Simple True or False Poll about Human Beings

good, because i don't expect anything from you either

 

Personally I see it as the other way round, him bringing you to the truth - though given your record that is an attempt at a folly.

Your conclusions are based exactly on what he said, nothing more.

As Iremon has shown they clearly are not.

Yes, and the beef is what leads you to falsely interpret things to suit.

Can't say I blame him, your assertions are based on assumptions not fully supported in biology or law.

As they say pride cometh before a fall.

- - - Updated - - -

Then, at least, we both know where we stand.

 

That's funny because you just claimed earlier - that I haven't yet provided the basis for my claim

In your opinion (and his).

Neither of which mean anything to me.

Not all confidence comes from pride.

Whether you respect them or not - the facts are on my side.

Rather, I am on the side of the facts.

Didn't we always?

 

Not a factual basis no, a basis formed from your own interpretation .. which Iremon has clearly shown to be wrong.

Funny that, so why do you even bother to argue, after all our opinions mean nothing to you.

In your case I'd say it does.

whether you respect them or not - the facts are not on your side

Rather, you are on the side of assumptions to fit the agenda.

Pretty much, though that was a reply to Steve.

 

YOU seem to still think this is about ME and that by defeating ME personally that will accomplish anything.

I will be compiling and presenting more and more facts to support the claim that a human being in the zygote stage of their life is a human (organism) being.

It's been my pleasure to do so - so far - and to have others participate has made it even more rewarding.

I'm actually encouraged by the poll results so far.

 

Again as usual YOU take it away from what is said and try to turn it into something else.

 

When I am the target of your comments to the extent that you have tried to make it about me - It takes too much effort to see it as anything more than just another personal attack.

 

You are not the target, the arguments you make are, if you cannot see the difference between disputed the arguments YOU make and attacking YOU on a personal level then that is your problem, not mine. The fact that you have to try and make out it is an attack on you when you already know perfectly well that 'you' can be used to refer to the person being addressed together with other people regarded in the same class: only shows the weakness of the opinion.

 

I actually welcome your 'attacks' on my arguments and conclusions.

Those sort of challenges can actually help further the discussion.

I'll continue to report posts which I think are directed at me personally - because I see those attacks as being counter productive and as a poor reflection on the site overall.

It will is then up to the mods to decide what (if anything) crosses the lines.

Now can we get back to the thread?

I notice that you haven't voted in the poll yet.

Is a human being in the zygote stage of their 'a human being' in your view, Fugazi?

 

nor will I vote in a poll that assumes the premise in order to get the results required to fit the opinion.

 

How is the true or false question about this statement: "Even in the zygote stage, a human being is a human being" assuming a premise?

Either the statement is true or it is false.

 

the more truer and less misleading question would be "Is the zygote a human being?".

It is not so much a question you are asking more of a statement without reason.

 

But - only human zygotes are 'human beings" in that stage.

That's why my question is more specific than is the one you suggested.

FALSE is one of the answers and you are more than welcome to provide the REASON for your answer yourself.

 

Never said they weren't though my question is certainly more specific than asking "are zygotes human beings", there is a difference between asking are they "human (adj) beings" and asking "Is the zygote a human (noun) being" .. shame you can't see that.

you question assumes a zygote is a human (noun) being, something that still has no consensus.

Nah, I'd rather you dwell in misconceptions.

 

Great. So why not answer accordingly.

You've yet to explain the difference between "human (adj) beings" and "a human (noun) being" and how that difference means that a human being in the zygote stage of their life is neither one nor the other.

So much for your allegations then.

 

The question is an unfair question that has its answer is built into the question as a premise. It assumes that zygote is a human being in the premise of the question.

This was pointed out and explained to you early in this thread.

A fair question would be: Is a zyglote a human being?

But I wouldn't expect that from you.

 

Yea, it's a human being. But it's not viable enough to justify taking away a woman's right to her economic sanity. If you don't want to have a child, you don't have to. That will never change in America. Get over it.

 

As a person can answer FALSE (if they want to) and that person can give the reason "because it's not a human being in zygote stage" - the questions It makes no such assumption at all.

Indeed, nearly half of those who have answered in the poll have already figured that out.

I know what your claim is.

But, again.. it's been proven wrong.

Now look who is being misleading?

I think you meant to ask "Is a human zygote a human being?"

No-one is claiming that ALL zygotes are human beings.

Are they?

No. They aren't.

My question is phrased the way that is to bring attention to the fact that the zygote period is just the first many stages of life that an organisms passes through.

 

Thank you.

All things to be debated in another thread - if you want to.

 

I guess I just don't understand why even ask the question. Everyone knows when sperm meets egg, life is created.

 

A human being is a human being. That part is not false so answering false would be incorrect.

They just ignored the blatant presumed premise in your unfair question, as numerous people have pointed out.

You're say-so is proof of nothing.

I agree that adding "is a human zyglote a human being" is a fair clarification though I'd think it would be presumed or else the question would be pretty superfluous.

 

That would only be true of your point and of my question - if a human being in the zygote stage actually is 'a human being.'

Are you agreeing that they are?

Despite what you might think about my question, I don't like making presumptions.

That's why I am asking people if they agree that a human being in the zygote stage of their life is 'a human being' - instead of just telling them that it is.

Or, instead of just assuming that they know it is.

 

Asking the question is necessary (for me at least) because so many still deny the fact and the relevance of what you just said.

 

A human zygote is obviously just that. To say it's a human being is stretching it a little. The main thing is that it has the potential for becoming a human being. I couldn't tell you exactly when that is. I think there are many humans that have not reached the human being stage in their entire life. These humans deserve to die. We should be merciful enough to kill them. Let me be the first in line, O Lord.

 

How is it a stretch?

1. Is it a living physical being?
2. What kind of being is it? (What species)?

You have already acknowledged that the union of the sperm and egg created a new life.

If it was a human sperm united with a human egg - What kind of life (being) did they create?

If it already exists physically - it's already more than only a 'potential' being. Isn't it?

I got nothing for that.