Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Dark Knight

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 02:27:02 PM »
So? The scenario will almost never happen.
Good

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 01:42:13 PM »
Fine, just as long as it is in agreement that a full term child at 40 weeks is also a fetus before it has been born because that is also the definition.  And in that case as long as it is still a "fetus" you are ok with it being aborted.

Personally, I'm actually okay with the death of anyone. In the case of abortion though, I believe that until a fetus is its own separate entity (umbilical cord cut), it does not deserve rights as an individual human, because it's not an individual.

Well saying someone must stop at stop signs and drive the speed limit is authoritarian and hypocritical as well.

Yes, it's authoritarian. No it's not hypocritical. I'm calling your stance hypocritical because just as a fertilized egg contributes to a potential human, so does sperm. For someone who is pro-life, all sperm should then be kept viable. Anyone who destroys any sperm is a murderer.

Again changing the terminology,  and again using a quote for "House".  Now that you changed the term from baby, to parasitic entity.  I am getting dizzy from the circles your speaking in.

I haven't changed terminology, I simply cite similarities and equivalencies. And it wasn't from House. I came up with this stuff in high school (as have many people), long before House ever became an idea for a show.

Nope, I was just going off what you feel and  as YOU stated in YOUR Quote in the last thread, it seems that you think THIS  since you provided me with those stipulations.  YOU stated that YOU feel that they cannot think, see , feel or choese something and I provided you proof that they do at 23 weeks.  I like how you cut the quote off to serve your need,  Next time you quote someone, you should provide the entire quote because that was as direct quote from you.  This is getting funny.   Please re-read the last 2 threads so you can rememer what your beliefs are.

I've stated my beliefs in the first reply above.

Arbitrary?  Last I heard, each only have 23 chromosomes.  That to is a fact so you may want to consider that as you, and I quote "simply use definitions and facts to make conclusions and choices."

It's arbitrary in that you make chromosomes the basis for being a human versus countless other things.

And you are missing the point also.  Killing someone due to a change its terminology, no matter what it is, is killing someone.

I said you can call it killing someone, I just like using the most accurate word to describe this "someone." Calling it a person and applying rights is just an appeal to emotion, rather than a valid argument.
This is a scenerio that was presented by you

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 01:38:36 PM »
Fine, just as long as it is in agreement that a full term child at 40 weeks is also a fetus before it has been born because that is also the definition.  And in that case as long as it is still a "fetus" you are ok with it being aborted.

Personally, I'm actually okay with the death of anyone. In the case of abortion though, I believe that until a fetus is its own separate entity (umbilical cord cut), it does not deserve rights as an individual human, because it's not an individual.

Well saying someone must stop at stop signs and drive the speed limit is authoritarian and hypocritical as well.

Yes, it's authoritarian. No it's not hypocritical. I'm calling your stance hypocritical because just as a fertilized egg contributes to a potential human, so does sperm. For someone who is pro-life, all sperm should then be kept viable. Anyone who destroys any sperm is a murderer.

Again changing the terminology,  and again using a quote for "House".  Now that you changed the term from baby, to parasitic entity.  I am getting dizzy from the circles your speaking in.

I haven't changed terminology, I simply cite similarities and equivalencies. And it wasn't from House. I came up with this stuff in high school (as have many people), long before House ever became an idea for a show.

Nope, I was just going off what you feel and  as YOU stated in YOUR Quote in the last thread, it seems that you think THIS  since you provided me with those stipulations.  YOU stated that YOU feel that they cannot think, see , feel or choese something and I provided you proof that they do at 23 weeks.  I like how you cut the quote off to serve your need,  Next time you quote someone, you should provide the entire quote because that was as direct quote from you.  This is getting funny.   Please re-read the last 2 threads so you can rememer what your beliefs are.

I've stated my beliefs in the first reply above.

Arbitrary?  Last I heard, each only have 23 chromosomes.  That to is a fact so you may want to consider that as you, and I quote "simply use definitions and facts to make conclusions and choices."

It's arbitrary in that you make chromosomes the basis for being a human versus countless other things.

And you are missing the point also.  Killing someone due to a change its terminology, no matter what it is, is killing someone.

I said you can call it killing someone, I just like using the most accurate word to describe this "someone." Calling it a person and applying rights is just an appeal to emotion, rather than a valid argument.

nuff said..... again

So you agree with divito that you are merely denying facts, replacing them with an appeal to emotion to absolve yourself from having to actually argue the facts that in the case of pregnancy, a woman has the right to choose if she wants to abort or not?

Red letter day for divito, I'd say.

Depends on what you would say is a fact, If a fetus is in fact not a baby, or another term for a baby fine.  If you feel that the fact that a late term fetus is not a baby then that is your decision, not fact.   The fact of what the definition of a fetus is has no bearing on the the choice of if it is ok to abort. 

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 01:32:24 PM »
No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 

Except for the fact that it's still a fetus.
Yup it is a fetus, and since it is still a fetus, even at 40 weeks, you feel it is ok to still abort?

I do, since by definition it's still a parasite.
ok, so let me get this straight I'll play along some more.  So, say a mother has twins.  The first baby is delivered, umbilical cord cut and laying in her arms.  The second is still not delivered yet.  The mother decides she doesn't want the babys and smothers the first baby and then has the doctor abort the second baby.  Was murder committed 1 time, 2 times or not at all?


Under U.S. law twice. 3rd trimester abortions are illegal fuckwit.

I know that, the question is on a basis of his idea that a fetus isn't a baby till it is born and that it is ok to abort.  It is a moral question dumbass.  read the string.

I think it is wrong to kill the fetus when it would be a baby in nearly no time, with no additional risk to the mother.

Agreed, That is the point I was trying to make. 

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 08:54:40 AM »
Fine, just as long as it is in agreement that a full term child at 40 weeks is also a fetus before it has been born because that is also the definition.  And in that case as long as it is still a "fetus" you are ok with it being aborted.

Personally, I'm actually okay with the death of anyone. In the case of abortion though, I believe that until a fetus is its own separate entity (umbilical cord cut), it does not deserve rights as an individual human, because it's not an individual.

Well saying someone must stop at stop signs and drive the speed limit is authoritarian and hypocritical as well.

Yes, it's authoritarian. No it's not hypocritical. I'm calling your stance hypocritical because just as a fertilized egg contributes to a potential human, so does sperm. For someone who is pro-life, all sperm should then be kept viable. Anyone who destroys any sperm is a murderer.

Again changing the terminology,  and again using a quote for "House".  Now that you changed the term from baby, to parasitic entity.  I am getting dizzy from the circles your speaking in.

I haven't changed terminology, I simply cite similarities and equivalencies. And it wasn't from House. I came up with this stuff in high school (as have many people), long before House ever became an idea for a show.

Nope, I was just going off what you feel and  as YOU stated in YOUR Quote in the last thread, it seems that you think THIS  since you provided me with those stipulations.  YOU stated that YOU feel that they cannot think, see , feel or choese something and I provided you proof that they do at 23 weeks.  I like how you cut the quote off to serve your need,  Next time you quote someone, you should provide the entire quote because that was as direct quote from you.  This is getting funny.   Please re-read the last 2 threads so you can rememer what your beliefs are.

I've stated my beliefs in the first reply above.

Arbitrary?  Last I heard, each only have 23 chromosomes.  That to is a fact so you may want to consider that as you, and I quote "simply use definitions and facts to make conclusions and choices."

It's arbitrary in that you make chromosomes the basis for being a human versus countless other things.

And you are missing the point also.  Killing someone due to a change its terminology, no matter what it is, is killing someone.

I said you can call it killing someone, I just like using the most accurate word to describe this "someone." Calling it a person and applying rights is just an appeal to emotion, rather than a valid argument.

nuff said..... again

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 07:34:56 AM »
No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 

Except for the fact that it's still a fetus.
Yup it is a fetus, and since it is still a fetus, even at 40 weeks, you feel it is ok to still abort?

I do, since by definition it's still a parasite.
ok, so let me get this straight I'll play along some more.  So, say a mother has twins.  The first baby is delivered, umbilical cord cut and laying in her arms.  The second is still not delivered yet.  The mother decides she doesn't want the babys and smothers the first baby and then has the doctor abort the second baby.  Was murder committed 1 time, 2 times or not at all?


I doubt that any sane woman will abort in the delivery room. If I recall, there are also laws which prevent third term abortions.

Please, try again.

This is a moral question dumbass, I is asked because of the answers that you gave me that any fetus can be aborted and that your ok with it.
Nice try.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 03, 2008, 07:33:28 AM »
No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 

Except for the fact that it's still a fetus.
Yup it is a fetus, and since it is still a fetus, even at 40 weeks, you feel it is ok to still abort?

I do, since by definition it's still a parasite.
ok, so let me get this straight I'll play along some more.  So, say a mother has twins.  The first baby is delivered, umbilical cord cut and laying in her arms.  The second is still not delivered yet.  The mother decides she doesn't want the babys and smothers the first baby and then has the doctor abort the second baby.  Was murder committed 1 time, 2 times or not at all?


Under U.S. law twice. 3rd trimester abortions are illegal fuckwit.

I know that, the question is on a basis of his idea that a fetus isn't a baby till it is born and that it is ok to abort.  It is a moral question dumbass.  read the string.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 02, 2008, 02:53:37 PM »
No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 

Except for the fact that it's still a fetus.
Yup it is a fetus, and since it is still a fetus, even at 40 weeks, you feel it is ok to still abort?

I do, since by definition it's still a parasite.
ok, so let me get this straight I'll play along some more.  So, say a mother has twins.  The first baby is delivered, umbilical cord cut and laying in her arms.  The second is still not delivered yet.  The mother decides she doesn't want the babys and smothers the first baby and then has the doctor abort the second baby.  Was murder committed 1 time, 2 times or not at all?

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 02, 2008, 12:46:57 PM »
No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 

Except for the fact that it's still a fetus.
Yup it is a fetus, and since it is still a fetus, even at 40 weeks, you feel it is ok to still abort?

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 02, 2008, 07:39:26 AM »


The string isn't about the definition for fetus, it was a discussion on if it was right to destroy a fetus, particularly a late term fetus.  It was found that some people think that it is ok to destroy a late term fetus even at 39 weeks due to its definition only.  That is were our main difference is.
[/quote]

So you are trying to infer that time takes part in what defines a fetus and a baby?
[/quote]

No, again definition is not the objective.  The issue is that during the string it was stated that any fetus is ok to abort.  And that if the Fetus is 11 weeks old or 40 weeks old has no bearing, as long as it is a fetus, it is ok to abort.  To base a decision off of that is blind.  The difference between a 10 week old fetus and a 40 week fetus is huge. 


11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:15:24 PM »
And I have spent a lot of time I NICU's.   

I guess you didn't get the subliminal message in that telling you to stop breeding, your genes suck.
Says the person who believes the Earth is flat.

When did I say I believed the earth was flat?

You people need to seriously stop making assumptions about me.

They are if you choose one definition over another.

Well, you have to choose the one that's of the right context. That involves more facts though.
And there you have it.


There's only one definition for fetus and baby, though. So at that point it's no longer opinion, nor do you have a choice.

You lose.


The string isn't about the definition for fetus, it was a discussion on if it was right to destroy a fetus, particularly a late term fetus.  It was found that some people think that it is ok to destroy a late term fetus even at 39 weeks due to its definition only.  That is were our main difference is.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:08:35 PM »

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:07:56 PM »
And there you have it.

So, you agree that it's fact now? Make up your mind.

No I was agreeing that if you chose a fact or definition over other facts and definitions based on what you percieve as the correct answer then the fact or definition is now based on the choice or opinion of the person instead of a straight fact. 

wow my head hurts from that one.

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 02:55:55 PM »
They are if you choose one definition over another.

Well, you have to choose the one that's of the right context. That involves more facts though.
And there you have it.

15
The Lounge / Re: What the Hell?
« on: December 01, 2008, 01:05:09 PM »
sometimes it happens if the fridge is too full.  The coolent will freeze up whatever is in the middle of the fridge  because there is no air movement.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 12:33:28 PM »
Was he talking about my post?! You fucking moron, Darkknight, it's the dictionary definition!

Nope, not referring to your post. 

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 12:21:50 PM »
And I have spent a lot of time I NICU's.   

I guess you didn't get the subliminal message in that telling you to stop breeding, your genes suck.


To correct you again it was my genes that kept a 23 weeker alive over the 90% that died that year.  And not that it is any of your business but her mother was fighting cancer at the time.   Before you start passing judgement and trying to talk big, why don't you leave your bedroom, stop playing World of Warcraft and get a girlfriend or something.  Start to live life instead of hiding in your little virtual world behind your avitar.  Because in the real world, life doesn't care about definitions or opinions.  If your in a real situation that a doctor asks you to choose between  a baby, human, parasite, whatever you want call it and a person you love.  And you are in that situation for real, you too would do a little soul searching, not logic.   



18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 12:20:16 PM »
Thank you.  Once the name calling begins you know its a win.  Feel free to reply or not reply, whatever, your answers were fickle and based soley on opinion, and you base your opinion on definitions of your own predetermained facts found online and very general at best.  Until you spend time in a NICU unit or on bed rest with a fetal monitor on your body your opinions will be just that.

Definitions are not opinion.

They are if you choose one definition over another.

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 09:11:56 AM »
If your goal is not to engage in serious discussion, then yes, I would consider it a win as well.

Umm that was a serious discussion,  and I am being called a troll.  The guy busts out with "well I believe" in his answer, I come back with "thats your opionion"  And I am called a troll.  Whatever.  You as well as anybody knows that once the name calling begins, that is usually when that person is at their wits end.  Actually I was in the process of editing my remark to you because you have been cool with the discussion.  the others were just coming up with answers that had no direction but their personal beliefs and then in the same sentence they state it as fact.  At least I give my source and explain my reason for why I call something fact and something belief.  Basiclly disagreeing just to disagree.   

Well, I called you a troll not because I'm at my wits end, but because your arguments are appeals to emotion and you refuse to listen to reason.

I understand and no big deal.  My issue is that you have book smart people, who base their opinion on something they read and rather then experience.  They take a literal fact and don't explore if further.  We are not androids and emotion is apart of this discussion.  I lived first had with these issues.  I saw a baby that was operated on while it was in the womb and survived after it was delivered 15 weeks later.  The definitions I was given by him were based soley off of one persons belief also.

I do listen to reason.  He didn't, Reason is something somebody does, weighing all the facts and Unfortunatly he was spouting off factoids based on his beliefs and opinions (by is own admission) and some definitions he found probably on wiki. 

Its ok to disagree  but to be fickle.  But Come on..  I do admit I do get emotional on this subject.  And you are correct on that, but I base my facts on Book, inet, and life experience.  And I have spent a lot of time I NICU's.   

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:50:00 AM »
If your goal is not to engage in serious discussion, then yes, I would consider it a win as well.

Umm that was a serious discussion,  and I am being called a troll.  The guy busts out with "well I believe" in his answer, I come back with "thats your opionion"  And I am called a troll.  Whatever.  You as well as anybody knows that once the name calling begins, that is usually when that person is at their wits end.  Actually I was in the process of editing my remark to you because you have been cool with the discussion.  the others were just coming up with answers that had no direction but their personal beliefs and then in the same sentence they state it as fact.  At least I give my source and explain my reason for why I call something fact and something belief.  Basiclly disagreeing just to disagree.   

All of your answers (at least on that I've read in this thread, feel free to provide examples if I'm wrong) have been closed, killing instead of perpetuating the debate. Replying with "that's your opinion" is pretty much like saying " fuck it, I'm done debating" around these parts. And you did, and were called on it. Saying agree to disagree is a copout too. This section is called religion and philosohpy not fact and definitive. Philosophy is personal belief, disregarding it is counterproductive to the discussion.

But that's just my opinion  ;)

That is fine to think that, and towards the end of the string it was getting that way, I was sick of saying the same thing over and over and it was getting to be just that.  Generalized answers that State "I believe therfor" in them.  And to be honest with you, I was running into people that were disagreeing just to disagree.  If I come with fact and he comes with fact because it is my opinion.  Well there isn't much further to go.  I was just talking with with a guy who decided to tell me what my position was, and also was being so fickle that he said that I am a pro-lifer so I also should be fighthing for the life of Sperm and eggs.  Now come on......  


He then finishes with a "find me a human that isn't attached in its first week.  I cannot answer that, why?  because he didn't tell me if it is the first week of conception, or after it is born or what.   The guy goes off telling me this whole time that a fetus isn't human and now it is, he tells me he is okay with killing at any age so obviously his opionion on abortion wouldn't matter anyways.  

I am fine with discussion but if you read the last few pages you can see how fickle it was getting.

21
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:39:44 AM »
ok then that is your belief.

Sure, which are backed by factual definitions. To deny my beliefs is to deny those factual definitions.

As are my Beliefs.  And as I stated, I am ok with that.

nope its seems it is your opinion that that is what a pro-life person thinks.

It's not my opinion, that's how logic works. Either you don't think all potential life is sacred, or you do. This isn't a buffet. Picking and choosing conditions is illogical and you're just wasting everyone's time here.

Then you are just being fickle.  You can honestly say that Pro-lifers are supposted to be fighting for the life of Sperm and eggs.  Now who is wasting everyone's time here.

Again another change in terminology to discribe your change in terminology.  Another full circle.

I haven't changed anything...perhaps reading would help you.

Just read it again,  and getting dizzy.

Ok find me a human that has only 23 chromosomes, or a human cell that begins to divide with only 23 chromosomes

Find me a human that wasn't attached to someone else in its first week.

Well I have trouble with your definitions so I guess I better as, first week after conception?  or First week after Birth?  

Calling it the most accurate word to describe this "someone" is again, based on your opinion instead of fact.  

Nope, factual definitions are used.

Again opinions

I'm gonna be with Wendy on this one. No one can be this stupid, you must be a troll. I probably will not reply further.

Thank you.  Once the name calling begins you know its a win.  Feel free to reply or not reply, whatever, your answers were fickle and based soley on opinion, and you base your opinion on definitions of your own predetermained facts found online and very general at best.  Until you spend time in a NICU unit or on bed rest with a fetal monitor on your body your opinions will be just that.

22
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 08:05:45 AM »
If your goal is not to engage in serious discussion, then yes, I would consider it a win as well.

Umm that was a serious discussion,  and I am being called a troll.  The guy busts out with "well I believe" in his answer, I come back with "thats your opionion"  And I am called a troll.  Whatever.  You as well as anybody knows that once the name calling begins, that is usually when that person is at their wits end.  Actually I was in the process of editing my remark to you because you have been cool with the discussion.  the others were just coming up with answers that had no direction but their personal beliefs and then in the same sentence they state it as fact.  At least I give my source and explain my reason for why I call something fact and something belief.  Basiclly disagreeing just to disagree.   

23
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: December 01, 2008, 07:56:09 AM »
Ignore dark knight. He's just a troll.

Thank you thank you thank you. 
 

24
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 01:52:31 PM »
You said the defining fetus was a matter of opinion.  ::)

Due to the bolded parts, they were no longer foetuses.

Again opinion[...]

in that quote it was his opinion.  so

25
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:40:01 AM »
You were born early?

No my 1st daughter was born at 23 weeks gestation and my second daughter was born at 30 weeks gestation.

Due to the bolded parts, they were no longer foetuses.

Again opinion, and based on how this entire string started, the question was asked if you would save a trey full of fetus'  well I guess they were not fetus' since they were born also. 

The question was poorly worded. The concept is what matters here.

"A fetus (or foetus or f?tus) is a developing mammal or other viviparous vertebrate, after the embryonic stage and before birth."

Thank you, I already posted the exact example 2 pages ago.
So whats your point other then dragging this along. before you answer please go back to page 2 to complete the circle you are attempting to start.

26
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:36:24 AM »
sure, both my daughers were.  My oldest who is now in second grade actually has slight memories of being in the hospital.  That sounds hard to believe but it is actually quite common.   Now you can see my view.  I cannot speak for a fetus born before 23 weeks but I have absolutely no doubt that a 23 weeker is a fully developed human.

Human development ends after 23 weeks in the womb? I was under the impression people continued growing until about their late teens.

Fully developed human
That has to be one of the dumbest questions I've heard but I'll play along with it.

27
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:18:01 AM »
You were born early?

No my 1st daughter was born at 23 weeks gestation and my second daughter was born at 30 weeks gestation.

Due to the bolded parts, they were no longer foetuses.

Again opinion, and based on how this entire string started, the question was asked if you would save a trey full of fetus'  well I guess they were not fetus' since they were born also. 

28
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:15:13 AM »
sure, both my daughers were.  My oldest who is now in second grade actually has slight memories of being in the hospital.  That sounds hard to believe but it is actually quite common.   Now you can see my view.  I cannot speak for a fetus born before 23 weeks but I have absolutely no doubt that a 23 weeker is a fully developed human.

29
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The whole Jesus Thing
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:08:00 AM »
Hans Blix of the UNMVIC led teams searching in Iraq. His reports contradicted those of the United States.

Tell that to the 150,000 kurds Chemical Allie Killed.  And yes, there is proof on video and also the bodies have been found.

30
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question aimed at pro-lifers
« on: November 28, 2008, 11:03:01 AM »
You were born early?

No my 1st daughter was born at 23 weeks gestation and my second daughter was born at 30 weeks gestation.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4