Have you watched an abortion procedure?

[Authentic Nouveau]

You aren't a physician, AN. That isn't slander, and it's no insult.

Tell me what motivates your focus on church lady gossip on an abortion thread?
I notice you aren't a doc. since you are blogging all day now.

If you study medicine one day, you will learn to gather facts before church basement lady gossip.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

I have, as a student.
It was mandatory to attend a clinic at the medical school I went to.
Have you?

Bet you don't have the stones to answer directly.

Since you got that totally wrong, we have no reason to believe you as a source for any claims. Why do you make stuff up on people you don't know ? Like you do on your own "credentials?"

 

[BMS]

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?

Well debating with someone like yourself who is unable to address the points made or the questions about your position put to you, is seemingly impossible. Since we we as human beings both went through a foetal stage, as we did through an embryo stage of development, when I refer to human being and ask you questions about the human being, your responses about the foetus is merely describing a stage of the human beings development.
So yes, ethnicity is embedded in a human being's DNA, and is so since fertilized conception, whether the human being is at the embryonic stage, the foetal stage, the adolescent stage or adult.

 

[BMS]

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.

Everyone who supports pro-choice abortion is prejudiced against unborn human beings. The human being during their stage of development as a child is obviously no different from the human being at their stage of development as an adult, or as a foetus. Its still the human being. Of course the human being as a new born baby will not survive anymore than the human being in the womb, but neither are a reason to kill the human being. Of course the human being as a child at 5 years of age cant know about puberty or reproduce any more than the human being still in the womb but these are not reasons to kill the human being.
The extent of profoundness of differences with the development of human beings, or any of their characteristics is irrelevant to the fact they are human beings. Different societies give or deny different rights to human beings. It seems your thinking is based on your own subjective biases.
If you cant give rights to unborn human beings because of your prejudice then maybe someone wont give you rights because of their prejudice towards you.

 

[Temujin]

Everyone who supports pro-choice abortion is prejudiced against unborn human beings. The human being during their stage of development as a child is obviously no different from the human being at their stage of development as an adult, or as a foetus. Its still the human being. Of course the human being as a new born baby will not survive anymore than the human being in the womb, but neither are a reason to kill the human being. Of course the human being as a child at 5 years of age cant know about puberty or reproduce any more than the human being still in the womb but these are not reasons to kill the human being.
The extent of profoundness of differences with the development of human beings, or any of their characteristics is irrelevant to the fact they are human beings. Different societies give or deny different rights to human beings. It seems your thinking is based on your own subjective biases.
If you cant give rights to unborn human beings because of your prejudice then maybe someone wont give you rights because of their prejudice towards you.

At least we have come to the heart of the matter. Of course there are differences between different stages of development. We all recognise that. The issue is simply whether the difference between a foetus and a new-born are sufficiently profound that they should be accorded different rights and status. I believe it is. You believe it is not. It isn't a matter of prejudice one way or another. It is a difference of opinion regarding what makes a person. It is a fact that my opinion is pretty much the same as current established law, which in our country has functioned extremely well for 60 years. That doesn't invalidate your opinion, of course, but it does make some of your remarks about the invalidity of my opinion rather ridiculous. You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. The facts are that abortion is a legal medical procedure. It is not, and never has been considered murder by any but the more extreme. The foetus does not have the same rights as the born child. In fact it has no rights at all in law and is regarded as an adjunct of the mother rather than a being in its own right.

You are welcome to object to these facts, but saying that they don't exist, or anyone describing them is merely prejudiced, is plain stupid and wrong. If you cannot recognise the world as it is, you will never be able to change it. Your point of view will be, as it is now, doomed to irrelevance.

 

[kiwimac]

Everyone who supports pro-choice abortion is prejudiced against unborn human beings. The human being during their stage of development as a child is obviously no different from the human being at their stage of development as an adult, or as a foetus. Its still the human being. Of course the human being as a new born baby will not survive anymore than the human being in the womb, but neither are a reason to kill the human being. Of course the human being as a child at 5 years of age cant know about puberty or reproduce any more than the human being still in the womb but these are not reasons to kill the human being.
The extent of profoundness of differences with the development of human beings, or any of their characteristics is irrelevant to the fact they are human beings. Different societies give or deny different rights to human beings. It seems your thinking is based on your own subjective biases.
If you cant give rights to unborn human beings because of your prejudice then maybe someone wont give you rights because of their prejudice towards you.

Rot and nonsense.

 

[BMS]

Rot and nonsense.

1/10 for effort. Try and give some evidence based reasoning or maybe add some colours

 

[shnarkle]

There is a pro-deather who says I don't know what an abortion is. lol

Orthodox atheist move to make assertions without access to facts. Intellectual lethargy!!!

I was probably in the fifth grade when I watched a documentary on the subject which showed a woman having an abortion. This was no more than a few years after it had been legalized. It was ghastly.

 

[BMS]

At least we have come to the heart of the matter. Of course there are differences between different stages of development. We all recognise that. The issue is simply whether the difference between a foetus and a new-born are sufficiently profound that they should be accorded different rights and status. I believe it is. You believe it is not. It isn't a matter of prejudice one way or another. It is a difference of opinion regarding what makes a person. It is a fact that my opinion is pretty much the same as current established law, which in our country has functioned extremely well for 60 years. That doesn't invalidate your opinion, of course, but it does make some of your remarks about the invalidity of my opinion rather ridiculous. You are entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts. The facts are that abortion is a legal medical procedure. It is not, and never has been considered murder by any but the more extreme. The foetus does not have the same rights as the born child. In fact it has no rights at all in law and is regarded as an adjunct of the mother rather than a being in its own right.

You are welcome to object to these facts, but saying that they don't exist, or anyone describing them is merely prejudiced, is plain stupid and wrong. If you cannot recognise the world as it is, you will never be able to change it. Your point of view will be, as it is now, doomed to irrelevance.

Person? I said human being. In Saudi Arabia abortion is generally illegal and so is homosexuality, but at least banning homosexuality doesn't kill an human beings, and if it does then they will be as bad as your position.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Well debating with someone like yourself who is unable to address the points made or the questions about your position put to you, is seemingly impossible. Since we we as human beings both went through a foetal stage, as we did through an embryo stage of development, when I refer to human being and ask you questions about the human being, your responses about the foetus is merely describing a stage of the human beings development.
So yes, ethnicity is embedded in a human being's DNA, and is so since fertilized conception, whether the human being is at the embryonic stage, the foetal stage, the adolescent stage or adult.

Stages of development begin at conception. Freud and Piaggett and others also offered Psych "stages of development. "
All, no exception, newborn black babies are born PINK. I have seen many. This is back to their word games approach.

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

I was probably in the fifth grade when I watched a documentary on the subject which showed a woman having an abortion. This was no more than a few years after it had been legalized. It was ghastly.

It is a baby for real while still in utero.

 

[J regia]

All, no exception, newborn black babies are born PINK. I have seen many.

So how do you change black babies from PINK to black, and do you use a UV light or do you just put them out in the sun for a few hours?

 

[Authentic Nouveau]

Rot and nonsense.

Pro-deather reflex response.