-->
@mustardness
Who are you to determine what common sense is? You can't just claim your ideology is common sense and then proceed to call people chimpanzees because they have a different ideology.
New York legalizes infanticide
Posts
Total:
291
-->
@Mharman
As is the current law. Just because the law is like that doesn't mean the issue should be like that. The current abortion laws are immoral.
Bingo. Social conservatives absolutely love to hide behind "the law" when something unpleasant "has to be done" that they agree with, like separating children from their parents and deporting people into war zones. Eh, I guess there's nothing we can do since you know, "it's the law"...
Now you just need to force everyone who misses a period to get a "conception certificate". Problem solved 4 evar.
Also, sperm cells are not life, they don't have a complete genome. It is when the sperm joins the egg that it becomes life.
If you can tell the difference between a living sperm and a dead sperm, then the sperm that is not dead is de facto alive. [LINK]
If you can tell the difference between a living brain cell and a dead brain cell, then the brain cell that is not dead is de facto alive.
-->
@Mharman
Who are you to determine what common sense is? You can't just claim your ideology is common sense and then proceed to call people chimpanzees because they have a different ideology.
Quit your whining you precious delicate free-speech loving snowflake.
-->
@Mharman
Well, I guess "personal attacks" are back on the table...This coming from the guy who can't even string together a coherent sentence.
-->
@3RU7AL
Bingo. Social conservatives absolutely love to hide behind "the law" when something unpleasant "has to be done" that they agree with, like separating children from their parents and deporting people into war zones. Eh, I guess there's nothing we can do since you know, "it's the law"...Now you just need to force everyone who misses a period to get a "conception certificate". Problem solved 4 evar.
Oh wow, a red herring.
If you can tell the difference between a living sperm and a dead sperm, then the sperm that is not dead is de facto alive.
Being alive does not make it "life" It is not a complete organism. It does not have a complete genome, it has a partial genome. Even prokaryotes have a complete set of DNA.
-->
@3RU7AL
This isn't whining. This is a legitimate complaint. It reveals how troubling his ideological narcissism is.
-->
@3RU7AL
He has attacked me twice before in this thread; I will fire back.
-->
@Mharman
Now you just need to force everyone who misses a period to get a "conception certificate". Problem solved 4 evar.Oh wow, a red herring.
It follows quite logically from "life begins at conception" - make it official.
If you can tell the difference between a living sperm and a dead sperm, then the sperm that is not dead is de facto alive.Being alive does not make it "life" It is not a complete organism. It does not have a complete genome, it has a partial genome. Even prokaryotes have a complete set of DNA.
If it can die, then it can be alive. What exactly are you trying to say, a sperm is some sort of tiny machine?
-->
@Mharman
He has attacked me twice before in this thread; I will fire back.
Do you believe that ad hominems are perfectly acceptable or invalid and off-topic?
-->
@Mharman
I see. It's only considered "whining" if someone doesn't like what you call them.This isn't whining. This is a legitimate complaint. It reveals how troubling his ideological narcissism is.
That actually makes perfect sense.
-->
@3RU7AL
You cite the fetus as an invader, however, the woman chose to have the fetus while having sex. You don't deport a guest if the guest will die outside. If she didn't want the baby, but still wanted sex, she could have bought an IUD beforehand and used it to prevent pregnancy.
-->
@3RU7AL
Gastric bypass is voluntary. It is an elective procedure. Yes, they remove part of their stomach because they don't want it. They remove it because it is causing unsightly weight gain. This type of surgery, like cosmetic surgery and other elective procedures removes tissue from a person voluntar
does the stomach die?
-->
@3RU7AL
If [social conservatives] want to offer lifetime ventilator or whatever to any child that is not viable on its own, let them pay for there choice to do so.Well stated.
by that logic no tax payer or insurance money should pay for a non medical reason abortion right?
-->
@3RU7AL
People who break the law are not worthy of the protections the law grants.By "bad people" do you mean "people not worthy of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?
-->
@Alec
You cite the fetus as an invader, however, the woman chose to have the fetus while having sex.
You can choose to have sex without choosing to bear a child.
In the same way, you can choose to allow a tourist into your country without granting them citizenship.
You don't deport a guest if the guest will die outside.
Whether or not a guest will die when they are deported is immaterial. Deportees often fear for their lives but this is not considered a reason to allow them to stay.
If she didn't want the baby, but still wanted sex, she could have bought an IUD beforehand and used it to prevent pregnancy.
If you want tourists but don't want them to become citizens, then you should attach ankle bracelets to them so they can be quickly and easily located and deported.
-->
@Greyparrot
By "bad people" do you mean "people not worthy of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?People who break the law are not worthy of the protections the law grants.
I see. Do you believe the law is infallible?
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
by that logic no tax payer or insurance money should pay for a non medical reason abortion right?
No, by that logic, if you want to keep embryos alive, you should invest in ectogenesis.
-->
@3RU7AL
by that logic no tax payer or insurance money should pay for a non medical reason abortion right?
No, by that logic, if you want to keep embryos alive, you should invest in ectogenesis.
I never have suggested they we should keep embryos alive.......but it should be both ways don't you think?
-->
@3RU7AL
It depends on the tone. The tone I typed it in was not whining. The tone I typed was rational. I'm done defending my honor to you. No offense, but it has begun to distract from the topic, which I'll admit was partially my fault.
-->
@3RU7AL
It follows quite logically from "life begins at conception" - make it official.
It was a red herring because it has nothing to do with the morality of abortion. Especially the first paragraph.
If it can die, then it can be alive. What exactly are you trying to say, a sperm is some sort of tiny machine?
It may be alive, but it isn't an independent being; it is merely part of a larger organism.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
by that logic no tax payer or insurance money should pay for a non medical reason abortion right?No, by that logic, if you want to keep embryos alive, you should invest in ectogenesis.I never have suggested they we should keep embryos alive.......but it should be both ways don't you think?
Please explain your reasoning.
-->
@3RU7AL
By "bad people" do you mean "people not worthy of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness"?People who break the law are not worthy of the protections the law grants.
I see. Do you believe the law is infallible?
Do you believe in anarchy?
There are ways to change laws, but people refuse to elect the kinds of Congresspeople that change laws.
-->
@Mharman
It follows quite logically from "life begins at conception" - make it official.It was a red herring because it has nothing to do with the morality of abortion. Especially the first paragraph.
It has everything to do with the morality of abortion. (IFF) "life begins at conception" (THEN) make it official.
If it can die, then it can be alive. What exactly are you trying to say, a sperm is some sort of tiny machine?It may be alive, but it isn't an independent being; it is merely part of a larger organism.
So, the question isn't so much "is an embryo alive" but rather, "is an embryo an independent organism".
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you believe in anarchy?
As one of your colleagues said recently, "Just because the law is like that doesn't mean the issue should be like that. The current abortion laws are immoral." [LINK]
There are ways to change laws, but people refuse to elect the kinds of Congresspeople that change laws.
What are you talking about. "Congresspeople" pass new laws every single year.
-->
@3RU7AL
It has everything to do with the morality of abortion. (IFF) "life begins at conception" (THEN) make it official.
Fair enough. You wouldn't need a certificate for that though.
So, the question isn't so much "is an embryo alive" but rather, "is an embryo an independent organism".
Specifically, is it part of another organism? And also, does it have a complete genome?
It can only be considered an independent organism of the answer is a no to the first question and a yes to the second.
-->
@3RU7AL
if you don't think tax payers should keep an embryo alive then why should the pay to kill it?
or is this only in relation to " lifetime ventilator"
imo tax payers shouldn't be paying for any non needed medical procedures, especially cosmetic ones
it appears people are interpenetrating the law as it has no or little restriction, tbh I haven't read it yet and what I know and have experience with that state, it probably isn't clear and doesn't make much sense anyway.
but let's say this only applies to medical reasons, I'm trying to figure out what those would be in such a late state of development.
what urgent condition affecting the mother's life can only be solved and save her life if the baby is killed? I can't think of one.
If the mother wants the baby killed because of some medical reason the baby has now developed, that's not an abortion that's euthanasia as she would not have done it otherwise.
if it's unrestricted and killed because of inconvenience, my tax money should not pay for that, it's elective with no real medical need or reason.
-->
@Mharman
It has everything to do with the morality of abortion. (IFF) "life begins at conception" (THEN) make it official.Fair enough. You wouldn't need a certificate for that though.
You would need some sort of OFFICIAL record. If every embryo is a citizen with full human rights and protection of the law, then they should be monitored from day one. We need to make sure all pregnant women avoid alcohol and other dangerous substances and get proper nutrition and checkups, avoid strenuous exercise and arrest irresponsible women for child endangerment.
So, the question isn't so much "is an embryo alive" but rather, "is an embryo an independent organism".Specifically, is it part of another organism? And also, does it have a complete genome?It can only be considered an independent organism of the answer is a no to the first question and a yes to the second.
The embryo is 100% dependent on the host for nutrients and oxygen and physically inseparable so, correct me if I'm wrong, it would appear to be part of the host.
The requirement of a "complete genome" seems arbitrary to me. There are no mammals that can self-reproduce (which seemed to be your original sticking point on the sperm), so it would seem that males and females would comprise two halves of a "complete genome". There is also the small matter of necessary genetic diversity. If two people were considered to posses a "complete genome", then they should be able to repopulate the human race on their own. However, it appears that a minimum population of 10,000 to 40,000 people would be required for long term viability.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
if you don't think tax payers should keep an embryo alive then why should the pay to kill it?
You misunderstand. (IFF) you want all embryos kept alive (THEN) you should pay for it, or lobby congress and or your insurance company to provide funding.
(IFF) you want to allow someone to electively remove an embryo from their own body (THEN) you should pay for it, or lobby congress and or your insurance company to provide funding.
These options are not mutually exclusive.
or is this only in relation to " lifetime ventilator"
The principle remains the same.
imo tax payers shouldn't be paying for any non needed medical procedures, especially cosmetic ones
Tax payers contribute to all sorts of non-critical infrastructure and services. I shouldn't have to pay property taxes if I don't have kids. I shouldn't have to pay city sales taxes if I don't go to the brand new football stadium. I shouldn't have to pay taxes to fund roads because I don't own a car. I shouldn't pay for other people to go to federally funded colleges. I shouldn't pay for hospitals if I never get sick. I shouldn't pay for firefighters if my house never burns down. I shouldn't have to pay for prisons if I don't commit any crimes.
it appears people are interpenetrating the law as it has no or little restriction, tbh I haven't read it yet and what I know and have experience with that state, it probably isn't clear and doesn't make much sense anyway.but let's say this only applies to medical reasons, I'm trying to figure out what those would be in such a late state of development.what urgent condition affecting the mother's life can only be solved and save her life if the baby is killed? I can't think of one.
That would be a job for medical professionals and insurance companies. Trust me, if an insurance company can determine something is "not medically necessary" to avoid paying for it, they will.
If the mother wants the baby killed because of some medical reason the baby has now developed, that's not an abortion that's euthanasia as she would not have done it otherwise.
I'm sure nobody is advocating for arbitrary infanticide.
if it's unrestricted and killed because of inconvenience, my tax money should not pay for that, it's elective with no real medical need or reason.
You are not paying for abortions. There is no such thing as a free abortion. The patient always gets a bill.
-->
@3RU7AL
Tax payers contribute to all sorts of non-critical infrastructure and services. I shouldn't have to pay property taxes if I don't have kids. I shouldn't have to pay city sales taxes if I don't go to the brand new football stadium. I shouldn't have to pay taxes to fund roads because I don't own a car. I shouldn't pay for other people to go to federally funded colleges. I shouldn't pay for hospitals if I never get sick. I shouldn't pay for firefighters if my house never burns down. I shouldn't have to pay for prisons if I don't commit any crimes.
*snap*
Yep, this ones going in my retarded compilation
Ahh yes, the conservatives are stoking their outrage at the coming of the abortion fairy, who is coming murder babies right before birth because the mother just changes her mind at the last minute! Oh the outrage! Oh the humanity! Oh the slippery slope until you’re Euthanized in your sleep at age 35!
This is primarily just typical Hysteria of triggered conservatives. The law isn’t really changing very much at all, other than the blood pressure and WPM of conservative bloggers.
Although this thread has almost all the tropes. All I need is one mention of transgender toilets, or there being 100 genders and I hit a conservative-outrage-bingo for today!