Abortion, Genocide, what’s THE difference?!?!?!?!?.... do you condone murder???

reply to post by spacegod

Of course a fertilized egg is a potential human.
So is an egg and sperm on their way to fertilization.
Which also means a date is a potential human.
And the movie and drinks and bed.
Hell, everything is a potential human

No...all of the above is just wrong.

A fertilized egg IS a human...nothing potential about it. Like I keep telling others, go learn some biology.

Egg...sperm...sure...potential human. Good thing no one is using the "potential human" argument in this thread...at least no one that is still participating.

The difference between murder and abortion is vast.
An unborn baby is merely potential. An adult has been a lifetime investment.
An adult's life is incredibly more important than an infant's.
Throwing away a packet of seeds is notthe same as cutting down a redwood or rainforest.

Again...wrong.

Please try to get off of the "potential" argument.

reply to post by kevinunknown


pull your head out of your ass there are tonns of reasons people might want to abort and none of them concern you it aint murder because it is still a featus (excuse the spelling) why do you think you cant abort after a certain period of time

Originally posted by MindSpin
Actually...I only take pride in people having to reduce their arguments to accusing me of such acts. My name gives them a nice little incentive to do so...it's no accident.

Once again.

You have been caught lying, you have admitted to manipulating people, you have admitted to spinning the truth (a form of deceipt) and you seem almost gleeful in all of it. This is not something a decent person does and while you may consider this an ad hom i'm afraid bringing such strange personality traits to light has very real bearing on the thread because it shows why you constantly refuse to answer anyones questions properly. Well that and you have basically admitted you love when people reply, positive or negative which is troll behavior.

You are not worthy of debate, but you are worthy of ridicule.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
You are not worthy of debate, but you are worthy of ridicule.

Aweee shucks now.

Why you such a man hater?

Originally posted by MindSpin
Sarcasm isn't your strong point hun...but then again neither is logic.

You have said that twice in response to posts containing absolutely no sarcasm. I am sorry if you are not sure what sarcasm is but consider your criticism of me is taken fully with that sugar on the spoon.

Maybe you should do yourself a favor and do what Annee eventually went and did...and look up the biological fact that life starts at conception.

I have no clue why I should be doing any such thing but you sure do like telling people what they should do. If you want to dispute the beginning of biological life, you are talking to the wrong person. Most people have already given you that. Then you have to shift your goal posts in immediate subsequent posts.

Do you honestly feel that with about 100 posts on abortion A DAY, we have not only covered all this already but also become so used to how you will respond to it that we can do it without you, thanks.

I can at least give Annee credit for finally looking up facts and decidng to stop being ignorant to them.

This posts is from you to me. Annee is not here. Tell Annee how much you like Annee. What a silly comparison. I guess that means any poster who shows even a modicum of common sense can be compared to your obvious lack thereof?
You are trying, AGAIN, to PRETEND you are having a conversation you are not. The only way you can ever claim to have been right about anything is immediately after lying about something. I am not sure why you think that is fooling anyone.

I'm not so sure that I have as much hope for you doing the same.

You are not sure if you can hope I will look up something we have already actually agreed about and moved on from? Maybe if you stopped spending 14 hours a day lying about abortion on here you would remember we have that ENTIRE conversation and I actually agreed about the beginning of biological life.

You are so busy trying to flood the boards with nonsense that you cannot even keep your arguments straight. That is not helping you out at all.

And at any time...you are still free to refute my argument that you are dancing around.

The one we already had or a new one?

Please prove that biologically, human life does not start at conception.

Oh, the one we already had. How about you go back and read how it went the last time we did that instead. It is important because if you at least followed your own argument, you would realize that you lost this one the last few times too because you cannot carry it to the NEXT throught without ADDING AND SHIFTING.

One of the problems with spending all day writing the same things over and over again is that you apparently forget what you have already gone over and have just really repeating the same personal attacks and fallatious "prove me wrongs" that never get the hollow earth people anywhere either.

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Well thank you Dr. Sinnthia...I appreciate your totally delusional views of what you think I should do.

Seems kind of odd coming from someone who blieves in choice so much...tellin me what I should do and all.

But it is consistent with your illogical thought pattern.

Originally posted by MindSpin
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Maybe you should do yourself a favor and ...

I'm not so sure that I have as much hope for you doing the same.

Gosh. Almost sounds like you are telling me what to do on top of telling all women what to do with their babies.

You ever looked up irony?

You are getting boring. I am really curious though what good you think you have actually done to help stop, curb, prevent any abortions in the last week. All it seems you have done is be rude, lie, and make people on your side step back from you. I am not so sure what your real goal could be but your shtick is wearing thin. If I eventually just stop responding to you altogether, I was bored to death from responding to your littany of abortion essays day after day after day. How many posts have you written to me in other abortion threads? Seems like a silly question but then I know the answer is actually, quite a few.

GOOD LUCK

Originally posted by MindSpin
It's funny...I don't ever remember saying I was personally afraid of that. I stated it was a legal reality.

No you did not. You have been writing about this exact thing for days now. Your entire crusade is based on your idea that all women are just waiting to steal your sperm and abort the result. I just crystalized the hyperbole instead of trying to hide behind it. You went a different way. Anyone that can read has more than caught on though.

On the other hand...you did state you were afraid every second of you life of being raped. I like watching you try to back peddle though. I could go quote you again if you want a refresher.

I forgot how you like to repeat things. I am curious if you think writing a 1000 posts means something when 500 say one thing and the other 500 say another thing. You can do that in 2 posts. Stop going over old material.

I honestly think that you believe if you repeat arguments you have already lost, eventually you will win.

You make that much obvious when after your 14 hour marathon, some people logged off and you used that declare you had won something.

I am still not sure what you are trying to win because I have yet to see you stop or prevent one abortion. You have yet to tell us of all the children you are adopting. The only thing you have done, is stay on ATS talking about abortion, repeating yourself over and over again, until people get bored with you.

reply to post by MindSpin

If there are brain cells there is the possibility of "brain waves"...is there not?

No, brain waves require fully differentiated and interconnected neurons, which do not appear in the first trimester. (not all cellular electrical potentials, even if coming from half-differentiated neurons, are brain waves) Here is a good article about it:

eileen.250x.com...

Why has this subject not been researched since the 1960s? Apart from the fact that live aborted embryos and fetuses are no longer available, researchers now know more about the structure and development of the cortex, the highest part of the brain and the part that makes us who we are.

Functional maturity of the cerebral cortex is suggested by fetal and neonatal electroencephalographic patterns...First, intermittent electroencephalograpic bursts in both cerebral hemispheres are first seen at 20 weeks gestation; they become sustained at 22 weeks and bilaterally synchronous at 26 to 27 weeks.

There are reasons, based on the physics of the EEG, why this has to be so. Remember, an EEG involves measuring varying electrical potential across a dipole, or separated charges. To get scalp or surface potentials from the cortex requires three things: neurons, dendrites, and axons, with synapses between them. Since these requirements are not present in the human cortex before 20-24 weeks of gestation, it is not possible to record "brain waves" prior to 20-24 weeks. Period. End of story. Scientists do not attempt to find electrocortical activity in embryos and fetuses because they know more about the physical structure of the developing human brain than they did in 1963.

More on the neurological definition of personhood from the article:

The sanctity of life must not depend upon cardiologic signs alone, with the brain excluded...Certainly the human spirit that emerges in man's unique individuality is the product of his brain, not his heart.

Since all authorities accept that the end of an individual's life is measured by the ending of his brain function (as measured by brain waves on the EEG), would it not be logical for them to at least agree that individual's life began with the onset of that same human brain function as measured by brain waves recorded on that same instrument?

I suggest that as physicians we should view human existence as a continuum from the first cell division of the fertilized ovum until the death of the last cell in the organism. When the coordinating and individuating function of a living brain is demonstrably present, the full human organism exists. Before full brain differentiation, only cells, organs, and organ systems exist, which may potentially be integrated into a full human organism if the brain develops. After brain death what is left of the organism is once again only a collection of organs, all available to us for use in transplantation, since the full human being no longer exists.

Monthly PET scans would do more harm than good with the increased radiation exposure....you would be harming more lives than saving.

OK, substitute MRI scans.

And who said anything about "saving" the 3rd month fetus...if there are brain waves...the abortion would just be denied due to it killing a sentient life....right?

Yes, which means saving the (already existing) person from death. But the probability that some fetus is so abnormal that it has so hugely accelerated brain development as to have BW in third month (and is not dead due to abnormality) is very very small.

You are trying to argue from a moral standpoint...but admit you are an immoral person based on those same morals.

Yes, and I dont think its the problem with my moral philosophy, its a problem with me.

How exactly is "all human life should be protected" illogical...walk me down that logical path please???

First, we have to establish objective basis for morality based on logic and science (relevant sciences - anthropology, sociology, philosophy). That is done here. In short, define it, determine why it evolved in a society, thus determining purpose, and objective moral basis is established as comparing laws or whole moral systems accoring to how effectivelly they fulfill this purpose (consequentialist morality). Derived objective basis:

Sam Harris claims that "moral" propositions and "values" are "concerned with the flourishing of conscious creatures in a society".[5] He argues "Social morality exists to sustain cooperative social relationships, and morality can be objectively evaluated by that standard.

"The first principle is the well-being of conscious creatures, from which we can build a science-based system of moral values by quantifying whether or not X increases or decreases well-being". Activities like lying or stealing, and even certain cultural values, for example, will be more generally morally "wrong" because they tend to cause suffering.

So, if we evaluate abortion issue by this objective moral standard, we must conclude that until the limit of sentience is hit, it is more moral thing to have abortion allowed, because abortion increases well-being (decreases suffering) of some sentient creatures (otherwise they would not want to do so), without decreasing the well-being or killing of any other already sentient creature. Thus the net effect is beneficial to well-being.
And in case of stem cell therapy, the increase of well-being of sentient creatures would be far greater, so embryonic research is a highly moral thing to do.

And since my morality is based on logic and science, I can claim that statements which do not agree with it are not only immoral, but in fact illogical. Hence, protecting all human life is illogical.

Originally posted by MindSpin
I would love to go do something else...believe me I would...there is this little thing call work that doesn't allow me to go out and do whatever I want. But ATS is a nice little one minute per post distraction. It really does not consume too much time of my day.

14 hours is 14 hours. 14 hours online, writing post after post after post after post after post on abortion.

Are you admitting that you cannot actually do anything producting or real and all you have left is spending your work day bouncing back to ATS?

I am not buying it. This is not saving any babies. This is not winning you any converts that I can see. So, perhaps your time at work not working would be better spent working to end abortions? I guess there is no logic in that.

It really does not matter if you can write a full page in less than one second when you spend 14 hours a day doing it hundreds of times.

You seem to have run out of anything productive and resorted to petty personal insults that really do not hurt much. A scared, declawed cat, blindly swatting at anything that moves. Your game is old and tired and you seemed to have already lost it about 50 pages ago.

Originally posted by MindSpin
Sarcasm isn't your strong point hun

DO NOT EVER CALL ME HUN.
Not you!
You don't get to call me anything but Sinnthia.

reply to post by 44247844




I do not know what the statistics are for 'pro choice' (eg. male to female) on this subject

but i would hazard a guess that the ratio for 'pro choice' would be much higher for females

Therefor if this is true would you agree with me that the belligerent, aggressive, antagonistic,

bullying attitude of Mind Spin make him a WOMAN HATER

I find it really funny that you are all latching onto this "manhater" thing in this thread. It only shows just how completely chauvanistic you guys - not all men, just you guys, really are.

The majority of threads I take part in have no men telling me what I can and cannot do, or should and should not do with MY BODY. Coincidentally, no one has ever suggested I have a problem with men in any of those threads. I cannot even believe you guys will sit there and tell women that women need to be coralled and controlled and then get all upset when a female points out that your lack of uterus means you need to take a step back on the issue.

When I try to control your prostate, you will have a case.

Originally posted by eletheia
reply to post by 44247844

 

I do not know what the statistics are for 'pro choice' (eg. male to female) on this subject

but i would hazard a guess that the ratio for 'pro choice' would be much higher for females

Therefor if this is true would you agree with me that the belligerent, aggressive, antagonistic,

bullying attitude of Mind Spin make him a WOMAN HATER

I know you didn't direct this reply to me but i wanted to just step in.

MindSpin has tried to bully everyone in the thread so i wouldn't label him a woman hater, he's a troll and so knows how to illicit a response and everytime someone engages him he loves it. I like to point out examples of direct lying simply because it destroys any points he is making but discussing him as you are and others debating him has basically ruined the thread. Just take a look at the last two pages.

Trolling objective achieved i would say.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
I find it really funny that you are all latching onto this "manhater" thing in this thread. It only shows just how completely chauvanistic you guys - not all men, just you guys, really are.

The majority of threads I take part in have no men telling me what I can and cannot do, or should and should not do with MY BODY. Coincidentally, no one has ever suggested I have a problem with men in any of those threads. I cannot even believe you guys will sit there and tell women that women need to be coralled and controlled and then get all upset when a female points out that your lack of uterus means you need to take a step back on the issue.

When I try to control your prostate, you will have a case.

I believe women should have the final say in abortion as well, it's her body and her choice. It amazes me you still labour under this idea that i disagree with your viewpoint on abortion law.

When you state that a mans opinion is less important than a womans in a debate you are being a sexist, sorry but that's a fact, it's a textbook definition of sexism. I merely pointed this out and you leapt down my throat with insults and attacks. What about women who cut off the foreskin of their childs penis, surely that should be immediately stopped right, i mean it's a woman deciding about a mans body!

You also need to take a step back because you have made a sexist remark and simply pointing that remark out does not make me your enemy.

Calm down.

reply to post by eletheia

but i would hazard a guess that the ratio for 'pro choice' would be much higher for females

According to wiki, the ratio is about the same for males and females:

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984






I agree with you but i still feel he is pushing this MAN HATER angle at the females

on the thread. That is the reason i left the thread sometime ago. Saying that i have been

following the thread and done a couple of posts. Whilst following the thread i have

skipped over Mind Spins posts because they have been much of the same, hostility and

repetition and therefor adding little of any value to the debate. IMO if this thread is to go any

further it will only do so if posts are made and Mind Spins input ignored.


It appears to me that he has hi jacked this thread from the OP

reply to post by eletheia


He may have pushed the "man hater" term to far, however there is one user who has made a directly sexist comment and she has actually derailed this thread as much as MindSpin instead of just admitting to it.

To state that a mans opinion means less just because he's a man is sexist, wouldn't you agree? I'm not saying a man should have a say as to whether someone he impregnates should have an abortion or not because that's her body and so her human rights being infringed, but i believe on a discussion forum a mans opinion is equal to a womans, and vice versa.


I would be interested in your reply to this.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984




MO on most things is that political correctness has gone mad !!!! That said i am very

careful in my opinions, i am very much for the "walk a mile in their shoes" attitude, and in

that respect either sex will have a hard time making judgements on each other.



An example (a little out of context) being ( and this is woman on woman) some relatives

(female of course) never want to be mothers. I as a mother cannot understand this, but then

who am I to make judgements.

You asked me for my opinion i hope i've made it understandable ?

reply to post by eletheia


I understand it's difficult to accurately judge someones opinion without being in their shoes, but i'm more interested as to whether you think the validity of a mans opinion on a discussion forum regarding this topic should be considered less valid. To me that's sexism, just like me saying a womans opinion would be less valid on the topic of circumcision.

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984




Everyone's opinion is valid. Having said that in the two examples you put forward my opinion

in the first one the woman should have the 'edge' because it is relative to her. And in the

second the man should have the 'edge' because it is relative to him. It is virtually impossible

for either of them to imagine the (physicality is that a word?) of the other. Mens eyes

water at the thought of a blow to their private regions or a vasectomy i can only imagine

what they feel, can they imagine the pain of childbirth? Who's to say which is worse it's only

a matter of opinion, yes its a valid opinion but who's to say who's right.

At the end of the day an opinion is only that 'an opinion'

Originally posted by 44247844

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Your references to "sky monsters" also insults a wide variety of people who you know nothing about. I have not been bringing religion into my arguments, but I believe that if someone wants to practice a religion without harming anyone else, then it is no one else's business what their beliefs are. I expected that people who post here would attempt to be respectful, at least to people who were attempting to be respectful themselves. You clearly are not that kind of person, and I truly do feel sorry for you.

Edit: By the way, it seems that after reading this page, I now realize why you respond in the way you do. Although I am not sure if you knew what my gender was before posting this (although you may figure that anyone who makes points against abortion would have to be a man, although I made points on both sides), you may very well be.... a MAN-HATER. I can honestly think of no other reason why you would respond in such a hostile manner to someone who has been attempting to reply courteously throughout his time at these forums.

I believe in god and don't feel the least insulted by Sinnthia's reference to sky monsters,
and any god who was so easily insulted would be a pretty pathetic being.

I've never see anything in her posts insulting men in general.

I guess if you want to take offence and play the martyr you can be insulted by anything.
Playing the endlessly maligned victim is one alternative to proving your case.