Abortions - Why so bad?

a reply to: Annee

So which species is it during the potential stage?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

You still failed to answer the question. Either of a you, it’s a simple yes or no.

Is a foetus a living human being?

I’ve defined all the words clearly.

a reply to: Grenade

I've answered your questions. You just don't like the answers.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Actually you’ve avoided answering the question. Diverted onto “personhood” and your opinions.

Please feel free to answer this question with yes or no.

Is a human foetus a living human being?

I know you can’t but it’s hilarious watching you and Annie perform mental gymnastics to try and dodge what’s really a basic and simple question.

It’s a reflection of your disingenuous character.

a reply to: Grenade

I've already answered your question. We can't agree on the definitions of "living" and "human being". So, you won't be getting a "yes" or "no" answer.

We don't call cats "feline beings" or dogs "canine beings". We call people "human beings" because it bestows a kind of spirit or soul on mankind that makes us think we're more than just animals. So, "When does a human become a "being"?" is actually an irrelevant question here.

Sperm and ova are living human organisms. A human organism is not a human person. In my opinion, a fetus becomes a person when it is capable of living outside of the womb, as human beings [people] do. Even so, a viable, but unborn fetus does not have a right to life that supersedes the rights of the woman carrying it.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Here I thought that was the purpose of a dictionary.

Unfortunately those agreed definitions don’t fit your narrative as the expression “living human being” fits perfectly with a foetus.

1. A foetus is alive
2. A foetus is a human
3. A foetus exists and so is a being

Again a simple yes or no would suffice. You realise the stupidity of saying no so can’t and you realise the implications of saying yes so can’t.

Hilarious

a reply to: Grenade

A human sperm is alive. A human ovum is alive. A human zygote is alive. A human embryo is alive. A human fetus is alive.

The term "being" is superfluous and meaningless. That is unless you're talking about something that transcends animalistic nature.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So, still no straight answer.

a reply to: Grenade

I gave you a straight answer. It's just not the answer you wanted.

Sorry/not sorry

"TELL ME WHAT I WANT TO HEAR"

Yeah, that's not really how it works.

a reply to: Annee

Despite your denial a foetus by definition is a living human being. That’s the objective truth, not my problem you can’t handle it.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Annee

Despite your denial a foetus by definition is a living human being. That’s the objective truth, not my problem you can’t handle it.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

A human sperm is alive. A human ovum is alive. A human zygote is alive. A human embryo is alive. A human fetus is alive.

The term "being" is superfluous and meaningless. That is unless you're talking about something that transcends animalistic nature.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Quadrivium

Another human being should not lose their right to life because (in 99% of cases) someone made a bad choice and can't handle the outcome of that choice.

Who says a fertilized egg, an embryo or a fetus has a "right" to life, or anything else?

Not nature. Not biology.

That's just, like, your "feelz" man!

More lies.
They are human beings.
Your religion and magical "person-hood fairy" are BS...
That is all.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

It's not a question of what species a fertilized human ovum is, it never was.

Exactly.

A biological mechanism to insure survival of a species.

Humans are in no danger of becoming extinct.

Aborting a potential human has no effect on the species. It never was a human.

Those adding their personal emotional status to it -- does not make it so. Changes nothing.

That is opinioned based.
Like slavers and Nazis you will use ANY excuse to kill those you deem "less than".
You are not stupid, I can tell by your post.
Is it the hate you feel towards men the problem?
The CHILD in the womb is a human being.
Period.
Science has moved beyond this debate.
If you are truly an ashiest, you should acknowledge this fact and move on, yet you are stuck in beliefs and feelzzzz.
A fantacy land of make believe.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

I have never denied that we're talking about human ova, human sperm and human zygotes. What I do have a problem with is when we bestow "personhood" onto the little critters. That, in my opinion, happens when viability is achieved, and even then it's not fully realized until birth.

Fictional lies.
EVERY single bit of this post is BS.

a reply to: Annee
LIES LIES and more lies....
Don't you people feel any shame, at all?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

A human being is a person, in my opinion. A human zygote is not a person.

EXACTLY and thank you!!
Your fantacy based opinion....
Nothing more.

a reply to: Sookiechacha
And there in lies your ENTIRE nonsensical problem.
We know for a FACT when a human beings life begins.
You have NO idea when your magical person-hood fairy shows up to sprinkle the magical person-hood dust to create a "person".
You live in a make believe world of death, yet you have the gaul to talk about religious people!!

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

I've already answered your question. We can't agree on the definitions of "living" and "human being". So, you won't be getting a "yes" or "no" answer.

We don't call cats "feline beings" or dogs "canine beings". We call people "human beings" because it bestows a kind of spirit or soul on mankind that makes us think we're more than just animals. So, "When does a human become a "being"?" is actually an irrelevant question here.

Sperm and ova are living human organisms. A human organism is not a human person. In my opinion, a fetus becomes a person when it is capable of living outside of the womb, as human beings [people] do. Even so, a viable, but unborn fetus does not have a right to life that supersedes the rights of the woman carrying it.

You don't have to agree, the definitions and science are clear.
You have your make believe opinionated argument. That is all.
No, no Sperm and ova are not living human organisms.
Why do you lie?
Is the death of the innocent that important to you?
A complete human organism does not exist until the union of sperm and ovum.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Grenade

A human sperm is alive. A human ovum is alive. A human zygote is alive. A human embryo is alive. A human fetus is alive.

The term "being" is superfluous and meaningless. That is unless you're talking about something that transcends animalistic nature.

We have been over this.
We have been over the basic biological difference between Haploid (sperm/ova) and Diploid (human organism).
You are intentionally lying at this point.
Why??