06-8-2011 at 5:01 AM

<b>This thread is being closed as the rules are not being followed and warnings are being ignored.</b>

06-8-2011 at 4:59 AM

<i>"So a scientest who is studying this "fetus" gave it that name to seperate it from being an accual human being? Or are those scientests doing what i alredy said? Desenctizeing themselfs from the truth because the truth my be to much for them to handle? Murders do that too in alot of cases, they see the person they are killing as less than a human being, thats what makes it right in there eyes. Funny how that works isn't it? I believe the Nezi's did the same with the Jewish."</i><br /> <br /> The holocaust and abortions are absolutely nothing alike. The jews were already alive, already had nervous systems, self awareness, emotions, etc. A fetus does NOT have that, which means it is NOT a baby/human/whatever you consider it. Which means that no, it does not have rights, because it isn't actually anything that can have rights in the first place. I'm sorry that you cannot accept the truth, but that's exactly what it is, the truth. <br /> <br /><i> "You didnt answer the question. Can scientets be wrong on this as well?"</i><br /> <br /> No, they cannot be. They have tested and retested this a hundred times over.

06-8-2011 at 4:56 AM

I didn't say that. I'm saying look at how many things have not and cannot be proven false.<br /> <br /> You didnt answer the question. Can scientets be wrong on this as well?<br /> <br /> Did you really just compare abortion to the Holocaust? <br /> <br /> It is relevent in the mass murdering of people. In this case people believe that a "fetus" is less that human, Hence it dosent have rights. The relevency is that the Nezi's believed that the jewesh where less that human, hence they also didnt deserve human rights.<br /> <br /> See the connection?<br />

06-8-2011 at 4:52 AM

No, they term it fetus based on how far along in development that it is. Did you really just compare abortion to the Holocaust? That's actually incredibly insensitive and rude. What if I was Jewish? I could take offense to that. I mean, especially considering they are nothing alike.<br /> <br /> I didn't say that. I'm saying look at how many things have not and cannot be proven false. Look at how much science has given us that can't be disproven. Science isn't always right, but neither is anyone. And I think science is the closest we get. Not personal opinion.

06-8-2011 at 4:46 AM

. A fetus can be studied and tested on right now at this very moment<br /> <br /> So a scientest who is studying this "fetus" gave it that name to seperate it from being an accual human being? Or are those scientests doing what i alredy said? Desenctizeing themselfs from the truth because the truth my be to much for them to handle? Murders do that too in alot of cases, they see the person they are killing as less than a human being, thats what makes it right in there eyes. Funny how that works isn't it? I believe the Nezi's did the same with the Jewish. <br /> <br /> Also, oh no, a couple scientific things were proven wrong.<br /> <br /> So theres no way in the wrold EVER that they could be wrong now?<br /> <br />

06-8-2011 at 4:40 AM

<b>Personal attacks are not allowed in the forums. This includes claiming people think they are (or act like they are or pretend they are or whichever) better than each other. Drop this subject or I will close the thread.</b>

06-8-2011 at 4:38 AM

Actually, I didn't say that yoiu are claiming to be better than us, I said you are acting like you are better than us. There's a difference.<br /> <br /> Also, oh no, a couple scientific things were proven wrong. But look how much else has NOT been proven wrong. Again, too much to list. Also this isn't something that can't be proven wrong. It just can't be. It's not a mix up of bones from forever ago, it's being studied in the here and now. Also, it's a term. It's not a theory, it's just a scientific term. That's not something you can prove.

06-8-2011 at 4:37 AM

<i>"Yes they should, did i say anywhere that a parent prooved to be inresponcible, prooved to be abusive should be able to keep that child? NO! No where in any of my posts did i say that a kid should be forced to live in that type of situation."</i><br /> <br /> But you keep saying people should be forced to deal with the child, which would cause it to be harmed, or killed, before it could be taken away by someone. Adoption is not an option to fix that, and the reason why is clearly defined in previous posts.<br /> <br /> <i>"So scientests are always right? Is that it? You know they not only made a dinosore out of two different animals they then speculated on what that animals life was like, down to migratory patterns and types of food eaten. That took years and years, and YES it was proven wrong and tossed out the windo."</i><br /> <br /> This is no where near the same thing as talking about a fetus. A fetus can be studied and tested on <i>right now at this very moment</i> but a dinosaur they can only guess at and look at the few facts they do have. There is so little evidence with dinosaurs, but NOT with a fetus.

06-8-2011 at 4:31 AM

You said that no matter what, people should be forced to accept the consequences and have the kid.<br /> <br /> Yes they should, did i say anywhere that a parent prooved to be inresponcible, prooved to be abusive should be able to keep that child? NO! No where in any of my posts did i say that a kid should be forced to live in that type of situation.<br /> <br /> "while years and years and freaking YEARS of scientific study can just be tossed out the window."<br /> <br /> So scientests are always right? Is that it? You know they not only made a dinosore out of two different animals they then speculated on what that animals life was like, down to migratory patterns and types of food eaten. That took years and years, and YES it was proven wrong and tossed out the windo. <br /> <br /> "FACT the human mind will do anything to convince themselfs that what they are doing is always right."<br /> Seems to be what you are doing now, considering you seem to think you are better than us.<br /> Assumption at its best, now your saying i claim to be better than you. At what part did i say that? Or is it that my opinion differs from yours you don't like it, you hate that i will not back down on my opinion and you are getting frustrated?

06-8-2011 at 4:24 AM

Crap. My entire post just accidently got deleted.-_-; Let me try to remember it.<br /> <br /> "Scientests are not always right though are they? PROOF a long neck dinosore they swore up and down was real, turns out its 2 different animals put tougher. I personaly believe that once again science is WRONG. It IS a baby, it will grow and be born into a baby, then as it grows up a child, then a teen then an adult. I see no where in that life line where it says Ummm its a CAT!"<br /> <br /> All I can say to this is facepalm. If I was sitting at a desk, I would have been pounding my head on it repeatedly because you don't seem to read what we are saying at all. Because, you know, personal opinion is true, while years and years and freaking YEARS of scientific study can just be tossed out the window. Yeah. That's totally it.<br /> <br /> "FACT its a child not a wild animal"<br /> Uh...humans are animals.>.> You do realize that, right? We belong to the Kingdom Animalia. Besides, nobody compared a fetus to a wild animal. I did compare it to a parasite a while back, which it is. "an animal or plant that lives in or on another (the host) from which it obtains nourishment. The host does not benefit from the association and is often harmed by it" A fetus fits this so well. It lives off the host's nutrients (the mother), and there are so many things that can go wrong in a pregnancy that I'm not even going to bother listing them. And it doesn't help the mother in any way.<br /> <br /> "FACT the human mind will do anything to convince themselfs that what they are doing is always right."<br />[removed by mod]<br /> <br /> Also, I don't think what the state did was right. At all. I think it was idiotic. Of course, I think a lot of things that the government does is idiotic, but I digress.

06-8-2011 at 4:20 AM

<i>[removed by mod]</i><br /> <br /> I never said I was speaking for you, I said that being against abortions put hundreds of kids in potentially abusive or fatal situations. You said that no matter what, people should be forced to accept the consequences and have the kid. Which means putting the kid into that type of situation where it could possibly be harmed or killed.<br /> <br /> <i>"FACT its a child not a wild animal<br /> FACT the human mind will do anything to convince themselfs that what they are doing is always right.<br /> FACT Scientests can be wrong, see above statement. They are still people. "</i><br /> <br /> Not a single person here claimed that it was a wild animal. What on earth are you even talking about at this point? Science shows that a clump of cells (which at that age pretty much IS the same as a wild animal fetus, since you keep bringing that up, I might as well point that out to you.) Science has to go back and try to piece together things with dinosaurs, with a fetus, everything is right there in front of them to observe and test on as they see fit. Just because you don't think it's accurate doesn't mean it isn't.<br /> <br /> <i>"Please read the question carefuly it says should "Should someone who accidently killed someone in a car wreck be forced to pay for that the rest of their lives"</i><br /> <br /> Keyword; accidental. So yes that could apply to someone else running out into the street to commit suicide and someone hitting them and being held accountable for manslaughter even though it was NOT their fault and there was absolutely nothing that could have been done to prevent it.

06-8-2011 at 4:08 AM

<br /> Also, it is not a human being. Do you know anything about science? Any scientist will tell you it is a fetus, especially scientists who have spent years and years studying the human body and reproduction system, etc.<br /> <br /> Scientests are not always right though are they? PROOF a long neck dinosore they swore up and down was real, turns out its 2 different animals put tougher. I personaly believe that once again science is WRONG. It IS a baby, it will grow and be born into a baby, then as it grows up a child, then a teen then an adult. I see no where in that life line where it says Ummm its a CAT! <br /> <br /> You can use that as an excuse all you want, we have facts to back up our statements. Sorry if you don't like what FACTS say. Facts are truth.<br /> <br /> FACT its a child not a wild animal<br /> FACT the human mind will do anything to convince themselfs that what they are doing is always right.<br /> FACT Scientests can be wrong, see above statement. They are still people. <br /> <br /> <br /> Then people who make the decision to have children need to pay for them themselves, not be a drain on society.<br /> <br /> lol thats like saying people who go to collage should not take every possible grant, because it drains society. Do not take any and all help that can be given. <br /> <br /> I have pointed out several times why not allowing abortion would cause things like that to happen. I'm not pointing it out again.<br /> <br /> [removed by mod]<br /> <br /> I'm sorry, what?! Are you saying that an accident that could have actually been caused by the dead person (running out in the street/highway with the intent to die, etc.), then the person who accidentally killed the person should die.<br /> <br /> Please read the question carefuly it says should "Should someone who accidently killed someone in a car wreck be forced to pay for that the rest of their lives" I had a friend in highschool, he had musculer distafey. He and his friend where in his dads house. They where alone, decided to get out the guns, they didnt know they where loded. Steve walked away for a little bit, he was on his way back to the room when the gun went off. It went threw the wall and hit him in the head, it killed him. There was so much blood, <br /> steve was blonde but the parents kept saying it couldnt have been him because the kid they pulled out of there house had dark red hair. His friend? He was charged with murder, it was a accident yes but he was charged with murder. He is under house arrest for the rest of his life after he gets out of jail this year. <br /> <br /> People need to take responcibility for there actions. I rember sitting in the cort room, and Steves parents didnt want him charged but it was a state matter, and i believe the state did what was right.

06-8-2011 at 3:56 AM

<b>RESPECT: That means no calling each other stupid, insane, idiotic, etc etc etc. I see this once more, I will take action. You are not to attack other players. If you're using those words in your post, you're moving into territory that breaks the rules on respect.</b>

06-8-2011 at 3:51 AM

"Should someone who accidently killed someone in a car wreck be forced to pay for that the rest of their lives or be sentenced to death for being a murderer, despite it being an accident?<br /> <br /> yes they should."<br /> <br /> I'm sorry, what?! Are you saying that an accident that could have actually been caused by the dead person (running out in the street/highway with the intent to die, etc.), then the person who accidentally killed the person should die. [removed by mod] That's like saying I spilled some milk, so I should be put in jail for 10 years. I mean, the thing about smoking I can understand. But in the case of vehicular manslaughter, it is oftentimes a complete accident or just horrible event. I'm just learning how to drive, and was out driving earlier and there were several times I could have hit someone. (I obviously didn't.>.>) But if they had decided to run out into the street while I was going 50 miles an hour, there would be nothing I could do to stop from hitting them (if they ran directly in front of me). A horrible accident yes, but an accident that couldn't have been prevented. That statement just enrages me, though. And people ask why I'm losing faith in humanity.<br /> <br /> Yeah, parents should know that, but they can't. My mom knew I was out with friends today, but she didn't know exactly where I was every second of the day because of this. And honestly, I'm glad she didn't. I didn't do anything illegal, but how are they going to know where their child is every second of the day? They can't, unless they insert tracking chips or something stupid like that.<br /> <br /> Also, it is not a human being. Do you know anything about science? Any scientist will tell you it is a fetus, especially scientists who have spent years and years studying the human body and reproduction system, etc.

06-8-2011 at 3:48 AM

<i>"No its still a human child isn't it? Its a baby. Plain and simple. To say otherwise is proof of desencitashion. It is a unborn child, not simply a object."</i><br /><br /> You can use that as an excuse all you want, we have facts to back up our statements. Sorry if you don't like what FACTS say. Facts are truth.<br /> <br /> <i>"What part of take responcibility for your actions arnt you getting?"</i><br /><br /> Then people who make the decision to have children need to pay for them themselves, not be a drain on society, resources, money, etc.<br /><br /> <i>"It is a parents responcibility to know where there kid is at all times and what they are doing. If a parent has a inkling that there pre/teen is haveing sexual relations that parent is now the responcible party. "</i><br /><br /> Parents cannot watch their kids 100% of the time. To say that they can is absolutely absurd. They maybe able to monitor them closely, but they cannot be with them 24/7 to enforce that. The most that can be done is give the children protection, which does fail at times.<br /><br /> <i>"Point out where i said that. Just once point out where i said that anywhere. "</i><br /> <br /> I have pointed out several times why not allowing abortion would cause things like that to happen. I'm not pointing it out again.<br /><br /> <i>"it IS a human being, it is a CHILD."</i><br /> <br /> Your opinion does not make it fact. Again, I can say the sky is purple and the grass is orange, but obviously that does not make it true.

06-8-2011 at 3:40 AM

Should someone who accidently killed someone in a car wreck be forced to pay for that the rest of their lives or be sentenced to death for being a murderer, despite it being an accident?<br /> <br /> yes they should.<br /> <br /> What about people who smoke? Should they be forced to live with lung cancer because they made the decision to smoke?<br /> <br /> Its a concaquence of there actions they knew would come into play. What part of take responcibility for your actions arnt you getting?<br /> <br /> A clump of cells (yes cells, NOT a baby) does not have more rights than a living, breathing, person. I think you are biased because you have children yourself.<br /> <br /> No im not biest because i have kids, i have believed that abortion is wrong since i was 10 years old. Once again assumeing. <br /> <br /> Children will always have sex behind their parents back, no matter what. They will ALWAYS find a way to do it if they really want to, but that does not mean they are responsible enough for a child by any means.<br /> <br /> It is a parents responcibility to know where there kid is at all times and what they are doing. If a parent has a inkling that there pre/teen is haveing sexual relations that parent is now the responcible party. <br /> <br /> you are saying that you are perfectly okay with already born children (who can think and feel) being resented, mistreated, abused (physically or mentally), and possibly murdered (sometimes in insanely brutal ways). .<br /> <br /> Point out where i said that. Just once point out where i said that anywhere. <br /> <br /> <br /> NOT A HUMAN BEING. I really don't know how else to spell it out for you.<br /> <br /> it IS a human being, it is a CHILD

06-8-2011 at 3:38 AM

It grows into a human child. It starts out as a clump of cells. If I called you a clump of cells, it would be an insult. A fetus actually is just a clump of cells. NOT A HUMAN BEING. I really don't know how else to spell it out for you.

06-8-2011 at 3:33 AM

a fetus grows into a baby<br /> <br /> So what is it between that time? a cat? a dog? how about a chicken?<br /> <br /> No its still a human child isn't it? Its a baby. Plain and simple. To say otherwise is proof of desencitashion. It is a unborn child, not simply a object.

06-8-2011 at 3:31 AM

<i>"No it dosent, science just gives the baby and thats what it is a BABY a different name so you can decencitize yourself to the truth. That you are chooseing to MURDER your own child."</i><br /> <br /> That is your opinion, not a fact. You are trying to revert to name calling (yes claiming we are murdering something is in fact calling us murderers.) in an effort to make us feel bad and attempt to prove your point, and it isn't working. Facts are what are relevant to debates and science proves what I (and everyone else here) said as a fact. It isn't a baby, it looks nothing like one, it doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it has no nervous system, it nothing at all. Again, I can say the grass is orange and the sky is purple, but that doesn't make it true. Just like you claiming a clump of cells is a baby, especially with rights, doesn't make it true. Sorry.<br /> <br /> <i>"Try and read my ACCUAL post before jumping to conclushions. It might help you understand."<br /> <br /> "Wow once again you did NOT read the entire post just the parts you think you can argue to. People who go around MASS MURDERING others should receve the death penelty. There is no rehabilitashion BECAUSE that person is ovsley not in tuch with any human emotion."</i><br /> <br /> <br /> I read your entire post. You said nothing about mass murdering, you only said murderers. However, that doesn't change the fact that what I brought up was still relevant. Should someone who accidently killed someone in a car wreck be forced to pay for that the rest of their lives or be sentenced to death for being a murderer, despite it being an accident? What about people who smoke? Should they be forced to live with lung cancer because they made the decision to smoke? What about cancer in general? A lot of it is caused by people or things created by people, so therefore people should be forced to accept it, suffer, and die from it, correct? That's the logic you are using here.<br /> <br /> <i>"No acculey its relevent to the conversation. See parents who arnt responcible for the chirldren and allow them to run around haveing sex at such a young age are the cause of abortions. More unwed teenage girls get abortions that woman, and i do meen accual woman not the oooh but im 17 im a woman now kind. "</i><br /> <br /> Children will always have sex behind their parents back, no matter what. They will ALWAYS find a way to do it if they really want to, but that does not mean they are responsible enough for a child by any means. A child under the age of 16 cannot work in most places, so how on earth can they care for their baby? A child under the age of 12 can literally DIE from a pregnancy, killing herself and the baby. How is that better than something that is not a life at all being removed to save the life of another? Not ALL abortions are underage kids either, as said a hundred times over in this thread, accidents do happen even when protection is used and even doubled up on. No one should be forced to let someone or something use their body against their will. That's like saying someone can forcefully take your organs against your will, just because it benefits someone else later down the road.<br /> <br /> <i>"oooh ok so whipe the slate clean give them a cookie or a sticker and send them on there marry way, do you REALLY think thats going to work? No one FORCED her to choose to have sex now did they? She had the idea that she was responcible enough to have sex so she did, now lets look at this more than one way. IF her partner had some kind of STD would a doctor be able to whipe that away? NO he wouldnt have. it is a conaquence of sex. If you believe you are grown up enough to have sex then YOU should be held responcible for your actions and have that child if you get pregnet, regardless of age."</i><br /> <br /> STDs cannot be gotten rid of, an unwanted pregnancy can. I'm sorry, but you are arguing for something that has absolutely no rights. A clump of cells (yes cells, NOT a baby) does not have more rights than a living, breathing, person. I think you are biased because you have children yourself. If you think children are great, good for you, but not everyone thinks so and not everyone wants them. Not everyone needs mini-copies of themselves running about, overpopulating the world, and depleting it of resources, draining the government of money, etc.<br /> <br /> You also completely ignored this paragraph of my post...<br /> <br /> By saying you are not okay with abortion and people should be forced to deal, you are saying that you are perfectly okay with already born children (who can think and feel) being resented, mistreated, abused (physically or mentally), and possibly murdered (sometimes in insanely brutal ways). .How is that better than terminating BEFORE it's an actual life? It isn't, not by any means.

06-8-2011 at 3:22 AM

Well, now I don't really have anything to respond to except the [removed by mod] fetus=baby, which has been proven false a million times in this thread alone.<br /> <br /> In short, a fetus grows into a baby. They are not the same thing. Get that through your head.