Prove there's a god.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581588 Jan 2, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree with everything you said but the question was to you not everyone else.
"I would say that having children is a benefit"
Most at least 98% of mothers I know would say this.
But we're not talking about children. We're talking about fetuses.

The potential benefit of a child doesn't make the fetus not a parasite.

People used to swallow tapeworm eggs to lose weight. They perceived a benefit. But the tapeworm remained a parasite.

These resources refer to organisms that have both parasitic and free living stages, like the creature in the Alien series:

[1] http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/1951220174...
[2]http://books.google.com.mx/ books?id=1yBMvatXY1oC&pg=P A388&lpg=PA388&dq=para sitic+and+free+living+stages &source=bl&ots=-CgytDV 0VT&sig=Y_MnBoIVIbfIFVwsVO gIDquMigE&hl=en&sa=X &ei=wyblUO7fHOSu2gWSr4GoBA &sqi=2&redir_esc=y#v=o nepage&q=parasitic%20and%2 0free%20living%20stages&f= false

The human being is the same. It's earliest form parasitizes its host, the mother. So what? Why so much resistance to the use of this word? Because it is insulting or demeaning to a fetus?

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#581589 Jan 2, 2013
UR BS wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do people insist on calling it anti-choice or pro-choice, when in fact it is Pro-life and anti-life.
The choice is life or death it is that simple. So you are either pro life or pro death.
Actually it's not Catcher understand each other perfectly
on this subject. The idea you have is a distraction, you see it isn't about religion or abortion really. Though that's what they want it to seem . But it's a ruse to distract you from what the real agenda is.

Control

If the law is passed to prevent choice , it has taken choice from the people and rested in the the governments hands. You no longer have the choice and you must comply. Now both of us are really against abortion. But we are both very against the control.
It is the woman's right to choose.

Oh course we want her to make the right decision, if she doesn't want her baby she can give it to someone who would really really want one. The same is true with gun control.

Control.

I don't want no more stinking control.
If we allow the government to control us we have no control.
Now oddly enough I don't think he feels the same about guns.
But to me it's the chipping away of our own control that they want. Until we are complete robots that have nothing to do but ask what we have to do.

They have been working on this for 200 years.
And sadly enough to my surprise I found they can take our 2nd amendment and it would be legal, with nothing we could do about it. If the house and senate agree to it. It's like this
They wrote it into our laws already enabling it to be if they choose so.

I will show you how.

You see by being a body of people "We the People"
You are god granted the right to bear arms.
N/P right yes problem..

As citizen of the US However.......you only have privileges granted. AND
If the United States outlaws any privileges you must comply as a citizen of the USA. Of course you can defy but we know where that leads. I see how we teeter on razor and how they use the law to control us now. I urge you to watch all five of these videos but it is explained how it works in them.

Oddly enough there are groups springing up calling themselves
"sovereign people" or sovereign citizens and you would have to google that as it takes too much explanation.

But here is the video explaining People Vs Citizens and the law.



Here is where it starts should you want to see the full explanation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

I was shocked and awed that should they decide they can strip us with only passing federal laws. But many states will resist, and the outcome of that could be disastrous.

BTW I'm pro choice to choose my destiny and not be told "you have too". But that doesn't mean I want anyone to kill their baby.



“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#581590 Jan 2, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. That's just not credible. Nobody would subject their family to that risk knowing what you know if they weren't afraid to live unarmed.
Furthermore, you're not credible about what your motives are. You're clearly playing the ostrich here.
- 851 Accidental discharge of weapon
- 19,766 Intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr...

- 8,583 total firearm homicide
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in...

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#581591 Jan 2, 2013
BTW here is the page showing it.

http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/pvcrigh...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581592 Jan 2, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>BTW, you claim you are pro-choice yet use misnomers such as "baby" and "murder" to describe abortion.
And you buy into the BS of pics of "babies" aborted being "murdered" and that of abortion being "gruesome".
Sure doesn't sound like someone who is pro-choice and if you really believe a baby is what is aborted and that abortion is murder and that z/e/f have wills, you're pretty screwed up to be pro-choice.
What you have expressed here are some of the most rabid views of the anti-choice crowd.
Good observation. And it's an enigma.

I suppose that it's possible to rabidly anti-abortion yet still pro-choice. I think that most pro-choice people would love to hear that all pregnancies were wanted, and all fetuses delivered.

I find abortion repulsive, would be loathe to do one, send a lover to have one, or if I were a woman, have one myself. I'll bet that you and most pro-choice advocates are close to that position as well.

But I don't use charged words and phrases "baby," "murder," or "abortion on demand." Nor do you.
OCB

Garner, NC

#581593 Jan 2, 2013
OCB is clueless

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#581594 Jan 2, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
But we're not talking about children. We're talking about fetuses.
The potential benefit of a child doesn't make the fetus not a parasite.
People used to swallow tapeworm eggs to lose weight. They perceived a benefit. But the tapeworm remained a parasite.
These resources refer to organisms that have both parasitic and free living stages, like the creature in the Alien series:
[1] http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/1951220174...
[2]http://books.google.com.mx/ books?id=1yBMvatXY1oC&pg=P A388&lpg=PA388&dq=para sitic+and+free+living+stages &source=bl&ots=-CgytDV 0VT&sig=Y_MnBoIVIbfIFVwsVO gIDquMigE&hl=en&sa=X &ei=wyblUO7fHOSu2gWSr4GoBA &sqi=2&redir_esc=y#v=o nepage&q=parasitic%20and%2 0free%20living%20stages&f= false
The human being is the same. It's earliest form parasitizes its host, the mother. So what? Why so much resistance to the use of this word? Because it is insulting or demeaning to a fetus?
Hogwash IANS , you too are calling a fetus a behavior
The fact remains it is not a parasite, it is in a parasitical stage of development . But it is also in the machine that makes it
and like all machines you have to feed it material and energy to produce it's product. If it were not in the making machine it would not ever have been in production

That's why it can't be called a parasite it is in a normal state of production, what we call procreation.
To call it a parasite it would have to have been introduced from the exterior.

Since: Feb 12

Germany

#581595 Jan 2, 2013
Aura said, "If the law is passed to prevent choice , it has taken choice from the people and rested in the the governments hands. You no longer have the choice and you must comply. Now both of us are really against abortion. But we are both very against the control.
It is the woman's right to choose.

Oh course we want her to make the right decision, if she doesn't want her baby she can give it to someone who would really really want one. The same is true with gun control."

The problem I see with this is the fact that the Choice you speak of was not orihinally a choice. It is again the SCOTUS injecting itslef in the decision. So it would not actually be removal of the choice as much as it would be restoring the sanctity of life.

I do understand what you are saying but my point is that in order to make it more palatable they are dehumanizing the child there by making it easier to kill it.
This is practice that is as old as mankind. Dehumanize someone and they become easy to kill. In WWII Germans were not Germans they were NAZIs so it was ok to kill them. In Viet Nam and Korea the locals were not really peole they were Slopes, Slants, Gooks, Charlie so it was OK to kill them. The terminology used in the abortion deal is the same thing. It isn't a baby or a child it is a fetus, or a zygot or whatever else they come up with.

As to the Second Ammendment I can see your point and the point of the videos but that is where we must hold their feet to the fire. A simple law can not override a right that is guaranteed under the Constitution. They must ammend the Constitution in order to do that.

Bottom line is that no subjecy is 100% balck and white there are multiple shades of grey involved. The problem is that there are those out there like some of the fools on this forum that will support the erosion of our rights.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581596 Jan 2, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>That's another good one- but I really love the "4 out of 3 people"- that struck my funny bone BIG time!
http://www.theincometeam.com/blog/wp-content/... [image]

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581597 Jan 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
But I'm not gonna lie to myself and say they're not aborting (killing) a lifeform.

I'm not romanticizing it, OCB. I'm just looking at it in a very logical & emotionless way.
Me, too, which is why I describe a fetus as a parasitic life form based on the organism's relationship to its host, and not on whether or not I find the word demeaning to the organism.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#581598 Jan 2, 2013
UR BS wrote:
Aura said,
The problem I see with this is the fact that the Choice you speak of was not orihinally a choice. It is again the SCOTUS injecting itslef in the decision. So it would not actually be removal of the choice as much as it would be restoring the sanctity of life.
I do understand what you are saying but my point is that in order to make it more palatable they are dehumanizing the child there by making it easier to kill it.
This is practice that is as old as mankind. Dehumanize someone and they become easy to kill. In WWII Germans were not Germans they were NAZIs so it was ok to kill them. In Viet Nam and Korea the locals were not really peole they were Slopes, Slants, Gooks, Charlie so it was OK to kill them. The terminology used in the abortion deal is the same thing. It isn't a baby or a child it is a fetus, or a zygot or whatever else they come up with.
As to the Second Ammendment I can see your point and the point of the videos but that is where we must hold their feet to the fire. A simple law can not override a right that is guaranteed under the Constitution. They must ammend the Constitution in order to do that.
Bottom line is that no subjecy is 100% balck and white there are multiple shades of grey involved. The problem is that there are those out there like some of the fools on this forum that will support the erosion of our rights.

The balance is held in check by the states than govern us.
They would have to agree with passing those laws , and seriously doubtful they could muster the votes to do so. After all they do not want another revolution.
And that's what could possibly happen.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581599 Jan 2, 2013
Mylan wrote:
Most of those were already squashed and the others are just opinions, not fact. Try again.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Oh, c'mon.... Which ones were squashed & which ones were opinions?
Suddenly, you are not satisfied with mere references to prior posts? Suddenly, you expect answers to be summarized anew or linked to, and are not satisfied with the bare claim that the matter has already been squashed?

If so, then you're learning, and I trust that we won't be seeing similar answers from you in the future.

“ad victoriam”

Since: Dec 10

arte et marte

#581600 Jan 2, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Me, too, which is why I describe a fetus as a parasitic life form based on the organism's relationship to its host, and not on whether or not I find the word demeaning to the organism.

Now you are calling all humans parasites. "sigh"

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581601 Jan 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I think you're only saying that to reenforce your pro-choice stance so you feel ok that a baby isn't being murdered against its will.
[1] It's not a baby
[2] It's not being murdered
[3] It has no will

How about a little accuracy: a fetus is being killed against its interests.

You would be horrified if I said to a pregnant woman who was experiencing a threatened miscarriage that her god was trying to murder her unborn baby against its will. It's nothing but emotive language that you appear willing to use in the case of a woman seeking an elective abortion, but probably not with one that you were not trying to manipulate with guilt.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581602 Jan 2, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>It can be argued that it is my opinion that life begins at birth; most anti-choicers are of the opinion that life begins at conception.
But LEGALLY, all rights afforded to a PERSON begin at BIRTH.
What do you think of this:

Life is a biological status. The sperm and the egg were alive, and continue to live as a zygote and through all other stages of human life until old age and senility.

Personhood and citizenship - the basis of human and civil rights respectively - are each a legal status.

You're a living human organism from conception, but you're not a person with rights until your culture says you are.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581603 Jan 2, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. SHe became my ex-wife because she wouldn't stop getting fat, stopped cleaning my house, never had a job & was a total bitch.
It sounds like it was all taking and no giving on her part. What a parasite, huh?

Catholics might blame you for taking the easy way out and murdering your marriage vows with a convenient divorce on demand, but I sure don't.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#581604 Jan 2, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. do you think/believe women should have the right to abortion in cases of rape or incest ??..
I do understand WHY they may not want to carry their attacker's baby to term.

“Is that all you've got?”

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#581605 Jan 3, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you are calling all humans parasites. "sigh"
He's a sick, twisted bastard.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581606 Jan 3, 2013
Mylan wrote:
Wow, you're as as quick as a tortoise on Prozac.
Consider Haldol or Thorazine for that joke instead.

Check out how Haldol in the neck of this woman gently calms her: http://dancingczars.files.wordpress.com/2012/...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#581607 Jan 3, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
See what happens when more & more people stop believing in God?
Less of this:

"Nevada: Parents beat son to death for not reading Bible"
http://www.examiner.com/article/nevada-parent...

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 5 min Buck Crick 104,962
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 18 min Ex Lesbian River 673,543
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr bad bob 184,635
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 4 hr onemale 286,297
Poll Bible - Written by Man - Edited by Man (Apr '09) 5 hr Jedi Master of All 1,933
Gay/bi Skype Sex ? (Mar '14) 6 hr Dom daddy for sub 21
Paul Ryan is a closet HOMOSEXUAL (Aug '12) 9 hr John 10
More from around the web