Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: &...

Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: ‘any fetus is less human than an adult pig’

There are 1829 comments on the freerepublic.com story from Mar 16, 2013, titled Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: ‘any fetus is less human than an adult pig’. In it, freerepublic.com reports that:

It would seem the pro-life movement has acquired an unlikely supporter. On Wednesday, Richard Dawkins, a vocal proponent of atheism and the author of The God Delusion, posted a provocative tweet about abortion: With respect to those meanings of "human" that are relevant to the morality of abortion, any fetus is less human than an adult pig.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at freerepublic.com.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#673 May 13, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Septic is the moderator :-)
Abortion is a ethical and political issue.
And Lincoln is the creationist piece of sh*t heckler who lies about a god he has no proof of and doesn't know when to shut the f*ck up.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#674 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Where does the 5th Amendment say anything about a "citizen"?
Please point it out to me.
Pay special attention to this phrase:
"No person..."
And this one:
"...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"
Then answer how killing something with no civil rights can result in a conviction for "murder".
5th Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
Worthless opinion from a creationist who believes that fossils "aren't real" and that jesus rode on the backs of dinosaurs.

All this in the face of evidence that buck crick is at lying piece of sh*t troll sent by the discovery institute to reign stupidity all over the topix atheist forum.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#675 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's been charged with murder?
Bei Bei Shuai, Indianapolis, January 3, 2011

"Woman Charged With Murder of Newborn Because She Ate Rat Poison While Pregnant"

Ashton Vincent Craven, Texas: "Drunk Driver Faces Murder Charge for Killing Unborn Baby"

How many names do you want?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#676 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
NO. A woman does not have a right to make her own medical decisions concerning a fetus.
So you are wrong.
Actually, she does, but you won't "get that" until you join the actual, "capable of thought", even while breathing segment of the human population. A parasite does not get to supercede the host's wishes.
A viable foetus though, does have certain rights, in limited circumstances.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#677 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Where does the 5th Amendment say anything about a "citizen"?
Please point it out to me.
Pay special attention to this phrase:
"No person..."
And this one:
"...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"
Then answer how killing something with no civil rights can result in a conviction for "murder".
5th Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
I said nothing about the 5th Amendment, Strawman. Is there some reason you can't address what I actually DID say?

Now, show ME where in the Constitution it speaks of a fetus.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#678 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
An infant, or a mentally handicapped person, is born, and therefore has civil rights. Embryos and fetuses do not.
No, an infant is not reliant on their mother in the same way that a fetus is reliant on the woman gestating it. Your ignorance is astounding.
Nobody claimed the infant is reliant "in the same way".

The point refuted was that the infant is not legally protected because it is "reliant".

Your task is to dilineate how being "reliant" in any way prohibits legal protection.

I don't think you are up to it.

The "reliance" argument is phony, and your effort to twist words will not help.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#679 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
"Bei Bei Shuai, Indianapolis, January 3, 2011
"Woman Charged With Murder of Newborn Because She Ate Rat Poison While Pregnant"

She was charged with the murder of her born child, and attepted FETICIDE.

Ashton Vincent Craven, Texas: "Drunk Driver Faces Murder Charge for Killing Unborn Baby"

The only real news source I can find for this one says he was charged with a Felony DWI.

"How many names do you want?"

Let me know when you get a real one.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#680 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody claimed the infant is reliant "in the same way".
The point refuted was that the infant is not legally protected because it is "reliant".
Your task is to dilineate how being "reliant" in any way prohibits legal protection.
I don't think you are up to it.
The "reliance" argument is phony, and your effort to twist words will not help.
Nice dodge. When someone says the fetus is completely reliant on the woman, and you say so is an infant, that is clearly your implication.

Being inside the woman's body, using her organ systems to sustain it's own non-functioning systems, and posing possible risks to life and health, means that the woman gets to decide if it will remain there or not. Deal with it.

Sorry, but you are the one twisting here, not I.
Lincoln

United States

#681 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice dodge. When someone says the fetus is completely reliant on the woman, and you say so is an infant, that is clearly your implication.
Being inside the woman's body, using her organ systems to sustain it's own non-functioning systems, and posing possible risks to life and health, means that the woman gets to decide if it will remain there or not. Deal with it.
Sorry, but you are the one twisting here, not I.
Killing of infants born alive in abortion centers is not right, moral or legal. Murder charges.

The Democratic Party dropped atheism/secularism in 1992 with the Election of President Bill Clinton and has carrier a majority vote for President in 1996, 2000, 2008 and 2012. President Clinton won a plurality in 1992.
Atheist vote may be split between libertarian followers of Ran Paul and supporters of the big tent Democratic Party.
President Obama carrier the Roman Catholic vote in 2012.
President Barack Obama is Protestant while Vice President Biden is Roman Catholic.

By including Christians, Jews and non believers the Democrats have won majority votes for President of the US. Republicans moving the the crazy right are losing.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#682 May 13, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Killing of infants born alive in abortion centers is not right, moral or legal. Murder charges.
The Democratic Party dropped atheism/secularism in 1992 with the Election of President Bill Clinton and has carrier a majority vote for President in 1996, 2000, 2008 and 2012. President Clinton won a plurality in 1992.
Atheist vote may be split between libertarian followers of Ran Paul and supporters of the big tent Democratic Party.
President Obama carrier the Roman Catholic vote in 2012.
President Barack Obama is Protestant while Vice President Biden is Roman Catholic.
By including Christians, Jews and non believers the Democrats have won majority votes for President of the US. Republicans moving the the crazy right are losing.
Yes, killing infants is murder.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#683 May 13, 2013
I see charges in your posts, I don't see convictions.

Any lawyer can bring up any charges if they So wish.
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Bei Bei Shuai, Indianapolis, January 3, 2011

"Woman Charged With Murder of Newborn Because She Ate Rat Poison While Pregnant"

Ashton Vincent Craven, Texas: "Drunk Driver Faces Murder Charge for Killing Unborn Baby"

How many names do you want?

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#684 May 13, 2013
I am glad you didn't go through line by line pointing out all he got wrong. Wow it takes effort to cram so much wrong into one post.
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, killing infants is murder.
Lincoln

United States

#685 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, killing infants is murder.
Democrats have moved to the center on culture issues and voters have taken notice

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#686 May 13, 2013
So you are firmly against a woman's right to chose?
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody claimed the infant is reliant "in the same way".

The point refuted was that the infant is not legally protected because it is "reliant".

Your task is to dilineate how being "reliant" in any way prohibits legal protection.

I don't think you are up to it.

The "reliance" argument is phony, and your effort to twist words will not help.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#687 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
I said nothing about the 5th Amendment, Strawman. Is there some reason you can't address what I actually DID say?
Now, show ME where in the Constitution it speaks of a fetus.
You spoke of the Constitution.

The "Constitution", as amended, includes the 5th Amendment.

So yes, you did.

I did address what you said.

Your 14th Amendment selection was an evasion. The 14th Amendment is an anti-slavery amendment.

You need to address, if you can, how an entity you claim has no rights and is not a human being, being killed, subjects the perpetrator to a murder conviction under our Constitution.

What is your answer?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#688 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
"Bei Bei Shuai, Indianapolis, January 3, 2011
"Woman Charged With Murder of Newborn Because She Ate Rat Poison While Pregnant"
She was charged with the murder of her born child, and attepted FETICIDE.
Ashton Vincent Craven, Texas: "Drunk Driver Faces Murder Charge for Killing Unborn Baby"
The only real news source I can find for this one says he was charged with a Felony DWI.
"How many names do you want?"
Let me know when you get a real one.
Now you are lying.

Ratchetting it up, huh?

Lie your way out of this:

News<Houston and Texas

Man charged with murder in south Houston drunken driving death of unborn child
By Mike Glenn | May 14, 2012 | Updated: May 15, 2012 9:22am

"Late Monday, Craven was at the Harris County Jail with bail set at $200,000 for the murder charge and $20,000 for the initial driving while intoxicated charge."

Nothing is proven by what you pretend you can't find.

Have you ever heard the name "Scott Peterson"?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#689 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Nice dodge. When someone says the fetus is completely reliant on the woman, and you say so is an infant, that is clearly your implication.
Being inside the woman's body, using her organ systems to sustain it's own non-functioning systems, and posing possible risks to life and health, means that the woman gets to decide if it will remain there or not. Deal with it.
Sorry, but you are the one twisting here, not I.
I already showed you examples where the woman DOES NOT get to decide that.

You are still evading, as "remain there" is not the salient point.

The difficulty stems from the "killing".

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#690 May 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, killing infants is murder.
So is killing fetuses, in some cases, according to the law, and operating under our Constitution.

You have yet to explain how that is so, since you claim they have no rights.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#691 May 13, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I see charges in your posts, I don't see convictions.
Any lawyer can bring up any charges if they So wish.
<quoted text>
Your argument is shifting. Why is that?

It won't save you, though.

Peterson Convicted of Murdering Wife, Unborn Son

Nov. 12, 2004 ABC News

Scott Peterson was convicted today of first-degree murder in the slaying of his pregnant wife, Laci, and second-degree murder in the killing of their unborn son.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/Peterson/story...

What now? Will you now swivel your argument into requiring the serving out of the sentence?

I suspect you are a lawyer, given your willingness to lie.

I like kicking lawyer ass on matters of law and the Constitution.

Please continue.
Lincoln

United States

#692 May 13, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
You spoke of the Constitution.
The "Constitution", as amended, includes the 5th Amendment.
So yes, you did.
I did address what you said.
Your 14th Amendment selection was an evasion. The 14th Amendment is an anti-slavery amendment.
You need to address, if you can, how an entity you claim has no rights and is not a human being, being killed, subjects the perpetrator to a murder conviction under our Constitution.
What is your answer?
14th Amendment defines Citizenship ..due process .
13th Abolished slavery

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 1 hr Rev Cash Dollar 203
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 1 hr Eagle 12 11,413
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 2 hr Eagle 12 5,804
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr Joe Momma 51,881
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 2 hr Sceptical-Mal 24,716
News Louisiana Christians reclaim safe space by runn... 6 hr Eagle 12 151
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 8 hr Eagle 12 22,125
More from around the web