The babies are.I Wear Pants;937940 wrote:Wasn't aware that anyone is forced to get an abortion.
Once again, the argument here is that a zygote, blastocyst, etc is not a human yet. The dispute is when it becomes such. You will say it's at the moment of conception, others will disagree.majorspark;937948 wrote:The babies are.
Whatever makes you feel better.I Wear Pants;937954 wrote:Once again, the argument here is that a zygote, blastocyst, etc is not a human yet. The dispute is when it becomes such. You will say it's at the moment of conception, others will disagree.
I suppose it's a damned good thing your mother decided not to abort your "zygote" as a matter of convenience or you wouldn't currently have the privilege of believing human life starts as a blastocyst. :rolleyes:I Wear Pants;937954 wrote:Once again, the argument here is that a zygote, blastocyst, etc is not a human yet. The dispute is when it becomes such. You will say it's at the moment of conception, others will disagree.
majorspark;937958 wrote:Whatever makes you feel better.
And the demonizing begins.believer;937966 wrote:I suppose it's a damned good thing your mother decided not to abort your "zygote" as a matter of convenience or you wouldn't currently have the privilege of believing human life starts as a blastocyst. :rolleyes:
While I certainly understand and respect your thinking here, it still doesn't justify the eventual results of your convictions. It might make you feel good at the time that you voted for the candidate who best fits your views on how America should be, but the end result is that you allow, by default, the candidate who will rape you more to proceed with the dirty deed.O-Trap;937737 wrote:The whole "Paul-or-bust" mantra is not unlike the "Republican-nominee-or-bust" mantra that seems to take place every general election, typically stemming from the view that, "Well, it'll be better than Clinton/Gore/Obama/etc."
I'm not okay with voting for the candidate who is going to rape me less as long as there is a candidate who I don't believe is going to rape me at all, no matter who else may or may not vote for him.
Then why make murder illegal? Following the logic of pro-abortionists, if I don't like you, I should have the right to take your life if you're an inconvenience to me.I Wear Pants;937971 wrote:But I don't feel I have the right to tell anyone else what to do.
No it isn't the same thing.believer;937989 wrote:Then why make murder illegal? Following the logic of pro-abortionists, if I don't like you, I should have the right to take your life if you're an inconvenience to me.
Human life is human life. The difference between you and the baby is you have a chance to defend your life. For some inexplicable reason, we've decided a mother has the right to murder her unborn child for purposes of convenience without repercussion. But if I murder you because I don't want you to exist, I'll at least see some lengthy jail time.
Zygote, blastocyst, etc. All convenient euphemisms to avoid the truth. The very moment that sperm cell unites with the egg...human life begins. Period.I Wear Pants;937994 wrote:No it isn't the same thing.
You believe a zygote is a human life. Others do not. The disagreement is there. There is no one supporting murder of babies. You disagree on the definition of a human life, not on that human life is to be protected.
Human life is not a 'belief.' It is a process that begins with conception and continues till death. There can be no disagreement with that. Once concieved, life continues until it is ended by either natural causes or environmental cause. If the environmental cause of death is by an act of another human being...either by accidental negligence or intention it is called murder. Any attempt to alter "the definition" to avoid the stigma of murder must be seen for what it is...an arbitrary line drawn for convienience and assuage of conscience.You believe a zygote is a human life. Others do not. The disagreement is there. There is no one supporting murder of babies. You disagree on the definition of a human life, not on that human life is to be protected.
Sorry, saying "Period" does not make it so. No matter how strongly you hold your belief, it is exactly that, a belief.believer;937999 wrote:Zygote, blastocyst, etc. All convenient euphemisms to avoid the truth. The very moment that sperm cell unites with the egg...human life begins. Period.
It doesn't magically start when some politician, bureaucrat or Supreme Court judge decides it's a baby. What's the mystical start of "real" human life? 1 week, 2 months, 6 months? Who decides?
really, so life begins at conception? life ends when the brain waves stop. or does life end later since life begins before there is even a brain?HitsRus;938028 wrote:Human life is not a 'belief.' It is a process that begins with conception and continues till death. There can be no disagreement with that. Once concieved, life continues until it is ended by either natural causes or environmental cause. If the environmental cause of death is by an act of another human being...either by accidental negligence or intention it is called murder. Any attempt to alter "the definition" to avoid the stigma of murder must be seen for what it is...an arbitrary line drawn for convienience and assuage of conscience.
damn, i actually agree with you.sleeper;938052 wrote:If life begins at conception, then a miscarriage is involuntary manslaughter. It's pretty dumb to base laws on a bunch of religious zealots. This is America. If you don't agree with abortion, don't have one.
CLEVELAND, Ohio—
A Cleveland teenager claims she was raped while staying overnight with activists taking part in the Occupy Cleveland rally.
The victim revealed the crime to her teacher at a school for students with attention deficit disorder, hyperactivity and autism.
She claims to have attended the rally on October 15th when she was 'instructed by rally personnel to share a tent' with a man she knew only as 'Leland' due to a shortage of tents.
Police report the victim thought 'Leland' had fallen asleep in his sleeping bag, after which she fell asleep in her own sleeping bag and blanket.
During the night she claims she was raped.
On Tuesday, Rally organizers say they deny knowing anyone named 'Leland,' and say they would not have made any sleeping assignments.
"These are very serious allegations and we are cooperating with the Cleveland Police Department to determine what actually occurred," said protest organizer Erin McCardle.
"Anyone here would never instruct any individual coming to camp to sleep with anyone else. This is all about personal decision and consent and we offer tents and that's all," she added.
The movement describes itself as a 'coalition of people who dare to imagine a new democracy in which all people regardless of their personnel wealth will have an equal voice in the decisions that affect their lives.'
They have staged marches and rallies all across the country.
In the past two weeks, Cleveland participants have come and gone. Not everyone stays overnight.
"We are a community group, we do not have leaders, we are a leaderless movement," said organizer Rebecka Hawkins. "So your [tent] assignment would be your own choice of what you wanted to do."
Hawkins did not say how the accusations first came to her attention.
"We are very concerned about the allegations. We are very concerned about our own personal safety, about the communities safety. Sexual oppression and sexual misconduct is a serious thing that we take seriously here at camp."
Many people would disagree.HitsRus;938028 wrote:Human life is not a 'belief.' It is a process that begins with conception and continues till death. There can be no disagreement with that. Once concieved, life continues until it is ended by either natural causes or environmental cause. If the environmental cause of death is by an act of another human being...either by accidental negligence or intention it is called murder. Any attempt to alter "the definition" to avoid the stigma of murder must be seen for what it is...an arbitrary line drawn for convienience and assuage of conscience.
I don't think the morning after pill kills criminals.majorspark;938005 wrote:Its mind boggling that IWP us unwilling to lay a glove on the most heinous killer because of of the very remotest of chances that an innocent life could be taken. Yet he is 100% sure life in the womb is a zygote that can can be killed anytime. These heinous represent more of a zygote than an innocent baby in the womb. I only wish we could off these heinous criminals with the same procedures we use on babies in the womb.
Religious zealots? Yet another easy cop out.sleeper;938052 wrote:If life begins at conception, then a miscarriage is involuntary manslaughter. It's pretty dumb to base laws on a bunch of religious zealots. This is America. If you don't agree with abortion, don't have one.
Criminals get juice.I Wear Pants;938127 wrote:I don't think the morning after pill kills criminals.
Who sleeps with a stranger in a tent on the street? These things are like magnets for idiots.OneBuckeye;938117 wrote:http://www.fox8.com/news/wjw-news-raped-at-occupy-cleveland-protest,0,2093122.story
What kind of juice? I love juice, do they offer cranberry juice? If so I may change my outlook on the death penalty and sign up myself. (You'd all like that, get to kill someone and I Wear Pants gone? Proof God exists!)majorspark;938157 wrote:Criminals get juice.