Atheists/Nazis in their contempt for God and humanity call babies "parasites"

BMS

Well-known member
Still wrong.

Still has nothing to do with whether or not the fetus is a parasite. You keep repeating about the human reproductive process, etc., nurturing the fetus, etc,....when will you understand that that has nothing to do with
the discussion? Whether the fetus is a parasite is a biological question that has nothing at all to do with whether or not it's part of the reproductive process, whether the mother created it and nurtures it, etc.

Then you think wrongly.

Which has nothing at all to do with the issue because contrary to your delusion, nobody is stating the fact that the fetus is a parasite so that they have a reason/excuse for aborting it.
Of course it has everything to do with the mother nurturing the offspring. Its the human reproductive process.
Anyone who supports pro-choice abortion has that derranged mentality. Of course by definition pro-choicw abortion is murder
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Of course it has everything to do with the mother nurturing the offspring. Its the human reproductive process.
Which, like all placental mammals, is based on parasitic offspring developing in utero rather than in an external egg.
Anyone who supports pro-choice abortion has that derranged mentality. Of course by definition pro-choicw abortion is murder
Anyone who knows how to use a dictionary will know, unlike you:
1. How to spell.
2. That abortion is not murder by definition.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Ok
Which, like all placental mammals, is based on parasitic offspring developing in utero rather than in an external egg.

Anyone who knows how to use a dictionary will know, unlike you:
1. How to spell.
2. That abortion is not murder by definition.
Have to agee then that by definition pro-choice abortion is murder.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Have to agree that you don't know how a definition works.
Have to agree I do. Pro-choice abortion is a decision to kill the human so premeditated. the only defence put up so far is tap dancing with words and pointing to laws of countries where it is legal.
If you cant admit the entity being killed on purpose is a human being then you are crazy to expect people to believe any other definition, including parasite.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
Have to agree I do. Pro-choice abortion is a decision to kill the human so premeditated. the only defence put up so far is tap dancing with words and pointing to laws of countries where it is legal.
If you cant admit the entity being killed on purpose is a human being then you are crazy to expect people to believe any other definition, including parasite.
Nope. Firstly, in the laws of the country you and I are living in, and in the countries of every poster on this board, abortion is legal, hence not murder. If you want to live in Nicaragua or Iran, then do so.

Secondly murder involves killing another person, by definition. By definition, a foetus (by which I mean any unborn child at any stage of development) is not a person. This definition has been upheld in Supreme Court judgement. The unborn is not a person, ergo cannot be a victim of crime, ergo killing it is not a crime, ergo no murder, by definition.

Thirdly, murder requires malice aforethought, a preformed intention to harm or kill the victim. This is not the aim of abortion, which seeks to end the pregnancy, not kill the foetus. If there was a way of aborting the pregnancy without the foetus dying, that would be preferable to all concerned. There is no more malice in killing the foetus in an abortion than there is in killing the weaker of conjoined twins to ensure the survival of the other. No malice, no murder by definition.

There are thus three legs which destroy your assertion that abortion is murder. Admittedly one is weaker than the other two, but together they are unassailable. They have been tested in court and have prevailed. Your assertion that abortion is murder is untrue, by definition.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Nope. Firstly, in the laws of the country you and I are living in, and in the countries of every poster on this board, abortion is legal, hence not murder. If you want to live in Nicaragua or Iran, then do so.

Secondly murder involves killing another person, by definition. By definition, a foetus (by which I mean any unborn child at any stage of development) is not a person. This definition has been upheld in Supreme Court judgement. The unborn is not a person, ergo cannot be a victim of crime, ergo killing it is not a crime, ergo no murder, by definition.

Thirdly, murder requires malice aforethought, a preformed intention to harm or kill the victim. This is not the aim of abortion, which seeks to end the pregnancy, not kill the foetus. If there was a way of aborting the pregnancy without the foetus dying, that would be preferable to all concerned. There is no more malice in killing the foetus in an abortion than there is in killing the weaker of conjoined twins to ensure the survival of the other. No malice, no murder by definition.

There are thus three legs which destroy your assertion that abortion is murder. Admittedly one is weaker than the other two, but together they are unassailable. They have been tested in court and have prevailed. Your assertion that abortion is murder is untrue, by definition.
No. As I said before, and so did you, the human being is the same entity whatever you choose to call it. In addition the human being at embryo stage or at person stage is not a fetus!
In countries where the law allows pro-choice abortion it by definition allows murder.
 

Temujin

Well-known member
No. As I said before, and so did you, the human being is the same entity whatever you choose to call it. In addition the human being at embryo stage or at person stage is not a fetus!
In countries where the law allows pro-choice abortion it by definition allows murder.
Sorry, but biology is not the same thing as the law. Murder is a legal not a biological term. According to law a human being changes as an entity numerous times throughout its existence. The most profound changes are birth, when it legally becomes s person, and death when it ceases being a person. You just cannot mix biology and the law, just as you cannot mix sociology and biology. Decide what the basis of your argument is, biological or legal.


Either way, you lose.
 

J regia

Well-known member
No. As I said before, and so did you, the human being is the same entity whatever you choose to call it. In addition the human being at embryo stage or at person stage is not a fetus!
And neither a foetus or an embryo is a baby or a child.
Which is why the bible commands the abortions of adulteresses (Leviticus 20:10, Numbers 5:20-28).
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Of course it has everything to do with the mother nurturing the offspring. Its the human reproductive process
Wrong. It has nothing to do with that. The fact that it is the mother nurturing the offspring and part of the human reproductive process says absolutely nothing about whether or not fetus is a parasite.

Anyone who supports pro-choice abortion has that derranged mentality.
I'm not interested in your insults and ad hominem.

Of course by definition pro-choicw abortion is murder
Still not.

Have to agree I do. Pro-choice abortion is a decision to kill the human so premeditated.
That is not the definition of 'murder'.

the only defence put up so far is tap dancing with words and pointing to laws of countries where it is legal.
Murder is a legal term; pointing out that abortion does not satisfy the definition of murder is not "dancing with words"; it is being correct.

If you cant admit the entity being killed on purpose is a human being
Whether the entity being killed on purpose is a human being is not determined.

then you are crazy to expect people to believe any other definition, including parasite.
Anybody who is not biologically ignorant understands that the fetus is a parasite.

I note that you have yet to provide the slightest argument against the fact that the fetus is a parasite.

In countries where the law allows pro-choice abortion it by definition allows murder.
Blatantly false, since murder requires illegality. If abortion is legal, then by definition it cannot be murder.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Sorry, but biology is not the same thing as the law. Murder is a legal not a biological term. According to law a human being changes as an entity numerous times throughout its existence. The most profound changes are birth, when it legally becomes s person, and death when it ceases being a person. You just cannot mix biology and the law, just as you cannot mix sociology and biology. Decide what the basis of your argument is, biological or legal.


Either way, you lose.
So my point was about biology remaining the same regardless of the different laws applied to it. Your response is about the law, particularly that law isnt the same as biology.
So you havent understood my post in the slightest.

You said the human being changes as an entity. That would mean its not always a human being. You are obviuosly wrong since the entity is the human being. You are getting confused by the changes in the development of the human being which are recognised in law.
Until you can grasp the reality it is difficult to debate with you.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Wrong. It has nothing to do with that. The fact that it is the mother nurturing the offspring and part of the human reproductive process says absolutely nothing about whether or not fetus is a parasite.


I'm not interested in your insults and ad hominem.


Still not.


That is not the definition of 'murder'.


Murder is a legal term; pointing out that abortion does not satisfy the definition of murder is not "dancing with words"; it is being correct.


Whether the entity being killed on purpose is a human being is not determined.

Anybody who is not biologically ignorant understands that the fetus is a parasite.

I note that you have yet to provide the slightest argument against the fact that the fetus is a parasite.


Blatantly false, since murder requires illegality. If abortion is legal, then by definition it cannot be murder.
Obviously not as explained to you before. You are tap dancing and hiding behind whichever term suits you at the time. If as the dictionary definition says murder is pre meditated then pro-abortion fits the definition and if as the definition says its unlawful then in countries where it is illegal it fits the defintion.

We are fighting for the right of the unborn human being against the murderous hatred of your derranged and twisted ideology
 

Temujin

Well-known member
So my point was about biology remaining the same regardless of the different laws applied to it. Your response is about the law, particularly that law isnt the same as biology.
So you havent understood my post in the slightest.

You said the human being changes as an entity. That would mean its not always a human being. You are obviuosly wrong since the entity is the human being. You are getting confused by the changes in the development of the human being which are recognised in law.
Until you can grasp the reality it is difficult to debate with you.
No, you are confused. As long as you talk about murder, you are talking in legal terms. If you want to talk just about biology, then you have to put talk of murder to one side. You can't have both.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
Obviously not as explained to you before. You are tap dancing and hiding behind whichever term suits you at the time. If as the dictionary definition says murder is pre meditated then pro-abortion fits the definition and if as the definition says its unlawful then in countries where it is illegal it fits the defintion.
Still wrong. Murder is the illegal killing of a human being. You would first have to demonstrate that the fetus is a human being and second apply it only to jurisdictions in which abortion is illegal. Which makes abortion not murder by definition as you have claimed.

We are fighting for the right of the unborn human being against the murderous hatred of your derranged and twisted ideology
The issue has nothing to do with the "right of the unborn human being". It is not in evidence that it is a human being, and the fact that it is a parasite (by the definition you cited) has nothing to do with its rights if any.

I do, however, note that you are madly scrambling to get away from the actual discussion, which is about the fetus being a parasite. I understand - if I'd posted a definition that showed my point to be completely false, I might be running away from it, too.
 

BMS

Well-known member
Still wrong. Murder is the illegal killing of a human being. You would first have to demonstrate that the fetus is a human being and second apply it only to jurisdictions in which abortion is illegal. Which makes abortion not murder by definition as you have claimed.


The issue has nothing to do with the "right of the unborn human being". It is not in evidence that it is a human being, and the fact that it is a parasite (by the definition you cited) has nothing to do with its rights if any.

I do, however, note that you are madly scrambling to get away from the actual discussion, which is about the fetus being a parasite. I understand - if I'd posted a definition that showed my point to be completely false, I might be running away from it, too.
So make your mind up, is it the law or the definition. Becuase in law in some countries pro-choice abortion is illegal and is pre-meditated killing.
I also notice you are trying to avoid this.
 

BMS

Well-known member
No, you are confused. As long as you talk about murder, you are talking in legal terms. If you want to talk just about biology, then you have to put talk of murder to one side. You can't have both.
Do you now understand that the human being is the entity as I described
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
So make your mind up, is it the law or the definition.
Your question doesn't even make sense. The definition in English of 'murder' is 'unlawful killing of a human being'. If they make something legal, then by definition it cannot be murder.
Becuase in law in some countries pro-choice abortion is illegal and is pre-meditated killing.
Great. In those countries it might be murder. You are wrong to say that abortion is murder 'by definition'.
I also notice you are trying to avoid this.
No, you don't notice that. You imagine it.
 

Bob Carabbio

Well-known member
Christians are loving and caring. Evil comes along and we get Nazis killing Jews, Christians,clergy, infants.

Parasites invade a host. babies are not invasive. The MOM actually carried the OOCYTE before the mom was born. 6-7 million oocytes.
Calling an unborn baby a parasite is motivated by those who want to justify capital punishment and destroy a human being. Murder.
These we call Nazis. We call out evil.

Schools with parasitology dept. don't dissect human babies. Mengele did.

This is a great place to discuss Nazis who want to destroy.


Parasites usually elicit a surge of antibodies as an immunological response. Many Docs I know some years will go over seas for a few weeks and they encounter parasites which are rare back home

Of course they know calling a human baby a parasite is a sign of a very sick mind. Evil.
Simpler than that - if it's a "Parasite" it's easier to Commit First Degree MURDER on it.
 
Top