Science > Abortion > If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following
| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"osprey" |
| Date: |
25 Jan 2006 10:13:02 AM |
| Object: |
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
The fetus is protected from abortion, typically right after the first
trimester. Now, if what pro-idiots were claiming was true, that the
fetus isn't a human being...why would states have laws that protect the
fetus from abortion after the first trimester?
If the fetus is not a human being, why are people being charged with
homicide and/or murder of killing the unborn?
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/parentingfamily/a/aafetalhomicide.htm
.....
Many states have recently enacted fetal homicide laws, which create a
separate crime for actions taken against a woman that result in the
death of - or harm to - her fetus. These laws treat the fetus as an
individual, apart from the woman. Some of these laws do not contain
exceptions for the woman or her doctor, which could possibly allow
criminal proceedings for measures taken as a course of treatment
(radiation treatment for cancer or antibiotics) or for abortion.
On the federal level, in 1999 the Unborn Victims of Violence Act (which
does contain exceptions for the woman, her doctor, and abortion) was
proposed and passed the House of Representatives.
http://www.equityfeminism.com/archives/years/2001/000023.html
Drug Addict Charged With Killing Her Fetus
South Carolina is on the cutting edge of a controversial practice that
will someday be decided by the Supreme Court -- can women who take
illegal drugs during her pregnancy be charged with child abuse?
South Carolina considers a fetus in the third trimester to be a person.
As such, the law considers a woman who takes an illegal drug in the
third trimester to be administering drugs to a child -- a form of child
abuse.
In May, South Carolina plans to place Regina McKnight on trial for the
second time on charges that she smoked crack cocaine throughout the
third trimester of her pregnancy which caused her unborn child to be
stillborn. Among other crimes, McKnight has been charged with homicide.
http://www.equityfeminism.com/archives/years/2003/000002.html
A judge in Pennsylvania recently ruled that a woman could be charged
with murder for the death of a fetus of a romantic rival.
http://talkleft.com/new_archives/007837.html
Pregnant Drug User Charged With First Degree Murder
For the first time, Oklahoma has brought first degree murder charges
against a woman whose baby was stillborn based on drugs the mother
ingested while pregnant. Prosecutors say there will be more such cases
filed in the future:
Of course there are many more cases.
.
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 08:04:30 PM |
|
|
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 10:22:46 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing with
rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is attained at
birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 07:30:40 AM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing
with
rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at
birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
NOUN: fe·tus
1.. An unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural
resemblance to the adult animal.
derived from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/fetus .
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 08:46:11 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing
with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is attained
at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no idea of
what you're saying *or* reading.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Admission of inability to deal with my observation noted.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 09:20:29 AM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing
with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained
at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no idea
of
what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's just
that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed.
If it isn't a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Admission of inability to deal with my observation noted.
I was sticking to the question.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 12:42:31 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing
with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no idea of
what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's just
that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed.
If it isn't a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
It gains the rights pertaining to personhood when it's born. That's been a
pretty constant social tradition for a few millennia.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Admission of inability to deal with my observation noted.
I was sticking to the question.
You're confusing the legal and moral aspects - whether you're too stupid to
know the difference, or deliberately trying to confuse them, is another can of
worms.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Iowa 6, Houston 4 (January 26)
NEXT GAME: Friday, January 27 at Peoria, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 02:51:36 PM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o5a4x4.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing
with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no idea
of
what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's
just
that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed.
If it isn't a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
It gains the rights pertaining to personhood when it's born.
Non-human fetuses are not granted personhood by being born or by the U.S.
Constitution.
That's been a pretty constant social tradition for a few millennia.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which
carry fetuses.
Admission of inability to deal with my observation noted.
I was sticking to the question.
You're confusing the legal and moral aspects - whether you're too stupid
to
know the difference, or deliberately trying to confuse them, is another
can of
worms.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Iowa 6, Houston 4 (January 26)
NEXT GAME: Friday, January 27 at Peoria, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 10:46:36 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o5a4x4.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no idea
of what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's just
that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed. If it isn't
a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
It gains the rights pertaining to personhood when it's born.
Non-human fetuses are not granted personhood by being born or by the U.S.
Constitution.
....which has nothing to do with the human fetuses that don't attain personhood
until their birth - which is stated in the Constitution, whether you
understand or not. Evidently Amendment XIV doesn't exist in your world.
(Hint: until you're born, you're not a citizen.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 2, Peoria 1 (January 27)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, January 28 vs. Chicago, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
28 Jan 2006 07:02:04 AM |
|
|
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0bp7ydv.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o5a4x4.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another
species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no
idea
of what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's
just
that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed. If it
isn't
a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
It gains the rights pertaining to personhood when it's born.
Non-human fetuses are not granted personhood by being born or by the U.S.
Constitution.
...which has nothing to do with the human fetuses that don't attain
personhood
until their birth
The Constitution does not say that a person must be born to be a person.
Birth is one way to become a citizen here.
Illegal aliens are persons, even though they were neither born nor
naturalized here.
- which is stated in the Constitution, whether you
understand or not.
Your problem is that what you think is stated in the Constitution in this
matter is not stated there.
Evidently Amendment XIV doesn't exist in your world.
(Hint: until you're born, you're not a citizen.)
Citizen. You got that part right. Personhood is another characteristic.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 2, Peoria 1 (January 27)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, January 28 vs. Chicago, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
30 Jan 2006 10:21:58 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0bp7ydv.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o5a4x4.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64o6bd70.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another
species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
According to you...who has demonstrated many times that you have no
idea of what you're saying *or* reading.
Well, it isn't that what you said isn't correct at all by itself, it's
just that your answer did not answer the question as it was posed. If it
isn't a human being then how will it be a person even if it is born?
It gains the rights pertaining to personhood when it's born.
Non-human fetuses are not granted personhood by being born or by the U.S.
Constitution.
...which has nothing to do with the human fetuses that don't attain
personhood until their birth
The Constitution does not say that a person must be born to be a person.
Birth is one way to become a citizen here.
Only persons can be citizens - and they have to have been either born here, or
naturalized if born elsewhere. Connect the dots.
Illegal aliens are persons, even though they were neither born nor
naturalized here.
They were born, idiot. I guess your education didn't teach you to actually
comprehend what you read.
- which is stated in the Constitution, whether you understand or not.
Your problem is that what you think is stated in the Constitution in this
matter is not stated there.
Just because you're too cracked in the head to understand it doesn't mean it
doesn't exist.
Evidently Amendment XIV doesn't exist in your world.
(Hint: until you're born, you're not a citizen.)
Citizen. You got that part right. Personhood is another characteristic.
....and you got it once you were born. What's your problem? (Aside from the
glaringly obvious ones, of course.)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Houston 5, Chicago 4 (January 28)
NEXT GAME: Saturday, February 4 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 12:39:58 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is tryiing to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being. It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 05:05:40 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:43d9177e$0$58099$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is tryiing to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
Sperm cells are not fetuses and egg cells are not fetuses.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 07:07:01 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is trying to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
All.
It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
Sperm cells are not fetuses and egg cells are not fetuses.
Neither are you.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 07:37:48 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:43d97235$0$58101$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is trying to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
All.
Human fetuses are human beings.
Why did you forget the definition already?
It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
Sperm cells are not fetuses and egg cells are not fetuses.
Neither are you.
LOL!
Which means you there is no woman's right to choose to abort me. WIMP!
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 10:58:39 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is trying to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
All.
Human fetuses are human beings.
Wrong again, kook.
It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
Sperm cells are not fetuses and egg cells are not fetuses.
Neither are you.
LOL!
Which means you there is no woman's right to choose to abort me.
Nobody said otherwise, kook.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 09:12:04 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:43d9a87f$0$58040$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is trying to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
All.
Human fetuses are human beings.
Wrong again, kook.
How can I be a kook when you say that statement is wrong?
Where is anuy error in that statement?
I do not need some code in law telling me that the statement I made is
wrong.
The legal profession and the courts are NOT supposed to be in the business
of making lies.
What about you?
It has not been born. It may be a
being that is human, but so are sperm and eggs.
Sperm cells are not fetuses and egg cells are not fetuses.
Neither are you.
LOL!
Which means you there is no woman's right to choose to abort me.
Nobody said otherwise, kook.
Good.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
27 Jan 2006 12:06:55 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your
problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which
carry fetuses.
Equivocation.
The pro-liar is trying to equate the meaning of "human being", which
has a specific legal meaning, and the meaning of "being which is
human".
A fetus is not a human being.
Which fetus are you referring to there?
All.
Human fetuses are human beings.
Wrong again, kook.
How can I be a kook when you say that statement is wrong?
Because your statement is wrong.
Where is anuy error in that statement?
A fetus is not a human being.
I do not need some code in law telling me that the statement I made is
wrong.
You think that your opinion is infallible.
The legal profession and the courts are NOT supposed to be in the business
of making lies.
And they aren't.
Are you?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "George" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 10:38:46 AM |
|
|
On 2006-01-26 05:30:40 -0800, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> said:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing with
rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is attained at
birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which carry fetuses.
NOUN: fe·tus
1.. An unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic
structural resemblance to the adult animal.
derived from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/fetus .
And if you are correct, and it is a human being, so what?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 12:07:29 PM |
|
|
"George" <ggains@waddfr.edu> wrote in message
news:200601260838468930%ggains@waddfredu...
On 2006-01-26 05:30:40 -0800, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> said:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing with
rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at
birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which carry fetuses.
NOUN: fe·tus
1.. An unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic
structural resemblance to the adult animal.
derived from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/fetus
.
And if you are correct, and it is a human being, so what?
That shows you what is being killed in an abortion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 07:51:08 PM |
|
|
In article <_a8Cf.9964$3m4.7811@bignews5.bellsouth.net>, Johnny
<wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"George" <ggains@waddfr.edu> wrote in message
news:200601260838468930%ggains@waddfredu...
On 2006-01-26 05:30:40 -0800, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> said:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of
dealing with
rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at
birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it.
At least you offerred an answer, but it is not correct.
If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another species
which carry fetuses.
NOUN: fe·tus
1.. An unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic
structural resemblance to the adult animal.
derived from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/fetus
.
And if you are correct, and it is a human being, so what?
That shows you what is being killed in an abortion.
Like in Iraq, or with the death penalty, or due to poor health care, or
any of a dozen other things the "pro-life" support.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
26 Jan 2006 08:48:55 PM |
|
|
George <ggains@waddfr.edu> writes:
On 2006-01-26 05:30:40 -0800, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> said:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkd5if1uuh.fsf@fnord.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
Probably because it involves issues you appear to be incapable of dealing
with rationally.
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
You're ignoring a few millennia of legal tradition - personhood is
attained at birth, because it's an easily observable event.
What is it if it is not a human being?
It's what will be a person - once it's born.
Care to offer any answers?
I just gave you one. You'll run away from it, but that's your problem.
I didn't run away from it. At least you offerred an answer, but it is not
correct. If it isn't a human being then it must be a being of another
species which carry fetuses.
NOUN: fe·tus
1.. An unborn young of a viviparous vertebrate having a basic structural
resemblance to the adult animal.
derived from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/fetus .
And if you are correct, and it is a human being, so what?
He's almost as likely to be correct as I'm likely to be snowed in here by a
blizzard in August.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 08:21:03 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
‘Republican’, but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I’ll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 09:02:17 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
LOL!
HHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why couldn't you answer it?
Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
'Republican', but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I'll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 10:28:25 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
Actually, he failed to answer it as you demanded.
LOL! HHAHAHAHAHAH! Why couldn't you answer it? Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Are you insinuating that you've got even more issues than you display in your
daily rants?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
You asked a question, loon, not a riddle. The riddle is why you're allowed
out in public at all.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 09:11:57 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:02:17 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
LOL!
HHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why couldn't you answer it?
Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
I see that Johnny can't do as required.
No surprise, really.
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
‘Republican’, but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I’ll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 09:20:19 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:8ffgt11bvm6kughgbptjqi67o0itf577oe@fe06.highwinds-media.phx...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:02:17 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
LOL!
HHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why couldn't you answer it?
Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
I see that Johnny can't do as required.
Still no answer.
Two strikes against you..
No surprise, really.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
The no surprise is that you failed to answer correctly two times already.
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
'Republican', but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I'll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 10:32:15 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:8ffgt11bvm6kughgbptjqi67o0itf577oe@fe06.highwinds-media.phx...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:02:17 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
LOL!
HHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why couldn't you answer it?
Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
I see that Johnny can't do as required.
Still no answer. Two strikes against you..
That means nothing, given your insanity.
No surprise, really.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
The no surprise is that you failed to answer correctly two times already.
The more obvious non-surprise is that anyone can see better brains than yours
by visiting any butcher shop.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 09:22:23 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:20:19 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:8ffgt11bvm6kughgbptjqi67o0itf577oe@fe06.highwinds-media.phx...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 22:02:17 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
AND, you failed to answer the question correctly.
LOL!
HHAHAHAHAHAH!
Why couldn't you answer it?
Is your name Oedipus Rex?
Obviously not, huh?
The riddle has not been answered by YOU!!!!!!!!!
I see that Johnny can't do as required.
Still no answer.
Two strikes against you..
Nope. No need to answer, since it is the legal status of the fetus
that is at issue. If you want to call it a human being knock yourself
out but at least have the honesty to stop saying ***** like that makes
it a person.
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
‘Republican’, but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I’ll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 09:00:48 PM |
|
|
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
Fetus is latin, coward.
---
I bought a Venus Fly Trap today. I was going to name it
'Republican', but the fly trap is beneficial to the
environment. I'll save that name - someday I might find
a plant that eats poor people and minorities.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain the following |
25 Jan 2006 10:24:23 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Adam H." <adam@mailinator.com> wrote in message
news:7fcgt11gk5dmps6gvh3cjdbumap6fqu6u7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:04:30 -0500, "Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com>
wrote:
"osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1138205582.573110.299810@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
If the fetus isn't a human being, then explain why a woman can NOT
abort after the fetus has become viable?
Why bother with such trivialities?
If the fetus is not a human being then it must be of another species.
What is it if it is not a human being?
Care to offer any answers?
What if the anti-choice brigade would stop conflating one term to mean
another? Maybe stop using a biological term to mean the same thing as
a legal term?
Care to try that?
Fetus is latin, coward.
What does that have to do with the discussion? It's a shame your parents put
up the money for you to get an alleged education at Furman (which is a
respectable school), only for you to throw it away.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Peoria 3, Houston 0 (January 24)
NEXT GAME: Thursday, January 26 at Iowa, 7:05
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Introducing The Dhourties And The Dualdigers, Nudism? Nakedity? Aren't We Born Naked? Isn't Our Naked Skin Our Clothes? Is Being Born Naked A Crime By The Dhourties' Logic If Nudity In Public Is A Crime?
"Infants Are Being Killed"
Basic Tenets of Being an RRR Cultist
Re: The gay agenda is being revealed daily now in SF, Seattle, NY, Portland, etc.
Re: The gay agenda is being revealed daily now in SF, Seattle, NY, Portland, etc.
THE BURDEN OF BEING A REPUBLICAN
NeoCons: Woman "Liked" Being Raped
Christia NeoCon Gactimus: Women "Liked" Being Raped (No Wonder He Worships AWOL Bush)
| Re: Who gets credit for causing the collapse of the Soviet Union? a. Ronald Reagan, for promoting Star Wars b. the pope, for being Polish c. Mikhail Gorbachev, for allowing dissention d. the KGB, for abusing the people e. Saudi Aramco, fo
Re: "gay fischer" admits to being an advocate for killing babies.
Re: It's not racism, it's being a realist
Happy Holiday Season - why did some spend it in a NG being bitter?
Christian Usenet Poster "Richard Dawkins" To Rape Victim: Stop Being a *****!
Christian Morality!!! 3 CA Men Brutally Attacked for Being Gay (Praise Jesus!)
J Young Christian Morality: WI Teens Brutally Attacked for Being Gay (Praise Jesus! Kill Gays! Christian Family Value Hatred!)
|
|
|
