:321: Wait away. I can't even sift through all your bullSh*t, with insults & twists of my posts, & caricatures, & blatant distortions. Perhaps you can find someone else to bait into a fun flame war with you. You don't follow the topic, but needle & insult to try to provoke your opponent. Have it your way. Insult all you want, & make all the snide comments at my expense.
LMFAO .. the person who starts an OP filled with BS accuses someone else of the same in order to cover up their own inadequacies and add to that -that the person cannot even adhere to their own restrictions, failing within a few sentences to stick to the "scientific" basis they insisted upon, instead delving into religion and politics. Face it you have been called out and found out for nothing more than corner street preacher with no real intent or interest in debating anything that disagrees with your erroneous opinion . .so run away and claim your hollow victory, you have become exactly what you claim of others. It is so much easier to try and blame others for your own failings than answering questions beyond your scope of knowledge. Yet another pro-lifer with only an opinion and no actual research or proof to that opinion. Have fun in your (*)(*)(*)(*) hole of your own creation, all can see just how dishonest, deflecting and shallow you really are.
Without brain activity you are legally dead. At least according to the coroner ?! Someone in a coma has significant brain activity. No brain = no living human
Just how do you equate the statement "No brain = no living human" with bacteria, mushrooms and plants, are you trying to suggest that bacteria, mushrooms and plants are human? If the statement had read no brain = not alive then you would have a point, it doesn't and you don't. It is plainly obvious that the poster is referencing HUMAN life and as such your comment is disingenuous and a strawman.
I'll go with that.. at least it is a standard that can be consistent. Now, to be fair, we have discovered a lot of variability in 'brain activity', & that can be a little vague, & would need more scientific definition, but it is better than the undefined, moving goalposts we have now. I'm sure you meant 'some' in a coma have significant brain activity. And if we use that measure as a standard for the end of human life, why not the beginning of human life? I don't know when 'significant brain activity' typically begins, & putting it at a week term could be a bit arbitrary, as some might develop slower or faster. Plus, there is the added confusion of defining 'brain activity'. How many posters here post in thousands of threads with apparently NO significant brain activity? So, should some measure of 'brain activity' be used to codify when human life begins & should be protected? Or do we keep it vague & undefined so that unborn babies can be terminated up to the minute of birth?
What utter crap, the only "babies" terminated after viability are those that are life threatening to the female, already dead or have disabilities incompatible with life. what you and other pro-lifers fail to comprehend is that your crusade for person at conception actually does open the door for elective abortions "up to the minute of birth" AND the state having to pay for them, be careful what you wish for. The goalposts of pro-lifers are no better defined, you do realise that it can take anything up to 24 hours for fertilization to occur don't you . .so which hour of that 24 would you care to arbitrarily choose as your point? I don't expect a reasonable answer if your previous comments are anything to go by.
Women who have elective abortions up until the minute of birth are evil people. They have no more morals than a chimpanzee. That's why late term abortion should be illegal, and the state should not pay for it.
No, I'm suggesting that a brain is not necessary for being considered alive. Human life is a subset of life and thus human life can exist without a brain as well.
Please show proof that women are having abortions "until the minute of birth"...... Got proof? Where is it? It would be really stupid to think women would go through 9 months of pregnancy to abort at the last minute. What reason do you think they would do that? Late term abortions, except for medical reasons, ARE illegal....what is your problem? Here's more of those inconvenient questions for you to ignore , Sam.....
It's sad to see you'll never change......throwing out ridiculous statements, never answering those INCONVENIENT questions and bringing up something that has nothing to do with them so you can pretend no one notices that you NEVER answer questions. You are a GOOD poster child for Anti-Choicers....
As usual Sam you can't stay within the debate .. please do show me where I say that women DO have elective abortions up to the minute of birth . .guess what .. I don't Says who ... you As expected you want to pick and choose how and when the law applies.
Which is not what you said, the comment made was clearly talking about human life which you tried to ignore and then move the goalposts. and if you had read the rest of the comments you would have plainly seen that the issue was brain death and brain life, so still your comment is disingenuous and a strawman
Again more misrepresentation of my position, if you ever learn to read something as it is then you will plainly see that I say that IF the pro-life ideology of person at conception becomes reality it DOES open up legal challenges for elective abortion to be legal up to the minute before birth and for the state to pay for it not that I think it should be legal. If you cannot accept the reality of what you wish for then I suggest you stop hiding your head in the sand and actually learn something.
It is all Sam can do is to misrepresent my position as he has no really intellect to refute what the facts are should the pro-life ideology of person at conception become reality. He like the majority of pro-lifers only see the positive implications while ignoring the negative ones.
Don't be shy....have the courage of your convictions. Don't you have the strength to answer questions to show how right you are....?????
Dishonest Harry, are you that ignorant and desperate for material that you need to imply falsely that I claimed plants are not alive ? Every human cell is "alive" this does not make a heart cell a living human.
You heavily implied it. The vast majority of Americans agree with me, and they dont agree with you. Explain how I "pick and choose" how the law applies. Excuse me, but I do not think the state should pay for bratty selfish women wanting to abort a fully grown baby (late term fetuses can feel pain, btw) just because shes a selfish animal. - - - Updated - - - So you admit that abortion being legal is something negative. Thank you for agreeing with me!!
Please show proof that women are having abortions "until the minute of birth"...... Got proof? Where is it? It would be really stupid to think women would go through 9 months of pregnancy to abort at the last minute. What reason do you think they would do that? Late term abortions, except for medical reasons, ARE illegal....what is your problem? Here's more of those inconvenient questions for you to ignore , Sam.....
This was funny Without "significant brain activity" heart and breathing stop functioning. All those in a coma have at least this much brain activity. Without significant brain activity there is no living human. There is a fairly comprehensive definitions out there on what significant activity entails. There is tons of stuff on there in relation to fetal pain and when cognition is thought possible. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/h...in-politics-of-fetal-pain.html?pagewanted=all For a more detailed scientific description see below: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1440624/ In short, brain activity is a function of electrical activity. Without the proper wiring in place (spinothalamic fibers) this "neuronal activity" does not occur.
You are confusing the term "human" when used as a noun " a human, a living human" with the term human when used as a descriptive adjective "human life, human heart, human feces" Not all human life is "a human" a heart cell is human life but it is not a living human. Where you got from my comments that bacteria are human .... I have no clue. The human cells in a dead human remain alive for quite some time but the human is "dead". The brain controls both heart function and breathing. Without a brain there is no beating heart and no breathing = the human is dead. Without a brain there is no living human. If a human has no brain = not alive, as you yourself claim. How then can a living human exist ? How can a human that is not alive .. be a living human ? The topic is abortion .. and so, as is so often the case, the poster is inferring that Human life is the same as a living human which is simply not the case.
The question "when does human life begin" can use the term human as a noun or a descriptive adjective. One needs to specify what one is talking about in order to answer the question correctly. There is a difference between the question "when does human life begin" and when does a living human exist. The beginning of something is often not that something. The beginning of the life of a building is the first brick but a brick is not a building. The beginning of a heart is a single heart cell but a single heart cell is not a heart. The beginning of human life happened hundreds of millions of years ago. Human life is a continuum. Animate does not come from inanimate. The zygote can not exist without the sperm and egg that come before, the sperm and egg can not exist without the humans that came before ... and so on. One needs first define what one is talking about. For a proper discussion of "is the zygote a living human" which is really the point of all this yapping. One first needs to give a definition of what living human is !
