Planned Parenthood tweets "Happy Mother's Day!"

There are not enough human eggs on this planet for every sperm. What are we to do? Plus, we don't
have enough women in the world that we can force to get pregnant in order to save the lives of these
sperms!

 

Well, I don't remember Carl Sagan crying tears over the death of the millions of sperm he spewed.

 

The question can be asked: When does motherhood begin?
Because I'm pretty sure it begins before birth, otherwise we wouldn't have all these pregnancy books about caring for your unborn child. There's a whole field of medicine that revolves around prenatal care.

 

No, and neither did he say those were human beings, but they are life.

 

And so do we give them Constitutional rights?

If not, why are you making such a stupid argument that sperm is life?

Now maybe you can concentrate on the argument at hand, life of the individual human being.

 

How disappointing for you not to have enough women to FORCE to have kids...


Makes you quite hypocritical KILLING OFF LIFE while screaming at others .......you sure are good at justifying(making excuses) for YOUR actions....


Maybe laws should be passed that punishes men for wasting/KILLING good LIVING sperm....

 

Now you see the illogical nature of the sperm is life argument? That is your guys' dumb argument, not mine.

 

I think most of us can draw a distinction between an amorphous clump of cells versus a human life that is shaped like a human being and is moving its little appendages around.

 

You can't.

- - - Updated - - -

Ya, it becomes "illogical" to YOU when it's thrown back atcha !

 

Can't be a mother until you give birth. Now, that may be too deep for you but it's a fact...do you have any idea what "PREnatal" means???


Being "pretty sure" means nothing.

 

Just because her child is covered by a flap of skin doesn't mean it's not there.

 

Sperm is human and alive. Men should take better care of the human life that is entrusted to them.

I'm so glad you clarified your statement with the adjective "individual." "Individual" meaning "separate." "Separate" meaning "not attached." It's perfectly clear that "individual" life begins at birth.

 

Because you said life begins at conception. Are you arguing that sperm isn't life?

A fetus is not an individual human being. It is completely dependent on the efforts of the woman to live. If the woman died, the fetus would die, so it can't be called an individual.

 

Yes, individual life begins when the magic stork brings the baby to the parents.

There is no such thing as pregnancy and no human development in the womb.

Women's reproductive organs are completely unnecessary.

 

No, I'm arguing that life begins at conception. Are you arguing that life begins at sperm? Stop making stupid idiotic arguments.

Yeah, it can be called an individual. It has it's own separate DNA. It is a unique individual human being.

All of us are dependent upon our mothers to survive until childbirth. That doesn't mean we are not human.

We also depend upon our fathers to survive and our families. If a woman dies when she is pregnant, do
not the people who loved her ask if the baby survived? Sometime they do, which shows you that they are
individual human beings. A child could conceivably be born to a mother who has been dead but kept alive
on machines as well. That shows you that the child is an individual human being.

 

No one said "life begins at sperm." Stop making stupid idiotic accusations.

Not only is it attached to the woman, it is actually INSIDE of her. It requires her body and her efforts to live. That is not separate or individual.

Assuming the premise, logical fallacy.

No one has said a fetus isn't human, but that doesn't make it a human being.[/quote]

If the fetus hasn't reached viability, they would not ask.

Wrong. It's the woman that is hooked up to the machines which keep her organs functioning enough to keep the fetus alive. If the fetus were removed from the woman's body, it could not survive before viability.

 

I'm the one throwing it back. As usual, you can't follow a conversation.

 

Life does begin at conception. You are the one who is advancing the strawman argument that life begins at sperm, not me.

Sure a fetus is an individual human being. It has a DNA that is unique, no other human being has the same DNA
unless they are a twin. We all completely depended on the efforts of our mothers to live, that does not make us
non-humans. Without mothers the human race would not exist. I gave examples of a child that was born months
after his mother died. That argument does not hold water.

 

You did. Now you are just backtracking.

Well of course it's attached to/inside of the woman, that is how reproduction works.
We are all separate individuals inside our mothers' wombs. That is a dumb argument
to make that we weren't.

It's not assuming the premise, it is stating a scientific fact. This is part of the science denying that
goes on in the left. How do you think you were made? Every person is made this way; every
human being is conceived and develops in the womb. This is basic biological scientific fact
I don't know why liberals try to pretend it doesn't exists.

Thus, the dehumanizing of the child in utero. This is an example of liberals who have no respect
for human life.

Nobody is saying that a fetus can survive if it is not viable. That also does not make it not human.

Right, but technically, the mother died 3 months before the baby was born.

 

If you adamantly claim, despite all evidence and facts to the contrary , that a fetus is a person why don't you debate Fugazi on that subject in the Debate Forum ????

 

give me a link.

 

It's the last forum, Debates and Contests, easy to find ....if you dare

 

I said sperm is life, existing before the conception you claim is the beginning of life.

How can a fetus be both attached and separate?

None of that validates your opinion as a scientific fact. Still thinking I'm going to believe Carl Sagan.

Nothing of the sort.

Liberals respect women, and women are human life. Taking away their human rights is dehumanizing to them.

And no one is claiming a fetus isn't human. Why do make repeated false accusations? Flame bait?

 

Conception is the beginning of life, which is not to say you don't need a sperm and an
egg for conception. Of course you need a sperm and an egg to create life. And of course
the sperm and the egg need to be alive, because you can't create life from inanimate objects
unless you are God or Dr. Frankenstein. This is basic science, basic biology. Did they not
teach this in public schools?

It's called an umbilical cord and a placenta. Also basic things they should have taught you at MLK Jr Junior High.

We were talking about unique individuals with unique DNA. This is something even Carl Sagan
knew about. I don't know if he was making a pro-choice argument for someone of even if your
quote is accurate, but I can say that this is not my opinion that every individual has unique DNA
save twins, it is a statement of scientific fact.

You just said a fetus is not a human being. What is it then? A dog? A cat? An infection?
Of course it's a human being. It is in an early stage of development. Don't dehumanize it.

Half the victims of abortion are females. Playing the woman card doesn't work as an excuse
for abortion. Infanticide is not a human right.

It is you who keeps on insisting on parsing words. Not only is a fetus human, it is a human
being. It is a unique individual. It is a baby. It is a person who has yet to be born. The
sooner liberals admit this, the sooner they can come over from the Dark Side.

 

Learned them from people who were rude to me.

I still won't get it in the end.

You can say a fact, but how you say it matters. It might not have been intentional but the way that it sounded, it was more like you were trying to insult me. If that wasn't your aim, then excuse me. All I simply want to say is be careful of how you phrase things. Otherwise it might make conversation difficult.