OK....I am going to try to remember everything without Googling so no complaining if I miss something...OK? I know that the Placental Barrier functions as I have previously stated as a BIOLOGICAL CAPACITOR for a lack of a better word. Basically because a developing Fetus has different needs and in order to properly develop very much in the same way...and this is JUST an analogy....a piece of electronic equipment that needs a different frequency or voltage of current for it to properly function...such as a Musical Amplifier....will take in the standard AC current plugged into your standard wall receptacle and this AC current will first be sent to a Capacitor and this will not only store the electrical charge but also allow electricity to be drawn from this capacitor in a manner that can properly amplify the speakers such an amp is used for. Now the Placenta...if I can recall has either 4 or 5 functions one I know for certain is acting as the Endocrine system which allows certain Hormones specifically needed for Fetal development. Another function is it takes in nutrients from the mother and regulates these nutrients and oxygenated blood to the fetus. As well Fetal waste is sent to the Placenta. The Placenta also serves to regulate white blood cells or antibodies to the Fetus and serves in a immunological manner. Now...I think I am forgetting something but I promised not to Google so...hey...what can I say. The Barrier's purpose is OBVIOUS as the levels of everything we just talked about as everything from the levels of oxygen to nutrients to white blood cells and others are different in need for the Fetus compared to the Mother. So...how did I do from memory? AboveAlpha
According to you, I can't speak for these women (I wasn't elected as spokesperson) and they can't speak for themselves (that's appeal for emotion), is there some reason you don't want their voices heard? Common sense would dictate that women don't suffer through months of miserable pregnancy unless they want a child. And women still do have the right to an abortion for medical reasons even at late term.
WHAT THE HELL!!!! You ask me a question and I get a freaking HEAD ACHE because I promised not to Google so I forced myself to remember from MEMORY your question....and you TAKE OFF!!!!??? WHAT THE HELL!!!???? AboveAlpha
Your appeals to emotion are just that. You know as well as I do that we were talking about whether or not the State (government) can require one person to share their body with another. Our laws as cited earlier show that when it is in the interest of the State to do so.... they can You tragic story appeals to emotion do not challenge or change that fact. Common sense (and life) has taught me that women can and will change their minds about things... even about whether or not they want to continue their pregnancies.
1. It was a rhetorical question. The purpose of the Placental Barrier is to separate the child's circulatory system (which includes the placenta) from the mother's circulatory system - It blocks large cells and molecules like Blood cells - while at the same time it allows molecules like O2 and nutrients to pass through. It's semi permeable. So, the claim that the Placenta is 'part of' the mother's body or created by her is ludicrous. 2. You need to brush up on your knowledge of capacitors and electronics but good job on trying to understand it (capacitors) and with trying to apply their characteristics to something biological. Capacitors do not have 'gain' (amplification) they almost always have a measurable amount of loss in fact. For gain (amplification) - you need a transistor or vacuum tube.
Well...I am going to address the Capacitor issue. In P.A. Audio Amps....the Capacitor is used not only to regulate a steady energy supply but as well....A capacitor can store electric energy when it is connected to its charging circuit. And when it is disconnected from its charging circuit, it can dissipate that stored energy, so it can be used like a temporary battery. Capacitors are commonly used in electronic devices to maintain power supply while batteries are being changed. Because large and powerful P.A. Audio Amps. have output capacities in the rages of 400 watts a side to 2000 watts a side at 4 ohms as usually they are dual stereo side A and side B and as well can be bridged....such amps have HUGE capacitors that store energy like a large battery and allow DC current use from an AC power supply and as well since the power from a standard ac plug in does not supply anywhere NEAR the necessary power to obtain such levels as 2000 watts a side at 4 ohms...a large capacitor is necessary. So in reality it is actually YOU who needs to brush up on your knowledge in this manner. As far as the Placenta is concerned....the woman's body must first supply the necessary nutrients and cells carrying oxygen for a Placenta to even be created and as I stated....anything growing in a woman is PART OF THAT WOMAN....UNTIL it is birthed or removed. AboveAlpha
I know better than to try appeals to emotion with you, at least where women are concerned. And you know as well as I do that SCOTUS determined the Constitution's references to persons were not meant to include the unborn.
Impressive! I do hope this 400 year lifespan doesn't come about before Alzheimer's and wrinkles have been conquered.
You would be surprised what can be found out .. google is your friend. Because the fetus is NOT seen as a person, the usage of laws pertaining to non consented use of another persons body to sustain its life do not apply .. however should your dream of a zef being declared a person from conception be realized they then will apply. - - - Updated - - - Of course you didn't
I've made my living in electronics as a technician for more than 30 Years. You said earlier that capacitors can actually act as amplifiers and that is wrong. They are incapable of doing that. You're changing your claim to say that they can assist in delivering power to an amplifier which they can. I already stated as much in my last post. I understand your claim, however the street runs both ways. When that thing growing in the woman is another person... she's part of his or her body too. Each their own bodies belong to themselves - even while they are attached to one another as they are also separated by the Placental Barrier.
So really then there can be no problem with either party (the zef or the woman) removing the things that belong to them from the other. ie, the woman can remove the supply of oxygen, nutrients etc from the zef and the usage of her uterus.
Again, listen to the words of what the SCOTUS said. "You would have almost an IMPOSSIBLE case" in support elective abortions, once the personhood of the child in the womb has been established.
Well, you seem to be unable to see it for what it really is. It seems that you want to shame us for diminishing the personhood of women (something which we are not doing) while you are trying to divert our attention from what you (and your ilk) are actually doing - (denying the personhood and rights to prenatal children). SMH
You mean, what you want it to be. "The right to life is a fundamental human right, central to the enjoyment of all other human rights. International human rights law recognizes this basic right as accruing at birth, and international and regional human rights bodies, as well as courts worldwide, have clearly established that any prenatal protections must be consistent with womens human rights." http://reproductiverights.org/sites/crr.civicactions.net/files/documents/RTL_3 14 12.pdf
The international world will take notice when the United States establishes the fact that "a human life" begins at and by conception. After all, what good is your fundamental "right to life" if that right doesn't begin when your actual life does?
The International world has noticed the effect of restrictive abortion laws in some countries. That's why more and more countries are liberalizing their laws. Your actual life begins at birth according to these 34 online dictionaries: http://www.onelook.com/?w=life&ls=a
The United States will never do such a thing...and even if it did I think your opinion of our influence night be a bit exaggerated.
I'm not going to get into a cherry picking fight with you, Cady. You keep looking for and focusing on the definitions that you feel support your denials if you want. Most of us know that you are taking them out of context and that even the sources you link to have definitions which prove against your denials. The law makers seem to have figured that out as well. Indeed, it doesn't take a genius to know that Planned Parenthood and or the ACLU would have used 'your' definitions to stop legislation like the Unborn Victims of Violence Act... if those definitions actually had the impact you seem to feel they have.
Did you find one dictionary that defined life as beginning at conception? I didn't, and I looked at all of them. We cannot have rights at the expense of other people, and that is what you are trying to establish. That's why the UVVA has an exception for abortion.
For the love of people everywhere, never run for office…and please burn your voters registration everything. i supposse taxing the rich at the same level as people for rotten ronnies is another right you would defend. going to illegal wars is the right for every presidential administration… watering down environmental laws to suit the many and don;t care about the many who get cancer is another human right you want to ignore.. listen to yourself…just listen
Again, I'm not going to get into a cherry picking dictionary definition battle with you. It's un-necessary - because we already have laws to say that a child in the womb is 'a human being' in ANY stage of their life. If you want to try to overturn those laws with your cherry picked definitions? Have at it. Exactly! We are trying to establish the fact that a woman can not have rights at the expense of her child's rights! Thank you! No. That's why the exception has to go. You see, once children in the womb are recognized as "people" too - the exception the UVVA makes to allow abortions makes even less sense. It becomes (as the Supreme court said) an "almost impossible" case to make - to deny the child their (equal) rights.
For the purpose of those laws... Why do you say "cherry picked definitions" when multiple dictionaries gave the same meaning, and not one gave your definition? I have no desire to overturn the UVVA, it excludes abortion, and it reinforces a woman's right of choice. It has been established by international human rights organizations that those "children's" rights are accrued at birth. (That's why they are called "birthrights.") You're welcome! We shall see.
