majora$$hole
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2010
- Messages
- 1,268
- Reaction score
- 168
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
no that would not be conception that would be point when there is a brain present to function. somewhere around the end of the first trimester if i'm reading the medical info correctly. so j-mac you seem to think the human cells formed at conception are a living human?Ok, that would be conception....We agree then.
j-mac
that may be true but don't you think it should be made available to those who that isn't the reason?
but that is how it is now so what do you want to change?Depends on the reason. Those that will die from the pregnancy, or are victims of violent crime, although I am mixed about the latter, could be allowed. However, in this country that is so small a percentage of the total it would be insignificant.
j-mac
no that would not be conception that would be point when there is a brain present to function. somewhere around the end of the first trimester if i'm reading the medical info correctly.
so j-mac you seem to think the human cells formed at conception are a living human?
but that is how it is now so what do you want to change?
okay so then do you think it is still a living human when the brain no longer functions? ie: "brain death" which is the definition for death in 48 states. or do you think someone isn't dead until all living human cells have fully decomposed?If left alone, the brains creation is unavoidable.
Yes. They aren't a Tiger are they? They aren't a Fish are they? They are human.
j-mac
i think r.v.w. states that until the end of the first trimester yes pretty much anything goes. after that it's pretty much you need a "good" excuse. am i wrong here?On demand. that is how it really is now. Abortion as contraception is wrong.
j-mac
or do you mac think that polar opposites in the law can't support oneanother? do i need to come up with examples of that?okay if we can't adequately measure brain activity in the utero as you say then i say at the point which all the conditions/components are met for brain activity to happen should be that point. as tothe brain starting up and shutting down not being the "same" thing i agree they are the opposite and being the opposite would agree with oneanother according to the law that is the whole point. about the "about to happen" vs. "never will happen again" again those are the opposite of one another and the point of my whole arguement. so i just don't see how what you said is shooting holes in it maybe you could explain how these opposites don't relate to oneanother again without them just being opposite for that is MY whole point. life and death ARE the polar opposites of one another you do agree with that don't you mac?
okay if we can't adequately measure brain activity in the utero as you say then i say at the point which all the conditions/components are met for brain activity to happen should be that point. as tothe brain starting up and shutting down not being the "same" thing i agree they are the opposite and being the opposite would agree with oneanother according to the law that is the whole point. about the "about to happen" vs. "never will happen again" again those are the opposite of one another and the point of my whole arguement. so i just don't see how what you said is shooting holes in it maybe you could explain how these opposites don't relate to oneanother again without them just being opposite for that is MY whole point. life and death ARE the polar opposites of one another you do agree with that don't you mac?
i think if abortion is being used as a contraception then the taxpayers should not pay for it. i say the taxpayer should cover 3 abortions for any woman who NEEDS them if she has had 5 abortions and is going in for her sixth then she should pay for it. she will find out really fast that there are cheaper less painfull forms of contraception out there that she should be using.On demand. that is how it really is now. Abortion as contraception is wrong.
j-mac
what "reasons" are those again? there are no "reasons" for either it just happens it starts it stops whats the BIG difference again?the brain doesn't start up "the opposite" of how it shuts down. thw reasons behind it starting up are not the same as shutting down the human brain is not a light bulb attached to a switch.
what "reasons" are those again? there are no "reasons" for either it just happens it starts it stops whats the BIG difference again?
okay so then do you think it is still a living human when the brain no longer functions? ie: "brain death" which is the definition for death in 48 states. or do you think someone isn't dead until all living human cells have fully decomposed?
i think r.v.w. states that until the end of the first trimester yes pretty much anything goes. after that it's pretty much you need a "good" excuse. am i wrong here?
i think if abortion is being used as a contraception then the taxpayers should not pay for it.
i say the taxpayer should cover 3 abortions for any woman who NEEDS them if she has had 5 abortions and is going in for her sixth then she should pay for it.
she will find out really fast that there are cheaper less painfull forms of contraception out there that she should be using.
1. not a different question it is "the question" imo.that is a different question.
So who says that the court is infallible?
Then you should be pretty mad right now.
Which is it? Should the taxpayer pay for contraceptive abortions or not?
Great, so a couple of murders and we will know that its wrong?
j-mac
1. not a different question it is "the question" imo.
2. i never said it was infallible in fact i'm trying to simplify the whole thing so there is less of a chance for error.
3. i don't get "mad".
4. can you not read?
5. it's not murder according to the law.
you got any thing else?
1.) you are mixing "brain dead" and "vegitative state" two different things the law is CLEAR about when someone is dead.Sure it is. The 'brain dead' decision many families of brain stem patients make is about quality of life issues. The decision made by the pregnant woman that couldn't be bothered to make the right contraceptive decision in the heat of the moment.
So, do you think that the SC made an error in their decision then?
I think you know what I meant.
What'd I miss? In one sentence you said that you don't think that the taxpayer should fund abortions, in the very next you said that they should up to 3 times...Which is it?
The laws conflict.
j-mac
no the brain can only "fire up" when there is a brain to fire up. the brain "shuts down" when it dies. it is just on and off that simple. i still fail to see this complexity you speak of.the brain "fires up" as the cells form. this occurs at slightly different rates per individual. the brain "shuts down" due to myriad reasons to complex to list. its not just on and off....its not that simple.
The most radical social conservative elements, really terrorists amongst us, have tried to bring America to its knees. They failed but they were far too close to succeeding.
What makes you think every woman who receives abortion services from Planned Parenthood are "deadbeats" - code word for poor minorities (Blacks and Histpanics)? Is it possible that many of these women come from decent, hard working families who just made poor choices? Why does every woman who has an abortion have to be moochers off the goverment's doles?
no the brain can only "fire up" when there is a brain to fire up. the brain "shuts down" when it dies. it is just on and off that simple. i still fail to see this complexity you speak of.
yes, anyone who does not agree with you is a terrorist... :doh
i am failing to see it because there is nothing to see. can we agree the law needs something to make it not so complex an issue? i agree it is the least understood part of the body but answer me this. which organization more than any other has tried to prevent the study of said organ throughout history and why?you fail to see it because you are intent on oversimplifieng the most complex organ in the human body. not to mention the least understood.
i am failing to see it because there is nothing to see. can we agree the law needs something to make it not so complex an issue? i agree it is the least understood part of the body but answer me this. which organization more than any other has tried to prevent the study of said organ throughout history and why?
in leonardo's day he had to do anatomy in the back alleys and basements to not be prosicuted by the church and to this day the church continues the squelching of information which may be detrimintal to its existance.do tell: which organization has blocked study of the human brain?
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?