Have you watched an abortion procedure?

Temujin

Temujin

Well-known member
BMS said:
Sorry but your reply doesn't make sense, how does observable reality commit murder? Could you please clarify what you mean by that and whether you believe film of the the nazi's killing Jews is an observable reality?
Click to expand...
The dominant verb in the sentence you are unclear of is "think". Observable reality agrees that the Nazis committed murder, since we can observe both the act and the legal retribution. We do not see the same legal retribution handed out to doctors who perform abortions. The reason is that what they do is not murder.
It's not difficult once you get your head around the fact that murder has three elements, all of which need to be present:
1. Killing of a human in being (Defined as a human that is alive and has taken at least one breath.
2. Illegality.
3. Malicious intent.

Abortion has none of these essential elements, therefore it is no more murder than it is insurance fraud.
My question was 'do you believe Jews are human being and humans beings in the womb aren't?'
Click to expand...
Jews are obviously human beings. The foetus in the womb is human, but has not taken a breath, so it is not yet a human in being. Neither is it a person, unlike the Jew. This is another quite easy concept once you grasp the difference between potential and actual, between what is now and what maybe in the future. A foetus may become a baby, a person, a human in being in the future. To say that it is one now is to confuse the present with the future and to mangle language in a failed attempt to legitimise nonsense.
 
Temujin

Temujin

Well-known member
BMS said:
Do you believe black human beings in the womb are actually human beings?
Click to expand...
They are just as human as any other foetus. They are not yet in being and not yet a person. Just like every other foetus. Your focus on Jews and black people is noted.
 
Whateverman

Whateverman

Well-known member
Algor said:
Having trouble with this one, Authentic Nouveau? It's a yes-no question. Lost your nerve?
Click to expand...
If you're not aware of this, you can tag users in your posts, so that (as long as you're not on their Ignore list) they'll be notified that you've mentioned them. If you're posting from a desktop, type that '@' sign followed by the first 3+ letters of their name. The web browser will then offer user names that match that, and you can choose the person you're referring to.

This creates a BBCode link in your post, and when posted, it notifies the person you've tagged. This way, Nouveau wont be able to ignore you. Like this: @Authentic Nouveau - you're being tagged

These links can be created manually, too. Here's what the above link looks like:

Code: 
[USER=139]@Authentic Nouveau[/USER]

The number is the user's ID, and it can be found in the QUOTE tag every time you quote their text. For example, your ID is 599, which I found when looking at the BBCode of your quote. Like this:

Code: 
[QUOTE="Algor, post: 273992, member: 599"]
Having trouble with this one, Authentic Nouveau? It's a yes-no question. Lost your nerve?
[/QUOTE]

FYI only! Ignore this if you already knew...
 
Temujin

Temujin

Well-known member
Whateverman said:
If you're not aware of this, you can tag users in your posts, so that (as long as you're not on their Ignore list) they'll be notified that you've mentioned them. If you're posting from a desktop, type that '@' sign followed by the first 3+ letters of their name. The web browser will then offer user names that match that, and you can choose the person you're referring to.

This creates a BBCode link in your post, and when posted, it notifies the person you've tagged. This way, Nouveau wont be able to ignore you. Like this: @Authentic Nouveau - you're being tagged

These links can be created manually, too. Here's what the above link looks like:

Code: 
[USER=139]@Authentic Nouveau[/USER]

The number is the user's ID, and it can be found in the QUOTE tag every time you quote their text. For example, your ID is 599, which I found when looking at the BBCode of your quote. Like this:

Code: 
[QUOTE="Algor, post: 273992, member: 599"]
Having trouble with this one, Authentic Nouveau? It's a yes-no question. Lost your nerve?
[/QUOTE]

FYI only! Ignore this if you already knew...
Click to expand...
It won't make any difference @Authentic Nouveau still won't reply!
 
Algor

Algor

Well-known member
BMS said:
It was a question. Read it again and see the '?' symbol
Click to expand...
It isn’t a topic I like just casually going on about. AN is clearly not telling the truth about his background, and that actually annoys me. I am a physician: I worked hard for it, and abortion is not a topic to be approached in bad faith. Hence I said something. My personal experience with people dying isn’t generally for casual conversation. So: why do you ask? Maybe we can approach the topic from a different angle.
 
Algor

Algor

Well-known member
Whateverman said:
If you're not aware of this, you can tag users in your posts, so that (as long as you're not on their Ignore list) they'll be notified that you've mentioned them. If you're posting from a desktop, type that '@' sign followed by the first 3+ letters of their name. The web browser will then offer user names that match that, and you can choose the person you're referring to.

This creates a BBCode link in your post, and when posted, it notifies the person you've tagged. This way, Nouveau wont be able to ignore you. Like this: @Authentic Nouveau - you're being tagged

These links can be created manually, too. Here's what the above link looks like:

Code: 
[USER=139]@Authentic Nouveau[/USER]

The number is the user's ID, and it can be found in the QUOTE tag every time you quote their text. For example, your ID is 599, which I found when looking at the BBCode of your quote. Like this:

Code: 
[QUOTE="Algor, post: 273992, member: 599"]
Having trouble with this one, Authentic Nouveau? It's a yes-no question. Lost your nerve?
[/QUOTE]

FYI only! Ignore this if you already knew...
Click to expand...
Tnx. No I didn’t.
 
B

BMS

Well-known member
Temujin said:
The dominant verb in the sentence you are unclear of is "think". Observable reality agrees that the Nazis committed murder, since we can observe both the act and the legal retribution. We do not see the same legal retribution handed out to doctors who perform abortions. The reason is that what they do is not murder.
It's not difficult once you get your head around the fact that murder has three elements, all of which need to be present:
1. Killing of a human in being (Defined as a human that is alive and has taken at least one breath.
2. Illegality.
3. Malicious intent.

Abortion has none of these essential elements, therefore it is no more murder than it is insurance fraud.
Jews are obviously human beings. The foetus in the womb is human, but has not taken a breath, so it is not yet a human in being. Neither is it a person, unlike the Jew. This is another quite easy concept once you grasp the difference between potential and actual, between what is now and what maybe in the future. A foetus may become a baby, a person, a human in being in the future. To say that it is one now is to confuse the present with the future and to mangle language in a failed attempt to legitimise nonsense.
Click to expand...
Ah so since human beings in the womb are human beings, there is your problem. Like the Nazis considered Jews subhuman you obviously have prejudices against the unborn human beings in the womb. You dont think human beings are humans beings unless they fit your prejudices.

BTW you are a human being and you spent some time in your mothers womb, so you were a human being then. That is why I asked you whether you believe observable reality. I see from your reply that you claim to but in observable reality you dont.
 
B

BMS

Well-known member
Temujin said:
They are just as human as any other foetus. They are not yet in being and not yet a person. Just like every other foetus. Your focus on Jews and black people is noted.
Click to expand...
So do you believe black human beings in the womb are black then? And, do you believe a black human being at embryo stage is not an black human embryo but a black human foetus?
 
Temujin

Temujin

Well-known member
BMS said:
Ah so since human beings in the womb are human beings, there is your problem. Like the Nazis considered Jews subhuman you obviously have prejudices against the unborn human beings in the womb. You dont think human beings are humans beings unless they fit your prejudices.

BTW you are a human being and you spent some time in your mothers womb, so you were a human being then. That is why I asked you whether you believe observable reality. I see from your reply that you claim to but in observable reality you dont.
Click to expand...
No, I am not prejudiced against unborn human beings. I just accept the observable reality that they are unborn and are different from human beings that are born. The difference is sufficiently profound that whether one is born or unborn affects the rights that society bestows on you. Declaring that both are human beings has no more force than declaring that they are both mammals.

Born human beings have rights because society has agreed to bestow rights on them because they are both human beings and born. Those that are human beings and not born do not have the same rights, if any. They have to wait until they are born to get their rights. There are excellent moral reasons why this is the case, not least the obvious injury to the rights of the pregnant woman, who obviously has been born and so has rights.
 
Temujin

Temujin

Well-known member
BMS said:
So do you believe black human beings in the womb are black then? And, do you believe a black human being at embryo stage is not an black human embryo but a black human foetus?
Click to expand...
I find it hard to believe that an educated person is asking these questions. Ethnicity is a property embedded in DNA. This remains the case in every foetus, embryo or unfertilized egg. Your question is completely incoherent. Why in earth are you asking it?
 
A

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Algor said:
Meh. He probably won’t commit further. Maybe he thinks its OK for physicians to be seen as spineless and deceptive.
Click to expand...
BMS said:
Ah so since human beings in the womb are human beings, there is your problem. Like the Nazis considered Jews subhuman you obviously have prejudices against the unborn human beings in the womb. You dont think human beings are humans beings unless they fit your prejudices.

BTW you are a human being and you spent some time in your mothers womb, so you were a human being then. That is why I asked you whether you believe observable reality. I see from your reply that you claim to but in observable reality you dont.
Click to expand...
When there are people willing to kill a baby and lie about it, they enthusiastically will try to attack people like you and me even more.
It doesn't bother me.
Nazis called Jews parasites. We have an abortion Nazi that says the infant is a parasite.
 
A

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Algor said:
It isn’t a topic I like just casually going on about. AN is clearly not telling the truth about his background, and that actually annoys me. I am a physician: I worked hard for it, and abortion is not a topic to be approached in bad faith. Hence I said something. My personal experience with people dying isn’t generally for casual conversation. So: why do you ask? Maybe we can approach the topic from a different angle.
Click to expand...
What motivates your slander and insults? Ego?
How do you justify the energy you and your amen corner invest in lying about credentials without gathering facts?

You need to ramp up the attacks, get your support group emotionally charged and create more distraction from discussing abortionism.

I do notice you claim to be a doc and notice you just are not very busy. No patients? No charts to write? lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top