Posted on 11/25/2002 4:58:42 PM PST by HighWheeler
I have no problem if babies are killed in the first trimester. The next day however, in the second trimester, magic occurs and they should not be aborted. Or was that the third trimester?
Abortion is even a good solution for people who are having responsible sex.
Babies are not very human anyway. They can’t even eat real food.
Mothers should have their babies killed by professionals so it is 100% completely safe for everyone involved.
Children can make too much noise when they are laughing; they should have been aborted when their mothers had the chance.
Fathers and babies don’t deserve rights. Mothers also vote, and are therefore entitled to the exclusive authority to kill other humans at will.
Babies should be killed in the privacy of a public clinic.
A baby is unwanted by everyone if the mother feels it is unwanted.
I tell everyone know that I practice compassion for the less fortunate: so I want to help you rid your womb of that annoying pest.
As long as babies are killed humanely before the parts are sucked out, I’m OK with it.
My job is more important than some baby interfering with my life.
Abortion is the greatest act of selfishness? So What? SOMETHING has to be the greatest act of selfishness.
Whatever you do, don’t let me see the results of the procedure, I might get sick and have awful flashbacks for the rest of my life.
I’m outraged that they kill cute dogs and cats at the pound. Dogs and cats are almost like people.
I’m not going to let some perfectly anonymous stranger adopt my baby.
The baby we aborted 5 years ago would be in kindergarten this year. I’ll bet he would have been the smartest child in class, too. And the most handsome. My brother would have given him a full sized fielder’s glove for his birthday, and he would have loved it so much he would have worn it to bed for a week. Oh well, he would have spilled his cereal milk this morning at the breakfast table, and who can put up with that huge mess?
Is it your assertion then that within a man's testes millions of souls a day are being created and destroyed?
Here are two questions for you plain and simple, do you feel that abortion is the death of a human and do you support the right to legal abortion?
Nice slight of hand on that phrasing there, Lysander.
The zygote single cell is still a human life. And the human life, not "whole human", is the singularity of the abortion debate. This technique to cheapen human life is a necessary trick for the pro-abortion butchers to make an abortion seem not much different from pulling a scab. A zygote is not like any other bodily cell, it has the capability of creating complete human body that in turn can help create another human body.
How do you define a "whole human"? Today, you shed some skin and lost some hair, are you less human? No. Your human life is still in tact. If you lose an arm, a leg and both eyes, are you a "whole human"? It's debatable.
But are you still a human life? Absolutely.
In the virtual continuum of cell growth and division from zygote to your "whole human", I defy you to determine the moment the person suddenly and unquestionably becomes a human.
The singularity of distinction is the moment the sperm and egg are joined.
I have a close friend who had one when she was a teenager. 8 years later she still goes into a mourning period around the time she had it. Breaks my heart...
This is a common result. I have heard it so many times that I came up with the story in last paragraph to highlight the thoughts that can go through a person's mind.
I know mothers who give up for adoption have problems with guilt but how does one cope knowing they have killed their child. I guess that will be my friends cross to bear until the day she dies.....
Give the man a cigar! Finally someone gets the point.
From zygote, to infant, to adult, to gamete, to zygote, to infant, to adult. On and on so it goes. The point of demarcation is arbitrary. It is human, it is life, it is human life, it is individual human lives. Point made. Point accepted. Argument is valid with sperm as well as with zygote or adult. All the fervor is about when it should enjoy the protections of law. When, it is, not what it is.
Mental gymnastics and not very convincing ones at that. A zygote has a unique DNA structure that has a natural drive to develop, including to develop the gametes. The gamete does not have a unique DNA structure that has a natural drive to develop.
An infant is not a seperation from a zygote, nor is an adult, they are stages of development from the same zygote. To equate the gamete as a period of development after the adult stage is to claim that an adult develops into a skin cell, or a white blood cell. The adult human does not develop into the adult gamete, is produces the gamete.
Zygote (human) -> Infant (human) -> Adult (human) -> White Blood cell (human)
Is that really how you view the circle of life?
Sorry, again a horrid logical argument.
By the way, you still haven't answered my very simple questions.
Using what definition?
It is unique in itself and has all the potential of developing into a full adult person given the right circumstances. Just like a fetus.
Wrong. A sperm cell does not have "the potential of developing into a full adult person" since it is not a human. A fetus is a human. Why? Because:
1- It has a unique DNA structure
2- It has a natural drive to develop
A sperm cell has neither.
And besides, you haven't answered the two simple questions I asked.
Go ahead and reply the same way again, it's just showing how you have no ability to refute my statements.
And by the way, sperm die in the testes by the millions everyday. How would you suggest we try to save them? They will die whether they are ejaculated or not.
Please pay particular attention to the fact that I have never brought up masturbation nor a defense of masturbation in any of my postings. It is you who are claiming that I am defending masturbation. That, by the way, is commonly known as a straw man in logic and is disreputable in every aspect of debate.
So, put up, slink away, or keep showing your ignorance and lack of knowledge on this issue. Choose one of the three options, I'll check back later.
A sperm does not need protection because they die all the time anyway? Come on. That sounds a lot like "a fetus would die outside the womb or they die from natural causes all the time anyway.” We are talking about the act of actively killing as opposed to natural death. Don't you know the difference between a miscarriage and an induced abortion? Don’t you know the difference between murder and natural death?
Arguing the definition of a human? Sounds like the pro-aborts rationalization about a fetus to me. Come up with your own definition and defend it. Sperm ain’t human, a fetus ain’t human? How is “it is only haploid” any different than saying “not fully developed fetus” other than on levels of abstraction?
Must be guilt about killing sperm to make you so defensive. I know somebody who killed some once and they still have nightmares about it. I am thinking about posting pictures of the horrible act so that you will be so disgusted you will see the point. Ever see millions of dying sperm? It is not pretty. An adult is the way that sperm make other sperm. Sperm have the soul. It is killing little bitty angels in a way. I think God will punish this nation if all this masturbation continues.
You'd better go back to biology. A sperm cell has 23 chromosomes. A normal human being's somatic cells, from zygote on, have 46. Correctly stated, the sperm cell has half the potential of developing into an adult human being; the egg has the other half.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.