weeks, a "muscle" is contracting.
There really isn't an actual heart at 3 weeks.That, of course, is the early stage of the heart. It's "beating" is separate and distinct from the heartbeat of the mother. This indicates there are two hearts beating.
I understand that you again see the need to resort to prolife revisionist linguistic hyperbole and thus end up spewing nonsense.At three weeks, the mother isn't even aware that she is pregnant, yet she is. Within her is a live, unborn child in its embryonic stage.
And if aborted, then not. So what?Left undisturbed, it will continue to grow, develop, and on its own schedule, pass through the birth canal
Ah, you are a prophet? You know what the rightful place of a zygote is? Amazing narcissism you display.and take its rightful place among us.
It is of human origin, that is its species designation if that's what you are talking about?Fantasea said:What difference does this make? We are dealing with an unborn human child in an early stage of development. Its humanity is not at all dependent upon being able to pass a "test".
Unfortunately, "baby" is the developmental stage beginning at birth. It is no more realistic to characterize the fetus as a "baby" than it is to characterize you or me as a corpse. Use of terms refering to a different developmental stage can only cause confusion, with its misapplication. And unfortunately, prolifers have been known to deliberately and dishonestly trying to push that blurring of developmental stages. As such, you should expect that using the word "baby" as a descriptor for embryo or fetus in a debate over abortion will immediately get you branded as and accused of being a liar, of being willfully deceptive.lori palmer said:steen,
#1 people have the tendancy not to respect life not as advanced as they are.(life not capable of comunicating and feeling the same as themselves. and yes, I use the term baby and will continue to do so.
Ah, but H. sapiens would be a correct descriptor as well. "baby" is not, in the context prolifers apply it to pre-birth developmental stages. So your remark about H. sapiens really isn't analogous. The issue of "corpse" is, however.I never once referred to my daughter as my fetus while I was pregnant. I am also a homosapien but i preffer to be called Lori.
Really? How so? How is it possible to have a sense of anything when you have absolutelky no input?#2 I will take your word about the 26 weeks. I researched for a while and couldnt find that exact topic. however, when I made the statement about the child at 3 weeks, I was not using the word feeling in the way you interpreted. What I meant was not that a baby at 3 weeks development is feeling the way you and I do, but that life occurs on many different scales. it is a complex event and just because its not using brainwaves and nerve endings doesnt mean there is no sense of being.
Because the brain is receiving absolutely no input. It does no more processing than your computer when nit is turned off.now I didnt say that there Is a sense of being. but how can you say there isnt.
"probably"? That's a copout.#3 as for people not considering slaves to be human,there are probably still a few grandfathers out there who refuse to acknowledge african americans as anything but monkies.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?