- Joined
- Dec 15, 2012
- Messages
- 3,306
- Reaction score
- 1,024
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
There are some hardcore specieists up in here.
Please, by all means-- enlighten me.
Legal protection should begin at birth.
You apparently define 'people' as merely organisms which have human DNA. I do not.
Abortion is not homicide.
My thoughts are twofold. If one believes in ethical nihilism, then one won't feel that killing fetuses is wrong. But on the other hand, if I am a human, shouldn't I value human life more than freedom? Is life more precious than freedom?
Regarding wars, I feel war should only be an option for matters of defense. Are we the saviors of the world? Is it our duty to liberate people in other nations from tyranny?
As for lives born in poverty, it's a gamble. Does a life born in squalor always die in squalor?
A single cell is created at fertilization. That's not a person.
Of course you think that term is meaningless. It's too inconvenient for your argument.
It is. Two humans mate and the byproduct of the mating is a zef. I'm sorry if that isn't romantic enough for you.
lol I thought the term person was meaningless.
1.) I said a "human being" which is the correct term to use.
Take a moment to look up the term. It's defined differently depending on who you talk too.
It is a great deal more than that and you know it. Insulting comments doesn't change anything.
2.)Well if you want to get picky here are some links to prove to you I was right.
Homicide Definition - FindLaw
Homicide - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
homicide - Legal Definition
homicide legal definition of homicide. homicide synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
Would you like to admit you're wrong yet?
Nobody is wrong except anybody that said a zygote is a human being and called that a "fact" thats an OPINION
2.) those links actual prove that its an OPINION
hom·i·cide
[hom-uh-sahyd, hoh-muh-] Show IPA
noun
1.
the killing of one human being by another.
2.
a person who kills another; murderer.
Ain't it ironic that the vast majority of folks who uphold the "sanctity of life" are also the same people who support going to war and bombing other nations, both of which inevitably result in deaths on both sides? These folks fight tooth-and-nail to defend the right to life of fetuses, yet when they're born, they are unwilling to support programs to raise these children, most of whom are born into poor/working class families: Head Start, social welfare, food stamps, the works.
I put forth this notion: you are not pro-life unless you oppose war. You are not pro-life if you fight for a child's right to be born, and then promptly dismiss the needs of the children born into families earning under $50,000 a year. I suppose you could dismiss the second requisite, but the first is vital if people want to continue touting the "pro-life" label.
Thoughts?
human being
n.
A human.
human being
n
a member of any of the races of Homo sapiens; person; man, woman, or child
Child
[chahyld] Show IPA
noun, plural chil·dren.
1.
a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children.
2.
a son or daughter: All my children are married.
3.
a baby or infant.
4.
a human fetus.
5.
a childish person: He's such a child about money.
What were you saying again?
How? They went out of their way to say any killing of human being by another human being is homicide legal or not. I even provided links that explained it in detail.
1.)thanks AGAIN for proving my EXACT point LMAO
SOME definitions humban being, dont allow anything preborn to be included, and SOME the minority allow some room for preborn and specifically mention FETUS which would by definition exclude zygote and embryo, and even more of a minority, ive only seen one allows all preborn by saying "unborn"
2.) because human being definition is subjective and all the homicide definitions dont say human (which is subjective), some say person and some say it has to be illegal or criminal as provide by YES your own links and mine.
Perhaps it wasn't the best source, but child and therefore human being does include all unborn. That is a fact. I can provide a better source but you seem to want to argue that bad sources that somehow leave it out prove you right. Is that actual logic you are using there or are you just hoping it passes for it?
What the hell here is what it says on merriam-webster
a : an unborn or recently born person
b dialect : a female infant
2
a : a young person especially between infancy and youth
b : a childlike or childish person
c : a person not yet of age
Then google
A young human being below the age of full physical development or below the legal age of majority.
A son or daughter of any age. (which btw, includes all ages lol)
Are you really going to picky that the term was fetus? "I win because you said fetus!" Weak.
2.)Keep thinking you are right, lol.
Let me get out my crystal ball here for you Henrin:
"Some sources use the definition you have already quoted, but some don't, therefore the definition does not include anything you have already sourced, because LMAO NUH-UNH :fart."
There's a reason why you shouldn't even humor the requests of some people - they're not here to have the discussion. They're not even here to spew emotion. There's only one logical reason someone would post that way.
You guessed wrong, i use facts and proof, feel free to use your own, we all have been waiting years![]()
are you actually suggesting cause you can find ONE source that fits what YOU like and yet you, me and others have posted other sources that dont fit what you like that only the ONE source you like is relevant?
LMAO
I wasn't guessing.
And hey, look at that, the above post was 100% "LMAO NUH-UNH :fart."
Sorry, but you just like playing this retarded again of relying on people that are wrong to prove you right. Its rather stupid to argue against scientific fact with bull**** like you do, but it is pretty funny. That is not a child! That is not part of the human species! lol..
Keep making a fool of yourself to anyone that knows biology.Keep being wrong, O-J.
I agree 100% it is stupid to argue against scientific fact, not sure why you are choosing to do it
fact remains calling abortion homicide is opinion has proven by facts and links and in other threads you have been involved in medical/SCIENTIFIC/ and dictionary links.
You mean other homicide is both illegal and legal and has been shown applies to all human beings be it called a person or not? Yeah, that has been shown alright.
You mean other homicide is both illegal and legal and has been shown applies to all human beings be it called a person or not? Yeah, that has been shown alright.
Yes that is correct.
Some definition of homicide are legal, some say its only illegal
some of the definitions say human beings some say person
Some definitons of human beings do not allow for anything preborn, some do down to fetus one i seen said unborn
some definitions of person use the law definitions, some do not and do not allow it to cover the unborn, some do
so yes all that has been shown which factually makes it all subjective pinion, thanks again for proving the facts and my point. :shrug:
Really? :doh I get the feeling you are new to this entire thing.
Have any feeling you want
facts dont change based on your feelings or opinions
Killing is inevitable, and there is little society can do to prevent it. If parents can murder their children and get away with it, how can abortion be prevented? Furthermore, why should the government step in and force women to remain pregnant? And how would such a law be enforced? Before abortion became legal, women went to unlicensed providers and had unsafe abortions. The unborn suffered a far worse fate in those places than now where it is more humane.
Consciousness isn't possible until the third trimester. Such abortions are exceedingly rare.
If the abortion is done in the first trimester, as most are, the zef feels nothing. It has the beginnings of a brain stem and nervous system with no conscious thought or perception. It cannot miss a life it has not yet lived, nor can it "feel" one way or the other about it.
I said a "human being" which is the correct term to use.
Take a moment to look up the term. It's defined differently depending on who you talk too.
It is a great deal more than that and you know it. Insulting comments doesn't change anything.
Well if you want to get picky here are some links to prove to you I was right.
Homicide Definition - FindLaw
Homicide - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
homicide - Legal Definition
homicide legal definition of homicide. homicide synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
Would you like to admit you're wrong yet?
No, slaves were not people. "People" means nothing more than whatever the current law says it does. You can't own people; personhood goes hand in hand with having your human right to liberty protected...
Nope. That's established scientific fact. Not an opinion. Opinions don't much matter when they contradict scientific fact. If someone asserts to you the law of gravity, and you say "Yeah well, that's just like, your opinion, man," then guess what? No, you're just wrong.
Sorry, you can't disagree.
See now THAT is an opinion. And I disagree. Because if you're that psychotic and selfishly destructive, with that little regard for the human rights of others, it's everyone's business - we're better off with you locked up where you can't hurt anyone else. Self-preservation and all.