Why are pro choicers afraid to fight it out state by state?

If there is such wide support then why is there zero push for a constitutional amendment?

 

What is this joke of a response. Asking silly questions does not support your silly claim that a person exists a shortly after the condom breaks. Asking silly questions does not turn your claim from preposterous unsupported nonsense into truth.

Chances are that a pregnancy -- something that which has not even occurred yet .. will not become a fully grown adult .. none of which supports your claim.

The sperm that escaped from the broken condom is both human and alive. Your inference that a person exists on this basis is simply false .. showing lack of comprehension of the subject matter ..

 

blah blah blah blah blah. That's all you give me. I clearly defined what it is and why its important and all you give me back in return is nonsense.

Chances are? Chances are some children after birth wont make it to adult hood. So what? We don't stop developing/growing till 25

 

Oh and there is a huge fundamental biological difference between sperm and a generalized egg.

Sperm does not meet my third criteria. It lives for about 2 weeks and then dies.

Work in your biology game.

 

There is no so what .. you had yet to figure out that not all sperm go on to form a child .. and you were corrected.

Your definition of a person is the nonsense here - showing your lack of comprehension of the subject matter --- claiming that a sperm is a person.

You can believe that every sperm is sacred if you like but claiming each one is a person is preposterous nonsense. Did you get this from the Pope or something ?

 

Again. There is a huge biological difference between sperm and a generalized egg.
.sperm on its own will not grown into a full grown human adult. Will it?

Sperm has a natural life cycle of about 2 weeks and then they die.

So you are going to need to find something else to try and gotcha me with.

Sperm...or cancer cells....won't cut it.

 

Who needs work on Biology ?? You are the one claiming a sperm is a person ... a preposterous fail .. now you want to add things to your definition in desperate hope of correcting your error .. but this is a massive fail .. just a hopeless attempt to be sure . now claiming that a human that only lives for 2 weeks .. was not a person .... could you not figure out how ridiculous this was on your own ?

Length of time living is not a criteria for personhood mate. A sperm is a person by your definition "human and alive" showing your definition is nonsense.

A zygote doesn't live for 2 weeks .. so is not a person according to your new and unimproved definition .. congrats for contradicting yourself.

 

Why are you blamering on about this .. You claimed a sperm was a person on the basis of being both alive and human. I don't need any ""gotchas" you keep getting yourself.. now desperately trying to backtrack on your own claim.

Your new claim that something need to live more than 2 weeks to be a person .. even bigger nonsense than your first definition.. contradicting your claim that a zygote is a person .. as zygotes life cycle is less than 2 weeks .. so again you got yourself .. no help needed from me.

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Not afraid but basic a human right like bodily autonomy should include EVERY American.

Ever heard of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA

We shouldn't have to go to another state to exercise the right of free speech....or will that be next.

For what? Bodily autonomy is a basic right...or should be unless we are living in a slave/Muslim country

 

The right to bear arms is a god given right. It’s still enshrined into the constitution and never would have been ratified by the original 13 without it. So why not enshrine this so called right if you think it has the support?

 

No your selective reading missed third qualifier.

- will it grow into a fully grown human adult.

Of which sperm does not meet since on its own it's not an individual which will grow into a human adult. On its own it's not got the DNA, blood type, sex, hair color eye color height mapped.out in its genome. It's only half of the essential ingredients needed to create that which is created at conception.

Zygote is the name we give one brief stage of human development. Like baby. Like toddler. Like child. Like teenager.

Please. Try again.

 

I didn't selectively read anything. You claimed the sperm was a person on the basis of being alive and human. Now you are rambling nonsense in an attempt to claim the sperm is not a person .. adding a bunch of new criteria to your definition in hopes of making it fit.

and not that it matters to your nonsense claim .. but the zygote does not have its own blood type, sex , hair color .. either .. once again showing you lack of understanding of subject matter.

and for that matter the zygote does not exist shortly after the condom breaks .. I am giving your silly argument ground allowing discussion of the zygote .. which you get all wrong .. but your ridiculous claim puts personhood prior to the zygote .. showing what morons these folks are who wish to ban the abortion pill.

1) Your claim that a zygote is a baby is unsupported - even if your claims were true .. which they are not .. having human DNA does not make a heart cell a human. Fact of the matter is at the zygote stage .. the genome is not complete .. no ontological individual .. Period - you have to wait until implantation for the genome to be complete .. at which point the "FIRST CELLs" of the human under construction re created.

2) Your claim that personhood exists at the sperm stage .. YOU don't even agree with

What troubles me is not your incorrect beliefs about personhood .. what is troubling is your desire to force your religious belief on others through physical violence .. on the basis of fallacy.

 

Show me where I said this.

lol

 

Show you where you said what ? I pointed out the silliness in many of your contentions.

So what is this claim that you are claiming not to have made .. unaware of the meaning of your own words .. in another joke of a post which explains why you are laughing .. at yourself

 

So you are going to claim I said something. Not showcase where I had said it, and then fault me on it?

K

This is a really easy w for me. Copy paste my EXACT quote in its entirety back to me that would suggest sperm is human life that will eventually grow to human adulthood.

Show me.

Or take the L

 

You said "Show me where I said this" - Said What ? What on earth are you talking about ?

 

Show me where what I said would qualify sperm as being something that qualifies as needing protective rights as the same as a fetus or baby or even a generalized egg.

 

All are people according to you .. according to your definition of personhood.

Do you not remember your own definition Mr. "Show Me" did you not say "Is it not alive - Is it not human" claiming a person existed shortly after the broken condom .. prior to sperm meeting egg..

Are you not claiming personhood exists on the basis of being both human and alive ? A zygote never becomes a fully grown adult so we threw that part of your definition .. being both a falsehood and nonsense as would apply equally to the sperm .. and other things both alive and human .. that are not people.

This leaves us with "Alive and Human" being your definition of personhood ... both conditions existing shortly after condom breakage..

or do you wish to reject your claim that being alive and human constitutes personhood .. and if so .. then on what basis is the condom leak prior to pregnancy .. a person ? What else exists other than the sperm at this point that you are claiming is a person ?
..
Your position is crucified .. do you not realize this .. you are arguing for personhood prior to the zygote.

Step 1- Give up on the crucified position ... personhood exists prior to zygote -- shortly after condom breaks

Step 2- move the goalpost to person-hood of the zygote --- which will also be crucified but at least you might have some hope of putting forth a coherent argument.

Step 3 .. Notice that I am trying to help out your argument .. as you have yet to come up with any of the quazi reasonable arguments for personhood .. and thats no fun .. I want you to have the best arguments . and then crush them.

comprende ?

 

Thanks for the easy W





Those are the three qualifiers.

That last part is important because it negates your nonsense if you ever tried to bring up cancer or sperm or skin cells or something else that's equally stupid.

Thanks for playing!

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Not afraid but basic a human right like bodily autonomy should include EVERY American.

Ever heard of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA

We shouldn't have to go to another state to exercise the right of free speech....or will that be next.



For what? Bodily autonomy is a basic right...or should be unless we are living in a slave/Muslim country

Why did you have to go off topic ? Can't address the post of mine you quoted ?? LOLOL....

 

This is already addressed and refuted.. your postition crucified to be exact.

You claim personhood exists if 1) Alive 2) Human 3) will become a fully grown adult given time

1 and 2 were accepted - as qualities of personhood. 3 is abject nonsense on steroids .. The sperm is a fully grown adult .. as is the zygote .. as is the cancer cell ..

What is "Equally Stupid" ? How about claiming a person exists prior to the zygote .. and continuing to defend this claim despite being shown it is raging nonsense.

What is this human entity that exists prior to the zygote that you claim has personhood ? You only have two choices Sperm or Egg - which one is the Person ? You claim its not the sperm .. so this means you are claiming the egg is a person

Should we start charging women who do not manage to convert their monthly egg into a person with failure to provide the necessities of life ?

Tell me what is "Equally Stupid" in this equation.. A) claiming a sperm is a person ... B) and not realizing it

 

Lol the third qualifier as I've said is important to negate any bullshit as to how cancer cells are the same as a growing person who currently is only a few cells large. They are not the same. Nobody would claim they are the same and the importance of that difference is declared by the third qualifier you don't like because it negates your stupid sperm and cancer cells "gotcha" examples.

Is it human? This is to remove importance from any other species besides our own. As I don't care about the plight of fish or dogs or snails.

Is it alive? Because I don't care about the plight of dead things since they are dead.

Is it going to grow/develop into a fully grown human adult?

The most important qualifier as it tells you exactly what it is. And why it's important.

Sperm. Cancer cells. Skin cells. Hair follicles. All cannot be compared to as the same as an embryo. Or fertilized egg. As they are not due to the difference detailed by the third qualifier.

So sorry. You will have to come up with some other lame gotcha.

 

Your third qualifier .. is abject nonsense on steroids. Turning human feces into a person 1) human 2) alive 3) a fully grown adult.

Why are you talking about an Embryo .. your claim is that a person exists well prior to that .. prior to the zygote.

What is this fantasy entity you claim is Person - a person that exists shortly after the condom breaks ... prior to the combination of sperm and Egg ? What is this entity that has a chance to become an adult ?

That is the Gotcha mate .. you got yourself .. What is this entity you want to claim is a person .. if not the sperm ? What else is there that has those qualities after the condom breaks ?

What else is there other than the sperm with these qualities of personhood ...... and last .. how is it possible that you have not at least sniffed a crucified position ?

 

Constitutional amendments are extremely hard to accomplish.

First of all, congress today does NOT represent the majority views of the US population.

I don't believe there can be enough change on the abortion issue to allow for a constitutional amendment. Republicans fund raise and campaign on the promise that they are the party of Christianity (vs. the dirty rotten sinners). Abortion is one of the few issues that they can use to support that crap. It's a key reason that motivates conservative protestants, who are opposed to abortion at greater than 75%.

 

They will discover how much in the minority they truly are 65% of Democrats think abortion should be limited.

This whole thing really kind of depends on vagueness to ask someone if they support a woman's right to choose they say yes they don't ask for the questions. Like at what point in the pregnancy, shouldn't be exceptions to there is stipulations they don't want to know that stuff because they will find out that a good chunk of the US more or less in line with the rest of the world.