| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"hate feminism" |
| Date: |
09 Jun 2004 04:02:10 AM |
| Object: |
Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
Alas, she refused to abort the foetus and King Pappy punched and
stomped on her stomach several times, causing a 'stiffybirth'.
http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,9791287%255E1702,00.html
Poor anti-abortionist Ms Flick now suffers a permanent and significant
loss as a result of the attack. The offender broke the close physical
bond between the mother and the foetus.
Foetus: feed me proper, you *****, stop feeding me drugs N booze.
Mother: shut up you little fucker, I'll bring you up soon.
Foetus: ***** you, I'll ask King Pappy to kill me first.
Mother: I'll be the sole decision maker or breaker, foetus.
Foetus: ***** you, I'll die before you gestate, be sure of it.
.
|
|
| User: "Starshine Moonbeam" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 04:27:38 AM |
|
|
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
Evolve, grow a brain, then report back.
--
Starshine Moonbeam
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sky KIng" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 08:25:53 AM |
|
|
In article <MPG.1b3092ade2a25b0398b456@news.alt.net>,
silverbells@tacoshells.com says...
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
Feminist logic...its right up there with Military Intelligence.
Evolve, grow a brain, then report back.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 07:03:46 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
He'd have to understand the true definition of feminism and his
definition of feminism are not the same.
Evolve, grow a brain, then report back.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steenkin Man" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 05:19:38 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic. You
appear to believe that it exists; so go on, explain this
feminist/female logic to us.
As it stands so far we have the following:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 07:20:30 PM |
|
|
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de...
1) A mother and foetus can bond
## Of course they can - and in many cases they don't! The child is abused,
neglected or may even be killed by the mother. Mothers (or their boyfriends
in recent times) have murdered their unwanted children since the beginning
of time.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
## True! All living babies are BORN. Not all mothers bond with their
babies.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
## Perhaps YOU can do that for us.
--
Flower Power...
pro-choice (pr-chois)
adj.
Favoring or supporting the legal right of women and girls to choose
whether or not to continue a pregnancy to term.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Pro-Choice
~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~{@
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ron Nicholson" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 07:42:38 PM |
|
|
In article <DPydnTZC-4HLNFrdRVn-sw@heartoftn.net>,
"Flower Power" <Choice@this.NG> wrote:
## True! All living babies are BORN. Not all mothers bond with their
babies.
I have some difficulty with this assumption as well. Even mother who
bond sometimes will need to place their children for adoption, or have
custody removed.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steenkin Man" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 10:06:00 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:20:30 -0500, "Flower Power" <Choice@this.NG>
wrote:
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de...
1) A mother and foetus can bond
## Of course they can - and in many cases they don't! The child is abused,
neglected or may even be killed by the mother. Mothers (or their boyfriends
in recent times) have murdered their unwanted children since the beginning
of time.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
## True! All living babies are BORN. Not all mothers bond with their
babies.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
## Perhaps YOU can do that for us.
You have a go. You assert above that both statements are true,
therefore you must believe that there is a possible logical
reconciliation of them. I would like to hear it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 09:06:18 PM |
|
|
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2irbn0Fqgi0tU2@uni-berlin.de...
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:20:30 -0500, "Flower Power" <Choice@this.NG>
wrote:
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de...
1) A mother and foetus can bond
## Of course they can - and in many cases they don't! The child is
abused,
neglected or may even be killed by the mother. Mothers (or their
boyfriends
in recent times) have murdered their unwanted children since the
beginning
of time.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
## True! All living babies are BORN. Not all mothers bond with their
babies.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
## Perhaps YOU can do that for us.
=========================================
You have a go. You assert above that both statements are true,
# Are you claiming no mothers or their boyfriends have killed unwanted
children in the home? Never heard of Susan Smith? What about the mother in
Texas who killed all 5 of her kids?
therefore you must believe that there is a possible logical
reconciliation of them. I would like to hear it.
# The logical answer is not all women BOND with their resented and unwanted
children. It's a simple as that. ;-)
--
FPower.......
But look what your Jehovah god said in his bible:
Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones." (Infanticide approved by god)
======================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 11:06:02 PM |
|
|
In article <2irbn0Fqgi0tU2@uni-berlin.de>, Steenkin Man
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 19:20:30 -0500, "Flower Power" <Choice@this.NG>
wrote:
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de...
1) A mother and foetus can bond
## Of course they can - and in many cases they don't! The child is abused,
neglected or may even be killed by the mother. Mothers (or their boyfriends
in recent times) have murdered their unwanted children since the beginning
of time.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
## True! All living babies are BORN. Not all mothers bond with their
babies.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
## Perhaps YOU can do that for us.
You have a go. You assert above that both statements are true,
therefore you must believe that there is a possible logical
reconciliation of them. I would like to hear it.
You assert your statement about possible logical reconciliation is
true, therefore you first need to reconcile THAT.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Somesappywriter" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 07:04:11 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:19:38 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net>
wrote:
[...]
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic.
He isn't.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 08:53:13 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:19:38 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic. You
appear to believe that it exists; so go on, explain this
feminist/female logic to us.
As it stands so far we have the following:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
A dog and a cat can bond.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steenkin Man" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 09:22:20 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:53:13 -0400, Attila <prochoice@here.now> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:19:38 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic. You
appear to believe that it exists; so go on, explain this
feminist/female logic to us.
As it stands so far we have the following:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
A dog and a cat can bond.
Can a dog bond with a cat that isn't alive? See proposition 2.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 10:13:36 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:22:20 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2iokp2Fofe2uU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:53:13 -0400, Attila <prochoice@here.now> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:19:38 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic. You
appear to believe that it exists; so go on, explain this
feminist/female logic to us.
As it stands so far we have the following:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
A dog and a cat can bond.
Can a dog bond with a cat that isn't alive? See proposition 2.
Irrelevant. Since bonding is an emotional connection and not governed
by logic I suppose someone could bond with a rock if they so choose.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
It is a living fetus but not a baby.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steenkin Man" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 10:03:06 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:13:36 -0400, Attila <prochoice@here.now> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 15:22:20 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2iokp2Fofe2uU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 09:53:13 -0400, Attila <prochoice@here.now> wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 11:19:38 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2io6hvFp7sbnU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 04:27:38 -0500, Starshine Moonbeam
<silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote:
In article <40C6D212.84CC3170@feminism.now>, "hate
feminism"(kill@feminism.now) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
connor_a wrote:
How dare he brake the bond between mother and foetus... she can do
that herself ;-)
That's an interesting point.
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it - and if I want to
kill then I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
I thought he was joking when he spoke of feminist/female logic. You
appear to believe that it exists; so go on, explain this
feminist/female logic to us.
As it stands so far we have the following:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
A dog and a cat can bond.
Can a dog bond with a cat that isn't alive? See proposition 2.
Irrelevant. Since bonding is an emotional connection and not governed
by logic I suppose someone could bond with a rock if they so choose.
A one way bond? The psychobabblers expect reciprocation or they call
it fixation, not bonding.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
It is a living fetus but not a baby.
If it's alive, the abortion must kill it. Abortion is just another
name for killing.
Reconcile the above statements using logic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 09:03:16 PM |
|
|
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2irbhiFqgi0tU1@uni-berlin.de...
If it's alive, the abortion must kill it. Abortion is just another
name for killing.
========================
But it's not your business if the women sees it differently and doesn't want
it. I never see any anti-choicer show any concern for the women/girl
involved with these disaster pregnancies.
--
FP....
Do they also warn women of the dangers of term pregnancy and
birth?.......like:
http://www.indiaparenting.com/pregnancy/data/preg16_00.shtml
http://www.imnotsorry.net/
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html
The risk of death associated with childbirth is about 11 times as high as
that associated with abortion.27
http://www.cdc.gov/epo/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00054602.htm
http://www.afterabortion.org/news/deaths_smj.html
====================================================
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David W. Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 11:06:02 PM |
|
|
In article <2irbhiFqgi0tU1@uni-berlin.de>, Steenkin Man
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
1) A mother and foetus can bond
A dog and a cat can bond.
Can a dog bond with a cat that isn't alive? See proposition 2.
Irrelevant. Since bonding is an emotional connection and not governed
by logic I suppose someone could bond with a rock if they so choose.
A one way bond? The psychobabblers expect reciprocation or they call
it fixation, not bonding.
You seem fixated on this issue.
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
It is a living fetus but not a baby.
If it's alive, the abortion must kill it. Abortion is just another
name for killing.
Then so is mowing the lawn.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Attila" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
10 Jun 2004 02:54:38 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:03:06 +0100, Steenkin Man <me@privacy.net> in
alt.abortion with message-id <2irbhiFqgi0tU1@uni-berlin.de> wrote:
2) A foetus is only a clump of cells and not a living baby
It is a living fetus but not a baby.
If it's alive, the abortion must kill it. Abortion is just another
name for killing.
No, abortion is the termination of a process. The term is common in
the space industry where a mission is aborted but no one is killed.
A pregnant woman has her pregnancy terminated in an abortion. What
happens to the fetus is a side effect.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "connor_a" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 07:44:23 PM |
|
|
Starshine Moonbeam <silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1b3092ade2a25b0398b456@news.alt.net>...
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
Evolve, grow a brain, then report back.
Get back to men when you are ready to shed equal blood N guts for
equal rights, sexistsista!
In the meantime, keep up the gender criminal work in being a self
preserving above men protect me pink.
Men are awaking, I hope your age is above 35.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Starshine Moonbeam" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
09 Jun 2004 10:19:47 PM |
|
|
In article <6688b088.0406091644.24a83926@posting.google.com>,
"connor_a"(connor_a@hotmail.com) dropped a +5 bundle of words...
Starshine Moonbeam <silverbells@tacoshells.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1b3092ade2a25b0398b456@news.alt.net>...
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
See, the problem isn't that you don't understand feminist logic, it's
that you don't understand ANY logic.
Evolve, grow a brain, then report back.
Get back to men when you are ready to shed equal blood N guts for
equal rights, sexistsista!
As long as men are more equal than women, right? Face it, you won't be
happy until women lose the right to vote and have to go to back alleys
for abortions and get beaten by women who'll have no place to run.
In the meantime, keep up the gender criminal work in being a self
preserving above men protect me pink.
I need nothing from anybody. That sucks for little nothings like you now
doesn't it?
And for future reference, yet again, I'm a guy.
Men are awaking, I hope your age is above 35.
Don't worry about my age. Worry more about how the hell you're going to
go through life with an empty head.
--
Starshine Moonbeam
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GOOD RIDDANCE on Nov. 2nd to Dishonest Warmonger-in-Thief G.W. Bush!" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
11 Jun 2004 06:11:49 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 21:02:10 +1200,
"Hate Feminism [One of the only Loons in Usenet who
is DUMB enough to **admit** that he's a bigot in every
posts, with the inane alias he chose for himself] wrote:
The way things are now is as follows: It's a human being if I (the
woman) say it is; if it's not then I can kill it -- and if I want to kill then
I say simply it's not.
Doesn't that make sense? Well, it's as makes as much sense as
feminist/female logic, that is.
Since those women are intelligent enough to recognize that nothing
of greater significance than gametes (sperm and ova) are being dealt
with, that makes your so-called "feminists" one HELL of a LOT smarter
than **you** are.
(BTW -- the ones that **choose** to gestate-to-term aren't saying
that those mere reproductive entities ARE human beings. They simply
are choosing to **enable** them, by being WILLING hosts, to BECOME
human beings.)
Reproductive-process entities : human beings :: acorns : oak trees.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
(REAL name and e-mail address, lest any bigot wrongly
think I'm hiding behind an a alias. The "alias," above,
is designed to be a visible MESSAGE, each time I post.)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
INSIGHT on our Warmonger-in-Thief ---
http://homepage.mac.com/webmasterkai/kaicurry/gwbush/dishonestdubya.html
AND...
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
ALSO worth a look:
http://anon.newmediamill.speedera.net/anon.newmediamill/pledge_acc/index.html
And... here's what happens to people like you & me:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/21/antiwar.soldier.ap/index.html
However, the same rules don't apply to the "Elite:"
www.awolbush.com
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
.
|
|
|
| User: "hate feminism" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond between mother and foetus |
22 Jun 2004 01:44:59 AM |
|
|
Since those women are intelligent enough to recognize that nothing
of greater significance than gametes (sperm and ova) are being dealt
with, that makes your so-called "feminists" one HELL of a LOT smarter
than **you** are.
Feminists are ideologically driven bigots who define truth according
to what they want to hear. Thus, as sexually dysfunctional women they
choose to regard marriage and motherhood as undesirable to working
full-time, for example. It's what they want to hear, because they're a
bunch of WEIRDOS.
(BTW -- the ones that **choose** to gestate-to-term aren't saying
that those mere reproductive entities ARE human beings. They simply
are choosing to **enable** them, by being WILLING hosts, to BECOME
human beings.)
Reproductive-process entities : human beings :: acorns : oak trees.
Trees aren't even human beings, or even animals. However, we know that
a fetus *is* the following:
(Originally posted by Papa Jack in <388678B7.5AB35B29@geocities.com>):
Amicus Curiae
"The Unborn Person Is Also a Patient."
Presented by more than two hundred doctors, many of them members
of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, in a Friend
of the Court Brief filed before the United States Supreme Court.
**************************************************************
From conception the child is a complex, dynamic, rapidly
growing organism. By a natural and continuous process the
single fertilized ovum will, over approximately nine
months, develop into the trillions of cells of the new-
born. The natural end of the sperm and ovum is death
unless fertilization occurs. At fertilization a new and
unique being is created which, although receiving one-half
of its chromosomes from each parent, is really unlike
either.
About seven to nine days after conception, when there
are already several hundred cells of the new individual
formed, contact with the uterus is made and implantation
begins. Blood cells begin at 17 days and a heart as early
as 18 days. This embryonic heart which begins as a simple
tube starts regular pulsations at 24 days, which, in about
one week, smooth into a rhythmic contraction and expansion.
Straus, et al. have shown that the ECG on a 23 mm embryo
(7.5 weeks) presents the existence of a functionally
complete cardiac system.... All the classic elements of
the adult ECG were seen....
Commencing at 18 days the developmental emphasis is on the
nervous system even though other vital organs, such as the
heart, are commencing development at the same time. Such
early development is necessary since the nervous system
integrates the action of all other systems. By the end of
the 20th day the foundation of the child's brain, spinal
cord and entire nervous system will have been established.
By the 6th week after conception this system will have
developed so well that it is controlling movements of the
baby's muscles, even though the woman may not be aware
that she is pregnant. By the 33rd day the cerebral cortex,
that part of the central nervous system that governs motor
activity as well as intellect may be seen.
The baby's eyes begin to form at 19 days. By the end of
the first month the foundation of the brain, spinal cord,
nerves and sense organs is completely formed. By 28 days
the embryo has the building blocks for 40 pairs of muscles
situated from the base of its skull to the lower end of
its spinal column. By the end of the first month the
child has completed the period of relatively greatest
size increase and the greatest physical change of a
lifetime. He or she is ten thousand times larger than the
fertilized egg and will increase its weight six billion
times by birth, having in only the first month gone from
the one cell state to millions of cells.
By the beginning of the second month the unborn child,
small as it is, looks distinctly human. Yet, by this
time the child's mother is not even aware that she is
pregnant.
At the end of the first month the child is about 1/4
of an inch in length. At 30 days the primary brain is
present and the eyes, ears and nasal organs have
started to form. Although the heart is still incomplete,
it is beating regularly and pumping blood cells through
a closed vascular system. The child and mother do not
exchange blood, the child having from a very early
point in its development its own and complete vascular
system.
Earliest reflexes begin as early as the 42nd day. The
male penis begins to form. The child is almost 1/2 inch
long and cartilage has begun to develop. Even at 5 1/2
weeks the fetal heartbeat is essentially similar to that
of an adult in general configuration.
By the end of the seventh week we see a well propor-
tioned small scale baby. In its seventh week, it bears
the familiar external features and all the internal
organs of the adult, even though it is less than an
inch long and weighs only 1/30th of an ounce. The body
has become nicely rounded, padded with muscles and
covered by a thin skin. The arms are only as long as
printed exclamation marks, and have hands with fingers
and thumbs. The slower growing legs have recognizable
knees, ankles and toes.
The new body not only exists, it also functions. The
brain in configuration is already like the adult brain
and sends out impulses that coordinate the function of
the other organs. The brainwaves have been noted at 43
days. The heart beats sturdily. The stomach produces
digestive juices. The liver manufactures blood cells
and the kidneys begin to function by extracting uric
acid from the child's blood. The muscles of the arms
and body can already be set in motion.
After the eighth week no further primordia will form;
everything is already present that will be found in
the full term baby.1 As one author describes this
period: "A human face with eyelids half closed as
they are in someone who is about to fall asleep.
Hands that soon will begin to grip, feet trying their
first gentle kicks."
From this point until adulthood, when full growth
is achieved somewhere between 25 and 27 years, the
changes in the body will be mainly in dimension and
in gradual refinement of the working parts.
The development of the child, while very rapid, is
also very specific. The genetic pattern set down in
the first day of life instructs the development of
a specific anatomy. The ears are formed by seven
weeks and are specific, and may resemble a family
pattern. The lines in the hands start to be engraved
by eight weeks and remain a distinctive feature of
the individual.
The primitive skeletal system has completely devel-
oped by the end of six weeks. This marks the end of
the child's embryonic (from Greek, to swell or teem
within) period. From this point, the child will be
called a fetus (Latin, young one or offspring).
In the third month, the child becomes very active.
By the end of the month he can kick his legs, turn
his feet, curl and fan his toes, make a fist, move
his thumb, bend his wrist, turn his head, squint,
frown, open his mouth, press his lips tightly
together. He can swallow and drinks the amniotic
fluid that surrounds him. Thumb sucking is first
noted at this age. The first respiratory motions
move fluid in and out of his lungs with inhaling
and exhaling respiratory movements.
The prerequisites for motion are muscles and
nerves. In the sixth to seventh weeks, nerves and
muscles work together for the first time. If the
area of the lips, the first to become sensitive
to touch, is gently stroked, the child responds
by bending the upper body to one side and making
a quick backward motion with his arms. This is
called a total pattern response because it
involves most of the body, rather than a local
part. Localized and more appropriate reactions
such as swallowing follow in the third month.
By the beginning of the ninth week, the baby
moves spontaneously without being touched. Some-
times his whole body swings back and forth for a
few moments. By eight and a half weeks the
eyelids, and the palms of the hands become
sensitive to touch. If the eyelid is stroked,
the child squints. On stroking the palm, the
fingers close into a small fist.
In the ninth and tenth weeks, the child's
activity leaps ahead. Now if the forehead is
touched, he may turn his head away and pucker
up his brow and frown. He now has full use of
his arms and can bend the elbow and wrist
independently. In the same week, the entire
body becomes sensitive to touch.
The twelfth week brings a whole new range of
responses. The baby can now move his thumb in
opposition to his fingers. He now swallows regu-
larly. He can pull up his upper lip; the initial
step in the development of the sucking reflex.
By the end of the twelfth week, the quality of
muscular response is altered. It is no longer
marionette-like or mechanical - the movements
are now graceful and fluid, as they are in the
newborn. The child is active and the reflexes
are becoming more vigorous. All this is before
the mother feels any movement....
Every child shows a distinct individuality in
his behavior by the end of the third month. This
is because the actual structure of the muscles
varies from baby to baby. The alignment of the
muscles of the face, for example, follow an
inherited pattern.
Further refinements are noted in the third month.
The fingernails appear. The child's face becomes
much prettier. His eyes, previously far apart,
now move closer together. The eyelids close over
the eyes. Sexual differentiation is apparent in
both internal and external sex organs, and
primitive eggs and sperm are formed. The vocal
cords are completed. In the absence of air
they cannot produce sound; the child cannot cry
aloud until birth although he is capable of
crying long before.
The taste buds and salivary glands develop in
this month, as do the digestive glands in the
stomach. When the baby swallows amniotic fluid,
its contents are utilized by the child. The
child starts to urinate.
From the twelfth to the sixteenth week, the
child grows very rapidly. His weight increases
six times, and he grows to eight to ten inches
in height. For this incredible growth spurt
the child needs oxygen and food. This he
receives from his mother through the placental
attachment - much like he receives food from
her after he is born. His dependence does not
end with expulsion into the external environment.
We now know that the placenta belongs to the
baby, not the mother, as was long thought.
In the fifth month, the baby gains two inches in
height and ten ounces in weight. By the end of
the month he will be about one foot tall and will
weigh one pound. Fine baby hair begins to grow on
his eyebrows and on his head and a fringe of
eyelashes appear. Most of the skeleton hardens.
The baby's muscles become much stronger, and as
the child becomes larger his mother finally
perceives his many activities. The child's mother
comes to recognize the movement and can feel the
baby's head, arms and legs. She may even perceive
a rhythmic jolting movement - fifteen to thirty
per minute. This is due to the child hiccoughing
.... The doctor can already hear the heartbeat
with his stethoscope.
The baby sleeps and wakes just as it will after
birth. When he sleeps he invariably settles into
his favorite position called his "lie". Each baby
has a characteristic lie. When he awakens he moves
about freely in the buoyant fluid turning from side
to side, and frequently head over heel. Sometimes
his head will be up and sometimes It will be down.
He may sometimes be aroused from sleep by external
vibrations. He may wake up from a loud tap on the
tub when his mother is taking a bath. A loud concert
or the vibrations of a washing machine may also stir
him into activity. The child hears . . . his mother's
voice before birth.
In the sixth month, the baby will grow about two more
inches, to become fourteen inches tall. He will also
begin to accumulate a little fat under his skin and
will increase his weight to a pound and three-quarters.
This month the permanent teeth buds come in high in
the gums behind the milk teeth. Now his closed eyelids
will open and close, and his eyes look up, down and
sideways. Dr. Liley feels that the child may perceive
light through the abdominal wall. Dr. Stiff has noted
that electroencephalographic waves have been obtained
in forty-three to forty-five day old fetuses, and so
conscious experience is possible after this date.
In the sixth month, the child develops a strong mus-
cular grip with his hands. He also starts to breathe
regularly and can maintain respiratory response for
twenty-four hours if born prematurely. He may even
have a slim chance of surviving in an incubator. The
youngest children known to survive were between twenty
to twenty-five weeks old
***********************************************************
http://www.ohiolife.org/mqa/1-1.htm [link now dead]
Motion and Brief Amicus Curiae of Certain Physicians, Professors
and Fellows of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology
in Support of appellees, submitted to the Supreme Court of the
United States, October Term, 1971, No. 70-18, Roe v. Wade, and
No. 70-40, Doe v. Bolton. Prepared by Dennis J. Horan, et.al.
(The List of Amici contains the names of over 200 physicians.).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
22 Jun 2004 01:35:49 PM |
|
|
"hate feminism" <feminism@is.sexist> wrote in message
news:40D7D56B.3471A7AA@is.sexist...
Feminists are ideologically driven bigots who define truth according
to what they want to hear. Thus, as sexually dysfunctional women they
choose to regard marriage and motherhood as undesirable to working
full-time, for example. It's what they want to hear, because they're a
bunch of WEIRDOS.
=============================
You're the weirdo living in the past when women were mere chattels of men.
It appears by your posts you want to go back to those days. Just take away
all women's rights - from the right to own property and inherit property to
voting - right? Lets force them to stop at the HS education level and then
keep them at home barefoot and pregnant. If they open their mouth you
simply beat the ***** out of them like in the old days.
Maybe you need to move to one of the radical Muslim nations where women are
still treated like that. You'll be much happier I'm sure. You can even BUY
a women there for a few donkeys, a few sheep and a case of beer. Have a
nice trip! :-)
--
FPower.......
But look what your Jehovah god said in his bible:
Psalm 137:9
"Happy shall he be that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the
stones." (Infanticide was approved by god)
======================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
22 Jun 2004 11:23:31 PM |
|
|
"hate feminism" <feminism@is.sexist> wrote in message
news:40D7D56B.3471A7AA@is.sexist...
Feminists are ideologically driven bigots who define truth according
to what they want to hear. Thus, as sexually dysfunctional women they
choose to regard marriage and motherhood as undesirable to working
full-time, for example. It's what they want to hear, because they're a
bunch of WEIRDOS.
I wouldn't call them "weirdos" but I must say some of these feminists
just go overboard & the ones who disregard marriage & motherhood as
'undesirable' seem to forget that both of these aspects of life are
more important & beautiful than any of their strong held beliefs. I
mean I'm all for the independent Woman working and making something
out of herself but it doesn't mean that you can't have a family life
as well. Juggling both work & homelife in a marriage is a true test of
success.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 01:35:03 AM |
|
|
"Mark" <mark_b_80@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f04af7fa.0406222023.4f13a808@posting.google.com...
"hate feminism" <feminism@is.sexist> wrote in message
news:40D7D56B.3471A7AA@is.sexist...
Feminists are ideologically driven bigots who define truth according
to what they want to hear. Thus, as sexually dysfunctional women they
choose to regard marriage and motherhood as undesirable to working
full-time, for example. It's what they want to hear, because they're a
bunch of WEIRDOS.
========================
I wouldn't call them "weirdos"
** Old fashioned chauvinistic men consider any women who wants something
different than what THEY feel is right are weirdoes. They believe all women
should automatically want what their religion teaches them women should
want, and what women deserve. They're trying to live in the past when women
had no "say" about anything. It's no longer a man's world.
but I must say some of these feminists
just go overboard
** Of course! Some men go overboard with trying to control women as well.
There's fanaticism on BOTH sides.
& the ones who disregard marriage & motherhood as
'undesirable' seem to forget that both of these aspects of life are
more important & beautiful than any of their strong held beliefs.
** They don't "forget." They're just not interested in marriage and/or
motherhood. To them other things are more important and who are we to judge
them and what they want out of life? Many men aren't into marriage and/or
fatherhood either. It goes both ways. There are also many women who can't
find a husband and wont settle for any jerk who comes along.
I
mean I'm all for the independent Woman working and making something
out of herself but it doesn't mean that you can't have a family life
as well.
** Most women manage a career and at least one child.
Juggling both work & homelife in a marriage is a true test of
success.
** If the man helps out at home. Many men don't and yet expect their wives
to work and raise kids. The men come home just as tired as the women and
watch TV while the women cooks, does the laundry, tends the children etc.
Their girlfriends and sisters SEE this form of slavery and "no life"
situation and decide it's not for them. Who can blame them?
--
FP....
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent
force for atheism ever conceived."
-= Isaac Asimov =-
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bobs Boyfriend" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
22 Jun 2004 11:48:24 PM |
|
|
In article <f04af7fa.0406222023.4f13a808@posting.google.com>,
(Mark) wrote:
"hate feminism" <feminism@is.sexist> wrote in message
news:40D7D56B.3471A7AA@is.sexist...
Feminists are ideologically driven bigots who define truth according
to what they want to hear. Thus, as sexually dysfunctional women they
choose to regard marriage and motherhood as undesirable to working
full-time, for example. It's what they want to hear, because they're a
bunch of WEIRDOS.
I wouldn't call them "weirdos" but I must say some of these feminists
just go overboard & the ones who disregard marriage & motherhood as
'undesirable' seem to forget that both of these aspects of life are
more important & beautiful than any of their strong held beliefs. I
mean I'm all for the independent Woman working and making something
out of herself but it doesn't mean that you can't have a family life
as well. Juggling both work & homelife in a marriage is a true test of
success.
It's great that you want to impose your beliefs onto other people.
Requiring someone to be a parent who doesn't really want to is typically
a recipe for disaster.
But keep goading women into popping out babies. I'm sure that will make
for a lovely society FILLED with well adjusted children.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 01:45:25 AM |
|
|
"Bob's Boyfriend" <together@wyoming.com> wrote in message news:together->
It's great that you want to impose your beliefs onto other people.
Requiring someone to be a parent who doesn't really want to is typically
a recipe for disaster.
## Please take note that they NEVER mention the future welfare of these
unwanted children. They seem to pretend that the mothers will automatically
start to love and want the infant in time. I'm sure it does happen in some
cases but mostly the unloved child is bitterly resented if kept. If given
away for adoption it has a slim chance unless it's healthy and WHITE. Look
at the emotional problems these unwanted and unloved kids have. The
anti-choicers refuse to deal with these sad facts.
But keep goading women into popping out babies. I'm sure that will make
for a lovely society FILLED with well adjusted children.
## Just look at all the malcontents, soulless reprobates, sociopaths,
murderers and other losers out there. They didn't come from loving 2 parent
homes where there was enough money to be comfortable. From families that
wanted and loved them. It's a known fact almost all criminals and social
misfits come from broken homes, dysfunctional homes, were
unplanned/unwanted, were raised on welfare, were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways..... do we need a few million more added yearly to those
we already have to deal with?
--
FP......
Wise men stare at the unknown, and boldly asks, WHY?
Others... fall on their hands and knees, and start mumbling...
(God did it! God did it!)
~ Thus Spake God's Creator ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~><> ><>
Do they also warn women of the dangers of term pregnancy and
birth?.......like:
http://www.indiaparenting.com/pregnancy/data/preg16_00.shtml
http://www.freeminds.org/history/part1.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steenkin Man" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 06:23:53 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 01:45:25 -0500, "Flower Power"
<SaveTheWhales@thisNG.edu> wrote:
It's a known fact almost all criminals and social
misfits come from broken homes, dysfunctional homes, were
unplanned/unwanted, were raised on welfare, were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways.....
Close, but no cupie doll.
It's known that most criminals were raised without their biological
father present. The rest of what you said is just noise.
Remind me, which one of these kids is yours?
http://urlcut.com/flowerpower
--
num tibi mentireris?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 04:40:47 PM |
|
|
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2jt7ipF15cd9tU2@uni-berlin.de...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 01:45:25 -0500, "Flower Power"
<SaveTheWhales@thisNG.edu> wrote:
It's a known fact almost all criminals and social
misfits come from broken homes, dysfunctional homes, were
unplanned/unwanted, were raised on welfare, were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways.....
Close, but no cupie doll.
It's known that most criminals were raised without their biological
father present. The rest of what you said is just noise.
========================
Lets repeat this one more time. It's a known fact almost all criminals and
social
misfits come from broken homes (NO FATHER PRESENT), dysfunctional homes
(FATHERS BEAT THE MOTHER, DRANK, ETC.), were *unplanned/unwanted,* were
raised on welfare (POOR, SHABBY & HUNGRY), were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways.....
What you claim is pure *****.
--
Flower Power.......
ANTI-Feminist definition: "Sick abusive controlling men" -->
adj. 1. A man who consistently supports
UNequal legal rights while opposing feminine equality.
2. Someone losing a debate with a feminist.
3. A woman who refuses to kowtow to ANTI-feminist propaganda.
Usually used as an ad-homonym attack because he has no reply (like Bob).
Translation: "You're wrong, but won't admit it."
Synonyms: terribly confused, defective brain, take the IQ-test, morons,
taking meds,
seek professional help, had one too many hits of crack, etc.
===============================================
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 05:43:36 PM |
|
|
Flower Power wrote:
"Steenkin Man" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:2jt7ipF15cd9tU2@uni-berlin.de...
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 01:45:25 -0500, "Flower Power"
<SaveTheWhales@thisNG.edu> wrote:
It's a known fact almost all criminals and social
misfits come from broken homes, dysfunctional homes, were
unplanned/unwanted, were raised on welfare, were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways.....
Close, but no cupie doll.
It's known that most criminals were raised without their biological
father present. The rest of what you said is just noise.
========================
Lets repeat this one more time. It's a known fact almost all criminals and
social
misfits come from broken homes (NO FATHER PRESENT), dysfunctional homes
(FATHERS BEAT THE MOTHER, DRANK, ETC.), were *unplanned/unwanted,* were
raised on welfare (POOR, SHABBY & HUNGRY), were resented, neglected and
abused in many ways.....
What you claim is pure *****.
You got that screwed up again. Must be a word processing error:
It's a known fact almost all criminals and social misfits come from
broken homes (NO BIOLOGICAL FATHER PRESENT), dysfunctional homes
(MOTHERS BEAT THE KIDS, DRANK, ETC.), were *unplanned/unwanted (*****
MOTHER GOT KNOCKED UP) ,* were raised on welfare (POOR, SHABBY &
HUNGRY), were resented, neglected and abused in many ways.....
There, it's all fixed.
Bob
--
When did we divide into sides?
"As president, I will put American government and our legal system back
on the side of women." John Kerry, misandrist Democratic candidate for
President. http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/women/
[Bob does not advocate any illegal, seditious, or immoral acts. All
posts are for discussion, rhetorical, or humorous purposes only.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Flower Power" |
|
| Title: Re: He broke the bond - go back to the old days |
23 Jun 2004 09:21:20 PM |
|
|
"Bob" <boby23456@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:40DA0798.1080608@hotmail.com...
It's a known fact almost all criminals and social misfits come from
broken homes (NO BIOLOGICAL FATHER PRESENT
** Because the women didn't abort when the useless guy ran off.....
), dysfunctional homes
(MOTHERS BEAT THE KIDS, DRANK, ETC.),
** Right. This happens when UNWANTED kids are born to an unfit women. Let
them abort if they want - why do you try to stop them?
were *unplanned/unwanted (*****
MOTHER GOT KNOCKED UP
** Yes, tell them they're SLUTS so therefore must PAY, PAY, PAY for their
sluttery by having and raising the unwanted fetus. Tell them abortion is a
sin and they're sluts - and their unwanted child must pay.
) ,* were raised on welfare (POOR, SHABBY &
HUNGRY), were resented, neglected and abused in many ways.....
There, it's all fixed.
** Right. Let them abort the unwanted fetus rather them coerce them to
give birth to an unwanted child. A child that will have little chance of
success in life with a "drunken welfare *****" (quoting you here) for a
mother - right?
See how easy that was for you to understand. ;-)
--
Flower Power...
pro-choice (pr-chois)
adj.
Favoring or supporting the legal right of women and girls to choose
whether or not to continue a pregnancy to term.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Pro-Choice
~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~<~~~{@ ~~~<~~~{@
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking,
which leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy."
-- Robert Anton Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
