Amicus Rising… Part one…

[4est_4est_Gump]

Libs can't be chirstians..since when?

does this mean when conservative christians tell a woman what to do with their body.. it doesnt bother you?

Learn to read.

The standard lib slander is that a person who holds life sacrosanct is doing so only because their lives are ruled by an outdated, outmoded, old-fashioned, antiquated Religious morality.

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of someone who after about a certain amount of time decides that now is the time that they can be just like the Christians they bash and impose their situational morality upon a woman. If it's her body and it's no different that a cancer then she has the right to cure herself at any point in time that she damned well chooses to or your argument loses the consistency requires for validity.

 

[about_average]

I'm asking you because this morning you stated that you considered yourself as a Libertarian.

If you'd actually read the post you're referring to, you'd know my position.

Libs can't be chirstians..since when?

He's said this before. As explained to me, a liberal christian is taking part in some nefarious plot to...to something or other. It was so ludicrous I don't even remember. I should look it up and send it to Andy Borowitz or The Onion. I'm sure they could run with it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

If you'd actually read the post you're referring to, you'd know my position.

...

Then you should have no problem, as a polite form of respectful conversation in restating it for me...



... I always do that for you or anyone else.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

...

He's said this before. As explained to me, a liberal christian is taking part in some nefarious plot to...to something or other. It was so ludicrous I don't even remember. I should look it up and send it to Andy Borowitz or The Onion. I'm sure they could run with it.

Don't answer for me. That is a form of patronization, it is disrespectful and it is why people continually assume that you are a liberal Democrat, not an independent Libertarian.

 

[about_average]

Don't answer for me. That is a form of patronization, it is disrespectful and it is why people continually assume that you are a liberal Democrat, not an independent Libertarian.

I wasn't answering the question, I was commenting on the question.
If you'll notice, the question was "since when?". I gave no date or time.
If I'd been answering for you, my post would have been, "Since 1989", or something similar.

Of course, no doubt you'll claim I'm just "parsing words" .

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Non-responsive.

Deflective...



The lawrd says shut the fawk up and answer the quarstion...

 

[Phelia]

Non-responsive.

Deflective...



The lawrd says shut the fawk up and answer the quarstion...

Beautiful. You wasted my time, but this delicious morsel and its utter lack of self-awareness have made it all worthwhile

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Beautiful. You wasted my time, but this delicious morsel and its utter lack of self-awareness have made it all worthwhile

Attack, attack, Always attack!

 

[Skiddles2014]

Beautiful. You wasted my time, but this delicious morsel and its utter lack of self-awareness have made it all worthwhile

He really is a dipshit, isn't he?

 

[DooleyDarter]

[QUOTE=badbabysitter;58840791]when the embryo gestates to a point it could be considered a viable life.. ie have a brain, functioning organs, able to breathe and digest and survive outside of its host unaided


a zygote has none of those


it should be interesting to you.. because apparently the reproductive system of a woman is a mystery to you as well[/QUOTE]


I don't really think a human baby can survive unaided outside of its host for a very long period of time. I get your argument up to that last unaided survival statement. If that is what you truly base your opinion on, then a woman should be able to kill her child up to at least a couple years of age.

 

[phrodeau]

http://i.lvme.me/g4q9a75.jpg

 

[richard_daily]

I'm fairly sure that amicus isn't going to "rise" when he passes on.

 

[subdued_passion]

I don't really think a human baby can survive unaided outside of its host for a very long period of time. I get your argument up to that last unaided survival statement. If that is what you truly base your opinion on, then a woman should be able to kill her child up to at least a couple years of age.

Unlike other mammals human babies are born before they're able to perform independent functions like walking and rely externally for nourishment as well as protection. This is because the birth canal isn't large enough to allow a child large enough to walk and talk out of it. In a way gestation is actually 18 months even though only half the time is spent inside the womb.

In some places abortion after 20 weeks is unlawful at others it's 24 weeks (in India gender specific abortions are illegal at any time) even though a newborn human is more helpless and dependent than bambi at birth.

 

[about_average]

Unlike other mammals human babies are born before they're able to perform independent functions like walking and rely externally for nourishment as well as protection.

Most mammals rely on their mothers for nourishment and protection when born. Not unique to humans at all. Some mammals won't adopt the newborn of others, but quite a few will.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I don't really think a human baby can survive unaided outside of its host for a very long period of time. I get your argument up to that last unaided survival statement. If that is what you truly base your opinion on, then a woman should be able to kill her child up to at least a couple years of age.

You are confusing "physical independence" with "social independence".

A fetus is dependent upon another human being for nutrients and oxygen. It's worth noting that many of the anti-abortion folks raise the false equivalency that because a newborn infant is also dependent upon another for nutrients and oxygen, a fetus should be considered the functional equivalent of a newborn.

This shows an inability to distinguish between the concepts of "physical independence" and "social independence". Social independence is where a child depends on society to feed, clothe and nuture him/her.

Physical independence, on the other hand, is when something depends on the physical body of another for its continued existence.

If you want to have some fun today, Dooley, you can be the first conservative ever to respond to my Amicus Abortion Challenge. Six simple questions.

 

[amicus]

So you're saying all women the world over have a choice as to when they get pregnant..that rape never occurs.. that birth control is 100% effective?

what fucking planet do you live on






she is being responsible for her actions... the father will never carry the child term.. the father will never have to worry about dying giving birth.. the father will never have to worry about developing health isses due to the child.. the father will not have end his career to support the child if he doesnt want to


exactly how many children have you personally given birth to







and here he goes with the pedophile shit again



those are called gold diggers... not surprising you've had to pay women for sex

~~~

Do take the time to educate your self on what percentage of pregnancies are the result on non consensual sex; further your education by learning the percentage caused by the failure of birth control chemicals.

Then apologize to all for trying to make a case of lifeboat ethics, proving a point by the exceptions to the general rule.

Do you really think there were fifty million rapes or birch control failures causing pregnancy since '73?

with your warped mind, probably so

amicus the realist

 

[DooleyDarter]

You are confusing "physical independence" with "social independence".

A fetus is dependent upon another human being for nutrients and oxygen. It's worth noting that many of the anti-abortion folks raise the false equivalency that because a newborn infant is also dependent upon another for nutrients and oxygen, a fetus should be considered the functional equivalent of a newborn.

This shows an inability to distinguish between the concepts of "physical independence" and "social independence". Social independence is where a child depends on society to feed, clothe and nuture him/her.

Physical independence, on the other hand, is when something depends on the physical body of another for its continued existence.

If you want to have some fun today, Dooley, you can be the first conservative ever to respond to my Amicus Abortion Challenge. Six simple questions.

The only really important question is the last. That is where you will probably get a 50/50 mix of opinion. If it is not murder, then you have answered all of the other questions above. If it is only murder after a certain TV time limit of gestation, then a woman aborting her fetus before that is home free. Also I guess the prosecution for the murder of 2 of someone who killed a pregnant woman before the TV time limit would also be a moot point. The big dilemma is the 50/50 vote on this. You will never convince the folks on he other side that its a choice and not a baby.

 

[amicus]

What the fuck is a Hershey's Losses? I Googled it thinking that there was a type of Candy my fat ass had not consumed, and google tries to tell me about company stock information; which I don't believe ANYONE would take as foreplay except for maybe that one accountant chick from superjail who was jacking off to Jared filling out forms at his desk.

~~~

I touch type, don't have to look at the keyboard and sometimes my fingers slip from the home keys, a typographical error which I repaired, but that is not the point, of course, you knew it was Hershey's Kisses I was referring to.

"Candy is dandy, but Liquor or, likker, is quicker..." some wag said that concerning the seduction of a female...

Not that any one in their right might would attempt to seduce blackbabysitter or irezumi, not even with your ten foot pole...

As women have been in this headlong rush to become little men in pants, they have lost much of the charm that used to be defined as feminine. Now, for the most part, they have become one night stands and they supply the condoms.

It is a stage in human development that we must go through, I guess, until we recognize our monumental error of giving women the right to vote. The sand niggers might have it right, sharia forever, woman, hold your tongue.

Not in my life time perhaps, but it will happen. You ladies have fouled your own nest...

amicus

 

[Sammael Bard]

Nasty old misogynist....

 

[about_average]

Nasty old misogynist....

Don't worry, he'll go down in history with the likes of howard rufus nichols.

 

[RobDownSouth]

The only really important question is the last. That is where you will probably get a 50/50 mix of opinion. If it is not murder, then you have answered all of the other questions above. If it is only murder after a certain TV time limit of gestation, then a woman aborting her fetus before that is home free. Also I guess the prosecution for the murder of 2 of someone who killed a pregnant woman before the TV time limit would also be a moot point. The big dilemma is the 50/50 vote on this. You will never convince the folks on he other side that its a choice and not a baby.

I'm disappointed you didn't take a crack at answering number 5: does a fetus have "human rights". It's an interesting conundrum, when you think about it. If we grant a fetus full "human rights", what happens when there is a conflict between the "rights" of the fetus and the rights of the mother?

I guess we'll never know...........

If it makes you feel any better, Colonel Hogan tried focusing the argument exclusively on the feticide/murder aspect as well.

 

[DooleyDarter]

I'm disappointed you didn't take a crack at answering number 5: does a fetus have "human rights". It's an interesting conundrum, when you think about it. If we grant a fetus full "human rights", what happens when there is a conflict between the "rights" of the fetus and the rights of the mother?

I guess we'll never know...........

If it makes you feel any better, Colonel Hogan tried focusing the argument exclusively on the feticide/murder aspect as well.

Therein lies the conundrum of which you speak. When does a fetus become a real kid? That hasn't and will not be answered to the satisfaction of all.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Therein lies the conundrum of which you speak. When does a fetus become a real kid? That hasn't and will not be answered to the satisfaction of all.

A fetus gains limited rights upon viability (generally understood to be 21-22 weeks post-conception) and full rights upon birth, if that's what you mean by "full kid".

Agree? Disagree? Call lines are open, operators are standing by.

 

[DooleyDarter]

A fetus gains limited rights upon viability (generally understood to be 21-22 weeks post-conception) and full rights upon birth, if that's what you mean by "full kid".

Agree? Disagree? Call lines are open, operators are standing by.

Thats that part the folks are not going to agree on. Generally understood by the crowd on what side of the abortomatic fence?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Thats that part the folks are not going to agree on. Generally understood by the crowd on what side of the abortomatic fence?

Okay, "some folks" disagree. Speaking solely for yourself, when do you think fetal viability occurs?

As an aside, should we define "viability" here first?