| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
19 Nov 2005 09:26:19 PM |
| Object: |
Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
Secrets
of the
Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
The doctor walked into the lab and set a steel pan on the table. "Got you
some good specimens," he said. "Twins." The technician looked down at a pair
of perfectly formed 24-week-old fetuses moving and gasping for air. Except
for a few nicks from the surgical tongs that had pulled them out, they
seemed uninjured. "There's something wrong here," the technician stammered.
"They are moving. I don't do this. That's not in my contract." She watched
the doctor take a bottle of sterile water and fill the pan until the water
ran up over the babies' mouths and noses. Then she left the room. "I would
not watch those fetuses moving," she recalls. "That's when I decided it was
wrong."
The technician uses the pseudonym "Kelly." She has her back to the camera,
she wears a wig. and her voice is electronically modified because she says
she fears for her life. Until a few months ago Kelly worked for a Maryland
company called the Anatomic Gift Foundation. Her job was to procure fetal
tissue for research. She worked at a Planned Parenthood clinic that was also
a member of the National Abortion Federation. Her interview appears on the
May issue of "Life Talk" video magazine-the first of a monthly series of
videos released by Life Dynamics Inc., a renegade pro-life group based in
Denton. Texas, that admits to having spies work in abortion clinics to
uncover their most closely guarded secrets.
This week the group is releasing the documentary evidence it has gathered
since Kelly approached them nearly two years ago. Life Dynamics has dozens
of order forms from researchers requesting fetal parts, price lists for
fetal organs and tissue, and donation consent forms for women undergoing
abortion. It offers a gruesome glimpse at a vast trade in human tissue from
babies that are aborted, and sometimes vivisected, to satiate the exploding
multibillion-dollar biotechnology industry.
The traffic in tissue flows worldwide into respected tax-funded
laboratories, including Canadian ones. The research itself is usually for
laudable goals, from helping prenatal infants survive to curing Parkinson's
disease. But the trade, worth billions. raises myriad ethical questions: Are
some humans being killed to benefit others? Are women being exploited to
support tissue collection? Who is profiting from the trade? And what are the
social implications of its existence?
Once the stuff of cheap science-fiction, human clones, artificial wombs and
human-animal cross-species are all now serious possibilities. Sexless
procreation is already a reality with in vitro fertilization. Selective
breeding of human beings is commonplace thanks to embryo screening and
"genetic terminations." And human- human brain cell transplants are
government-funded. All of these endeavours rely on aborted fetuses.
Scientists have used fetal tissue in research since at least the 1950s, says
Pittsburgh researcher Suzanne Rini, author of the 1995 book Beyond Abortion:
A Chronicle of Fetal Experimentation. Thirty years ago, as abortion laws
were relaxing and some second- and third-trimester abortions were performed
by hysterotomy (essentially a Caesarean section), experiments on live
fetuses were cutting-edge technology. Geoffrey Chamberlain received a
professional award for research (outlined in the March 1968 issue of The
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology) in which he took live aborted
fetuses, attached them to an artificial placenta, perfused them to see if he
could make them live, and then pulled the plug on them. No one objected.
It was shortly after that article, Mrs. Rini notes, that the Cambridge
Evening Post featured a story on Lawrence Lawn, a physician who did manage
to provoke controversy when it was learned that he was procuring live
fetuses from a private abortion clinic. "We are simply allowing something
which is destined for the incinerator to benefit mankind," he said, obliging
a photographer with a picture of himself standing next to a dying fetus
suspended in a perfusion tank. Yet even Dr. Lawn believed there were limits.
"Of course we would not dream of experimenting with a viable child. We would
not consider that to be right."
With the decriminalization of abortion in the 1970s, fetal research became,
in the words one ethicist, a "golden opportunity for researchers. The public
almost never heard about fetal experimentation. But by the 1980s, some of
the most macabre research was being publicly funded. Mrs. Rini catalogues
experiments ranging from the perfusion of impaled beating fetal hearts with
adrenaline and caffeine to eye-tissue transplants and skin grafting. Dr.
Bernard Gondos of the University of Connecticut at Farmington, whose
research on fetal gonads described most of his specimens as "previable
dead," lamented having to import fetuses from outside the United States. Dr.
Karen Holbrook of the University of Washington received a $259.740 grant in
1984-85 for her work on "Fetal Skin Biology" using first-, second- and third
trimester human fetuses. She told Mrs. Rini: "Hopefully they are not born
alive. It's better to avoid that. The skin is taken after fetal demise."
Asked it the skin diseases she was trying to diagnose prenatally were fatal,
Dr. Holbrook replied, "No, but they ruin your life."
By the 1980s transplants had become entrenched, and fetal tissue, which
grows quickly and is less likely to trigger an immune reaction in a host,
became even more coveted. Fetal tissue transplants became part of efforts to
treat diabetes, Huntington's disease, blindness, spinal cord injury,
Parkinson's disease, leukemia and more. In 1988, U.S. president George Bush
banned federal funding of fetal human-to-human transplants. This move was
widely mistaken for a ban on all fetal tissue research; in fact, most such
research carried on unimpeded.
In any case, Bill Clinton's first official act as president in 1993 was to
strike down the ban. People were demanding to be "treated" with fetuses.
California lawyer Joan Samuelson had founded the Parkinson Action Network
(PAN) in 1990 to lobby for an end to the moratorium. "Will lifting the ban
save us in time?" she asked when it was abolished, and she began lobbying
for an accelerated grant review process for fetal-tissue transplant
research.
Transplants of brain tissue from young fetuses (usually aborted at less than
10 weeks) into Parkinson's sufferers have attracted the most public
attention to fetal tissue research. In 1990 the results of Olle Lindvall's
research team's transplants into four Swedish patients were hailed as
"promising" because one recipient appeared to have benefited remarkably. The
other patients were not monitored long enough to determine the grafts'
effects.
Neuroscientists presenting findings at the XIII International Congress on
Parkinson's Disease in Vancouver last month sounded optimistic, but their
data was not the knockout blow Parkinson's researchers have been hoping for.
Thomas Freeman of the University of South Florida reported that 360 patients
have received human tissue transplants in 17 centres worldwide to date. But
the variables researchers use to evaluate success differ so widely as to be
incomparable, so he focused on the results of his own "open trial" on six
patients, which he admitted was open to placebo effects and observer bias.
The only fetal tissue transplant study to be performed with a control group
so far was published in April by Curt Freed of the University of Colorado
and Stanley Fahn of Columbia Presbyterian. They followed two sets of
patients: those who actually received neural fetal cells and those who had
their heads opened for a sham surgery in an attempt to eliminate the placebo
effect. Although the Medical Post headlined the research story "Parkinson's
progress," and the New York Times proclaimed, "Hints of success in fetal
cell transplants," Dr. Paul Ranalli, a professor of neurology at the
University of Toronto, calls the research "hugely unimpressive." The only
benefits were bestowed on patients under age 60, he notes, and the vast
majority of Parkinson's patients are senior citizens. Even in those cases,
he adds, "a magnifying glass is required to discern any functional benefit."
What is more, Dr. Fahn told the Vancouver congress that he was disturbed by
an unexpected outcome of the trial: facial "runaway dyskinesias"
(involuntary muscle movements) which were particularly younger patients.
Other researchers have noted similar findings, says Dr. Freeman. As with
drugs, there could be a dose at which fetal cells "may be harmful," he said.
Procedures on more Parkinson's patients will help clarify these findings.
Dr. Freeman told the attendees that Canada is leading the way in these
experiments, primarily at the lab of Dr. Ivar Mendez at Dalhousie University
in Halifax. Dr. Mendez. who declined an interview last week, received a
$90,042 grant from the Medical Research Council of Canada for 1999-2000. His
transplant data is anticipated soon.
At the advent of the new millennium it is "pleuripotent" embryonic stem
cells that are at the forefront of fetal tissue research. Ethicists are
already distinguishing between using human embryos "left over" from in vitro
fertilization and humans created specifically for research. "Farmed" embryos
are capable of differentiating into many types of tissue and are being
hailed as new sources for whole organs for donation, and for human clones.
As bright as all the research may sound, others discern a darker side. There
is no law on fetal tissue collection-only guidelines. Researchers are free
to hold to them or ignore them. And where laws do exist-such as the ones
against infanticide and the sale of human tissue-there are ways around them,
and they are sometimes broken outright.
Kelly explains that the Planned Parenthood abortion clinic she was working
in received a service fee from the Anatomic Gift Foundation for its tissue
"donations." "We were never employees of the abortion clinic," she explains.
"We would have a contract with an abortion clinic that would allow us to go
in...[to] procure fetal tissue for research. We would get a generated list
each day to tell us what tissue researchers, pharmaceuticals and
universities were looking for. Then we would go and look at the particular
patient charts-we had to screen out anyone who had STDs or fetal anomalies.
These had to be the most perfect specimens we could give these researchers
for the best value that we could sell for." Probably only 10% of fetuses
were ruled out for anomalies, she adds. The rest were "healthy donors."
Fetuses ranged in age from seven weeks to 30 weeks and beyond. Typically
Kelly harvested tissue from 30 to 40 "late" fetuses each week. "We were
taking eyes, livers, brains, thymuses, and especially cardiac blood.even
blood from the limbs that we would get from the veins," she says.
Researchers used their own shipping firms-"UPS, FedEx or a special courier,"
she adds. "We would take it in a box and put it on as regular cargo.
Sometimes it would be an intact fetus or it might be a batch of eyes or 50
to 40 livers going out that day, or thymuses. Whatever it was, there were
mass quantities of it going out." To support this claim, Life Dynamics
provides copies of dozens of order forms for fetal parts from North American
researchers. They contain names of researchers, universities and
pharmaceutical companies, day and evening telephone numbers, courier account
numbers, the type of tissue requested, preferred gestational age of the
fetus, and other details.
A sample, from a scientist studying the "Biochemical Characterization of
human type X Collagen," requests "Whole intact leg, include entire hip
joint, 22-24 weeks gest." The extractor is directed to "dissect by cutting
through symphasis pubis and include whole Illium [hip joint]. To be removed
from fetal cadaver within 10 minutes."
One order form carries the name of the University of British Columbia's Dr.
Vanugram Venkatesh alongside a request for an international FedEx shipment
of "16-24 week lungs (trachea not required)" to study "molecular mechanisms
of fluid reabsorption in human fetal lung." "Significance: Respiratory
Distress Syndrome...a major cause of death in premature infants." The memo
adds: "Bill our account."
Contacted last week at his Vancouver office. Dr. Vankatesh said that he did
do research on immature lungs two years ago with a Medical Research Council
grant, at the B.C. Children's Hospital. But he added, "I don't do that
anymore," Asked if he used human tissue, he replied. "Yeah." then changed
his mind. "Well, we were doing genetics mainly...Where are you getting your
information? We were using cell lines." Asked if he had ever ordered fetal
lungs from the U.S., he said, "I have to go," and hung up abruptly.
On their video, Life Dynamics asks Kelly if the abortionist at the clinic
ever deliberately altered procedure to procure tissue. "Yes," she replies.
"All the limbs, the arms, the head, the chest cavity were never invaded.
They were all completely intact, Sometimes, the fetus appeared to be dead,
but when you'd open up the chest cavity you'd see the heart beating."
The clinic used the partial-birth abortion technique for later pregnancies:
the doctor grasps hold of a fetus leg with tongs and pulls the entire baby,
except for the head, feet-first and face down out of the mother. Then he
punctures the base of the skull with scissors, inserts a cannula to suck out
the brain, and slides the head out. It is a three-day procedure requiring
that women be inserted with laminaria, seaweed cervix dilators, beforehand.
Were women ever coerced into the procedure? Kelly says that sometimes,
before the final surgery, on the third day "you could blatantly hear them in
the halls saying they wanted to change their minds." But they were sedated,
in what Kelly calls a "Nyquil nap," which made it difficult to protest.
Sometimes the IV was turned up; in any case, the woman always had the
abortion.
Routinely, the women would go into labour before the final surgery. "They
were coming out alive," says Kelly. Aside from the incident with the twins,
she says, there were three to four live births in a typical two-week period.
"The doctor would either break the neck or take a pair of tongs and
basically beat the fetus until it was dead."
As incredible as Kelly's testimony seems, other sources corroborate it. Eric
Harrah worked in the abortion industry for 11 years, leaving it 18 months
ago. He managed and owned or partially owned 26 American abortion clinics.
Live births, he tells Life Dynamics, were the industry's "dirty little
secret." "It was always very disturbing, so the doctor would try to conceal
it from the rest of the staff," he says, but one incident is hard for him to
forget.
The woman in question was 26 weeks pregnant. She had laminaria inserted,
signed paperwork agreeing not to call anyone but the clinic if she went into
labour, and was sent to a motel up the road to await her procedure the next
day. She was brought to the clinic in the middle of the night, carrying her
fetus in a white cotton hotel towel.
"I was in the scrub room when I saw the towel move," says Mr. Harrah. "A
nurse said, 'Eric, you're just tired. It's three in the morning.' Then we
both looked and a little baby's arm raised up out of the towel and was
moving like a newborn baby. I screamed and ran out. The doctor came in and
closed the door and when we went back in to process the baby out of the
clinic into the lab, [the baby] had a puncture wound in his chest."
Evidence for the demand for late-term fetal tissue can be corroborated apart
from Life Dynamics. The National Institutes for Health operate a Laboratory
for Embryology at the university of Washington in Seattle that runs a 24
hour collection service at abortion clinics. An advertisement in the March
1994 NIH Guide still appears on the Internet, offering to "supply tissue
from normal or abnormal embryos and fetuses of desired gestational ages
between 40 days and term. Specimens are obtained within minutes of
passage...and immediately processed according to the requirements of individ
ual investigators...Specimens are shipped by overnight express."
Mark Crutcher, president of Life Dynamics, is now convinced that the
research demand for intact late-term fetal organs is the hidden truth behind
the partial-birth abortion controversy. In state after state this year,
partial-birth abortion bans written into state laws by legislatures have
been vehemently opposed by pro-choice groups and overturned by courts. "Why
do pro-aborts fight so hard to keep it?" asks Mr. Crutcher. "All it says is
you can't kill them by this method. It doesn't prevent them from getting any
other kind of abortion. This is about maximizing profits. First, you sell
the woman an abortion. Then you turn around and sell the dead baby you take
out of her. But you have to take it out whole or you don't have anything to
sell."
"It has nothing to do with the woman's right to choose or with protecting
the sanctity of the right of abortion," agrees Mr. Harrah. "It has
everything to do with protecting the sanctity of the fullness of the
abortionists wallet. This is the only type of abortion procedure that
doesn't cost them to get rid of the dead baby. They actually make money."
Apart from abortionists and the wholesalers who traffic in aborted baby
parts (see story, page 34), who stands to profit from this fetal research?
Of the pharmaceutical companies sponsoring it, Mr. Crutcher says: "I don't
think there's one that's not involved." He surmises they are investing in
the future. Baby boomers are aging, and about to start falling apart. A
practical treatment for Parkinson's would be lucrative. "Just look at
Viagra," says Mr. Crutcher. (In Canada alone, the little blue impotence pill
sold 20,600 prescriptions worth $1.55 million in its first week on the
market). "That's just a hint of the fortunes awaiting drug manufacturers
pandering to boomers' quest for youth. They're the wealthiest generation in
the history of the world. And also the most narcissistic. They want to live
forever." And fetuses are the new human scrap heap. Says Mr. Crutcher:
"We're going to kill the very young to treat the very old."
Perhaps, but Mrs. Rini offers hope of a wrinkle in the plan. "Does the
fetus' aliveness, which is coveted by researchers, and ability to sponsor
life for others, ironically but actually prove the fetus' own life?" she
writes. She cites ethicist Paul Ramsey: "Far from abortion settling the
question of fetal research, it could be that sober reflection on the use of
the human fetus in research could unsettle the abortion issue."
Steven Bamforth is a geneticist who operates a fetal tissue repository at
the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton. He and his researchers have
the difficult task of sorting through 10- to 12-week fetal remains from
abortion clinics in Edmonton and Winnipeg, dissecting recognizable body
parts for hearts and eyes. extracting messenger ribonucleic acid and
shipping it to other geneticists at the Universities of Toronto and British
Columbia. "The humanity is always before us," Dr. Bamforth told this
magazine last year. "If society said this research is not acceptable, of
course, we would immediately desist. It's not something that I do
happily." .
.
|
|
| User: "Paul Duca" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
20 Nov 2005 09:13:38 AM |
|
|
Or...What J Young Thinks About So He Can Pleasure His Mother
Paul
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Yournameheres personal Cthulhu" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the "Dead-Baby Industry" industry |
20 Nov 2005 01:04:39 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> suddenly spluttered:
Secrets
of the
"Dead-Baby Industry" industry.
Lies, damned lies and:
http://www.operationrescue.org/index.php
Also, google "0903961032".
This book was withdrawn from publication in 1977 because it was shown
to be full of lies, and the authors were very nearly sued for libel.
Nonetheless, the anti-abortion lobby still quote extensively from it
and keep it in their libraries.
------------------------------------------------
Conflict over the exact will/purpose/nature of God cannot ever be
resolved, since there are no facts to go on.
D Silverman FLAHN, SMLAHN
AA #2208
.
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the "Dead-Baby Industry" industry |
20 Nov 2005 02:02:25 PM |
|
|
"<Yournamehere>'s personal Cthulhu" <yournamehere@martyrdom.org> wrote in
message news:sdg1o1dc2704er4ulm1ck66m585h6bjlh1@4ax.com...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> suddenly spluttered:
Secretsof the "Dead-Baby Industry" industry.
Lies, damned lies and:
http://www.operationrescue.org/index.php
Also, google "0903961032".
This book was withdrawn from publication in 1977 because it was shown
to be full of lies, and the authors were very nearly sued for libel.
Nonetheless, the anti-abortion lobby still quote extensively from it
and keep it in their libraries.
I'm sure "J" will make note of that.
Certainly, he wouldn't want his credibility to come into question?
<irony meter pegged>
LC~ As if...
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different
results."~ Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "grinder" |
|
| Title: B.S. |
20 Nov 2005 10:21:41 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets
of the
Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
Poor Celeste. I can only imagine her wide-eyed sitting in front of her
keyboard scaring the wits out of herself as she writes this little essay.
Does she want to be the next Stephen King?
No. She gets her kicks by scaring the weak minded.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Friendly Fire" |
|
| Title: Re: B.S. |
20 Nov 2005 11:04:29 AM |
|
|
"grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid> wrote in message
news:po1gf.1577$rM2.656@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets
of the
Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces
to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
Poor Celeste. I can only imagine her wide-eyed sitting in front of her
keyboard scaring the wits out of herself as she writes this little essay.
Does she want to be the next Stephen King?
No. She gets her kicks by scaring the weak minded.
Frogs are dissected in biology classes around the Planet. Are you Pugs
against that?
Naw, it's some rightwinged "Christian" warmongering child molesting thing.
Anyone who listens to these Fundies has a hole in his head.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: B.S. |
20 Nov 2005 04:34:41 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 17:04:29 GMT, "Friendly Fire" <nu@son.net> wrote:
"grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid> wrote in message
news:po1gf.1577$rM2.656@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets
of the
Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces
to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
Poor Celeste. I can only imagine her wide-eyed sitting in front of her
keyboard scaring the wits out of herself as she writes this little essay.
Does she want to be the next Stephen King?
No. She gets her kicks by scaring the weak minded.
Frogs are dissected in biology classes around the Planet. Are you Pugs
against that?
Naw, it's some rightwinged "Christian" warmongering child molesting thing.
Anyone who listens to these Fundies has a hole in his head.
Should be a medication for that. (Or, maybe, withdrawal from existing
meds?)
TheRain
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
19 Nov 2005 09:39:13 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets
of the
Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
The doctor walked into the lab and set a steel pan on the table. "Got you
some good specimens," he said. "Twins." The technician looked down at a
pair
of perfectly formed 24-week-old fetuses moving and gasping for air. Except
for a few nicks from the surgical tongs that had pulled them out, they
seemed uninjured. "There's something wrong here," the technician
stammered.
"They are moving. I don't do this. That's not in my contract." She watched
the doctor take a bottle of sterile water and fill the pan until the water
ran up over the babies' mouths and noses. Then she left the room. "I would
not watch those fetuses moving," she recalls. "That's when I decided it
was
wrong."
These fetuses are those people that Sebree and so many Pro-Choicers want to
deny personhood even though the Constitution does not grant that
classification to unborn persons or persons extracted from the uteruses of
women.
They act as if the Constitution must state explicitly that human fetuses are
persons in order for living human beings in utero or those that are
extracted from the uteruses of women to be recognized as persons.
They rely on Pro-Choice laws which were drafted after Roe V Wade and without
the consent of the people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
19 Nov 2005 10:55:33 PM |
|
|
(Wentzky's format atrocities repaired)
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
The doctor walked into the lab and set a steel pan on the table. "Got you
some good specimens," he said. "Twins." The technician looked down at a
pair of perfectly formed 24-week-old fetuses moving and gasping for
air. Except for a few nicks from the surgical tongs that had pulled them
out, they seemed uninjured. "There's something wrong here," the technician
stammered.
"They are moving. I don't do this. That's not in my contract." She watched
the doctor take a bottle of sterile water and fill the pan until the water
ran up over the babies' mouths and noses. Then she left the room. "I would
not watch those fetuses moving," she recalls. "That's when I decided it was
wrong."
These fetuses are those people that Sebree and so many Pro-Choicers want to
deny personhood even though the Constitution does not grant that
classification to unborn persons or persons extracted from the uteruses of
women.
It states that you have to be born to be a citizen, dumbass...and fetuses gain
that distinction, in this country, once they're born.
They act as if the Constitution must state explicitly that human fetuses are
persons in order for living human beings in utero or those that are
extracted from the uteruses of women to be recognized as persons.
They rely on Pro-Choice laws which were drafted after Roe V Wade and without
the consent of the people.
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
You really need to be committed to the nearest state nuthatch to you in South
Carolina, if you really believe that.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
20 Nov 2005 08:48:05 AM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkwtj33ol6.fsf@eris.io.com...
(Wentzky's format atrocities repaired)
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces
to
fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
The doctor walked into the lab and set a steel pan on the table. "Got
you
some good specimens," he said. "Twins." The technician looked down at a
pair of perfectly formed 24-week-old fetuses moving and gasping for
air. Except for a few nicks from the surgical tongs that had pulled them
out, they seemed uninjured. "There's something wrong here," the
technician
stammered.
"They are moving. I don't do this. That's not in my contract." She
watched
the doctor take a bottle of sterile water and fill the pan until the
water
ran up over the babies' mouths and noses. Then she left the room. "I
would
not watch those fetuses moving," she recalls. "That's when I decided it
was
wrong."
These fetuses are those people that Sebree and so many Pro-Choicers want
to
deny personhood even though the Constitution does not grant that
classification to unborn persons or persons extracted from the uteruses of
women.
It states that you have to be born to be a citizen, dumbass...and fetuses
gain
that distinction, in this country, once they're born.
Why do you think that citizen and person are identical terms?
They act as if the Constitution must state explicitly that human fetuses
are
persons in order for living human beings in utero or those that are
extracted from the uteruses of women to be recognized as persons.
They rely on Pro-Choice laws which were drafted after Roe V Wade and
without
the consent of the people.
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
You really need to be committed to the nearest state nuthatch to you in
South
Carolina, if you really believe that.
You need to read for comprehension and stop acting like someone who needs to
be committed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry |
20 Nov 2005 02:30:53 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkwtj33ol6.fsf@eris.io.com...
(Wentzky's format atrocities repaired)
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:MdudnZqK86P0cOLeRVn-sw@giganews.com...
Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry
Aborted fetuses are being dissected alive, harvested and sold in pieces
to fuel a vast research enterprise
By CELESTE MCGOVERN
The doctor walked into the lab and set a steel pan on the table. "Got you
some good specimens," he said. "Twins." The technician looked down at a
pair of perfectly formed 24-week-old fetuses moving and gasping for
air. Except for a few nicks from the surgical tongs that had pulled them
out, they seemed uninjured. "There's something wrong here," the
technician stammered.
"They are moving. I don't do this. That's not in my contract." She
watched the doctor take a bottle of sterile water and fill the pan until
the water ran up over the babies' mouths and noses. Then she left the
room. "I would not watch those fetuses moving," she recalls. "That's when
I decided it was wrong."
These fetuses are those people that Sebree and so many Pro-Choicers want to
deny personhood even though the Constitution does not grant that
classification to unborn persons or persons extracted from the uteruses of
women.
It states that you have to be born to be a citizen, dumbass...and fetuses
gain that distinction, in this country, once they're born.
Why do you think that citizen and person are identical terms?
I don't. You're the crackhead who refuses to deal with that inconvenient
reality.
They act as if the Constitution must state explicitly that human fetuses
are persons in order for living human beings in utero or those that are
extracted from the uteruses of women to be recognized as persons. They
rely on Pro-Choice laws which were drafted after Roe V Wade and without the
consent of the people.
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
It doesn't mention fetuses at all. Put the crack pipe down, for once.
You really need to be committed to the nearest state nuthatch to you in
South Carolina, if you really believe that.
You need to read for comprehension and stop acting like someone who needs to
be committed.
I've been reading for comprehension since before you were hatched. Thanks for
continuing to show what a babbling idiot you are, though...ain't that First
Amendment the cat's meow? No wonder Governor Sanford isn't likely to ever
acknowledge he was even near your class...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 04:47:22 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 04:49:24 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 10:31:21 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 08:47:31 AM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 10:21:41 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron. Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:08:43 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0e6x97u.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron.
But there is nothing that says you must be born to be a person.
Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Why?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:45:56 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0e6x97u.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron.
But there is nothing that says you must be born to be a person.
There's a basic legal tenet that specifies only persons can be
citizens...which means you're spinning your wheels, as usual.
Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Why?
Maybe you'd get some time in a cell for annoying government agencies...even
you might learn something.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:52:02 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk1x19x2jf.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0e6x97u.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron.
But there is nothing that says you must be born to be a person.
There's a basic legal tenet that specifies only persons can be
citizens...which means you're spinning your wheels, as usual.
Citizenship is a status of persons which is granted to those born or
naturalized here.
It does nothing to say a person is NOT a person if a person is NOT a citizen
here.
Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Why?
Maybe you'd get some time in a cell for annoying government
agencies...even
you might learn something.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 01:13:00 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk1x19x2jf.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szku0e6x97u.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
[...]
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron.
But there is nothing that says you must be born to be a person.
There's a basic legal tenet that specifies only persons can be
citizens...which means you're spinning your wheels, as usual.
Citizenship is a status of persons which is granted to those born or
naturalized here. It does nothing to say a person is NOT a person if a
person is NOT a citizen here.
....which does nothing to make you understand that trying to throw in more non
sequiturs doesn't make you look like anything but even more of a whackjob.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 10:33:02 AM |
|
|
The Chief Instigator wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron. Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Try taking a deduction on you income tax for a fetus :)
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 11:35:03 AM |
|
|
Mimi Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> writes:
The Chief Instigator wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron. Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Try taking a deduction on you income tax for a fetus :)
Our daughter could have done that, since April 15 came around when she was
pregnant with our first grandchild...;-)
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:09:13 PM |
|
|
The Chief Instigator wrote:
Mimi Cohen <mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net> writes:
The Chief Instigator wrote:
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkacfyipuu.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlqudq$t0v$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses - since they haven't been born.
You missed again.
Quit projecting your defects on the rest of us.
Born is only a qualification for citizenship.
Read the amendment.
You have to be born to be a citizen, moron. Try getting an SSN for a fetus
and see how much you're laughed at.
Try taking a deduction on you income tax for a fetus :)
Our daughter could have done that, since April 15 came around when she was
pregnant with our first grandchild...;-)
:)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 07:15:34 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 07:59:48 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlr73m$s63$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
Really? The 14th Amendment was AFTER RvW?
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
20 Nov 2005 10:13:40 PM |
|
|
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA."
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 08:46:44 AM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlrhhk$v67$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA."
It says persons, dumbass.
Human fetuses are persons.
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
You need it to say that?
Are you really that stupid?
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 10:19:28 AM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlrhhk$v67$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA."
It says persons, dumbass.
You got one right, but then, even the blind hog finds an acorn, sooner or
later.
Human fetuses are persons.
That's not how the law sees it. Oops!
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
You need it to say that? Are you really that stupid?
You've already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that you're stupid and
insane. You don't have to keep proving it every time you post.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:07:54 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szky83ix9bj.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlrhhk$v67$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the
USA."
It says persons, dumbass.
You got one right, but then, even the blind hog finds an acorn, sooner or
later.
Human fetuses are persons.
That's not how the law sees it.
What law?
The Constitution doesn't see human fetuses as non-persons.
Oops!
Oops!
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
You need it to say that? Are you really that stupid?
You've already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that you're stupid
and
insane. You don't have to keep proving it every time you post.
You think cats are persons, too, because the Constitution does not mention
them?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Chief Instigator" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:43:34 PM |
|
|
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szky83ix9bj.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlrhhk$v67$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the
USA."
It says persons, dumbass.
You got one right, but then, even the blind hog finds an acorn, sooner or
later.
Human fetuses are persons.
That's not how the law sees it.
What law? The Constitution doesn't see human fetuses as non-persons.
It doesn't see them as persons, either...since you have to be born to attain
personhood, and Amendment XIV specifies birth as a requirement for
citizenship.
Oops!
Oops!
That's the story of your last fifteen years, indeed.
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
You need it to say that? Are you really that stupid?
You've already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that you're stupid
and insane. You don't have to keep proving it every time you post.
You think cats are persons, too, because the Constitution does not mention
them?
No, because I'm not mentally ill, like you are. QED.
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
| User: "Johnny" |
|
| Title: Re: Secrets of the Dead-Baby Industry (Pro-liar insanity) |
21 Nov 2005 12:50:44 PM |
|
|
--
X-No-archive: yes
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szk64qlx2nd.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"The Chief Instigator" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
news:szky83ix9bj.fsf@eris.io.com...
"Johnny" <wxpprofessional@msn.com> writes:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:dlrhhk$v67$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
Johnny <wxpprofessional@msn.com> wrote:
The 14th Amendment does not deny personhood to human fetuses.
The 14th amendment does not deny personhood to cats.
Sure it does.
Where?
You didn't answer that question.
Cats aren't persons.
Neither are fetuses. In fact, the US Constitution treat
fetuses and cats exactly the same.
Wrong again. Cats are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Neither are fetuses.
It doesn't say "cats, born or naturalized" are citizens on the USA.
"It doesn't say "[fetuses], born or naturalized" are citizens on the
USA."
It says persons, dumbass.
You got one right, but then, even the blind hog finds an acorn, sooner
or
later.
Human fetuses are persons.
That's not how the law sees it.
What law? The Constitution doesn't see human fetuses as non-persons.
It doesn't see them as persons, either...since you have to be born to
attain
personhood,
BZZZZZZ!
You missed the Daily Double, again.
Why can't you remember the word "citizen'?
and Amendment XIV specifies birth as a requirement for
citizenship.
Which is not personhood.
It is Citizenship.
Why are you so unable to grasp the difference?
Oops!
Oops!
That's the story of your last fifteen years, indeed.
And, it doesn't say that persons who are not born are not persons.
And it doesn't say that cats are not persons.
You need it to say that? Are you really that stupid?
You've already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that you're
stupid
and insane. You don't have to keep proving it every time you post.
You think cats are persons, too, because the Constitution does not mention
them?
No, because I'm not mentally ill, like you are. QED.
You still think the Constitution says all persons born or naturalized are
persons?
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (patrick@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2005-06 Houston Aeros)
LAST GAME: Toronto 4, Houston 2 (November 19)
NEXT GAME: Friday, November 25 vs. Milwaukee, 7:35
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
