August 9, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: The only L is engaging with WGB because hes a man child. As you can see Im happy to engage with anyone else who isnt a giant **** that does nothing except make personal attacks. Right, so taking it like a bish confirmed.
August 9, 20232 yr Just now, VanHammersly said: Not sure, but they do use them to train. Also, you're claiming covert WW3 with zero evidence because...feelings. We should believe the government implicitly
August 9, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: Because Im struggling to figure out why you guys keep chiming in without adding a GD thing to the discussion. Sling Blade over here can't figure out why people keep calling him stupid after he makes 6 incredibly stupid posts in a row.
August 9, 20232 yr 7 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: What relevancy does IVF have to an abortion discussion? Im talking about the scientific fact that every single human life ever on earth started with conception. IVF is simply a form of conception. Its the creation of life not the willful effort to end it. Stem cell research is incredibly important but doesnt justify abortion on its own merit, IMO. There are ethical limitations to scientific capabilities. I already explained that. It has relevance to your stance that life begins at conception. If the law states that life begins at conception, then IVF goes out the window. "Life begins at conception" means that the second that conception happens, then legally that embryo is treated as a human being and all the same rights a person has gets applied to it. Well..... 1) Last I checked, you can't put a human being in a freezer 2) this would require that every single viable embryo that is created must then be implanted. This would obviously be in-feasible. So like I said, having the stance that life begins at conception would lead to a slippery slope that actually would lead to anti-life results. "Stem cell research is incredibly important but doesnt justify abortion on its own merit, IMO. " Again, I'm not talking about abortion. I'm talking about "life begins at conception" stance.
August 9, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: There is evidence that we have special forces there. Do the CIA and special forces defend embassies? Yes because I cant resolve every single ethical issue with respect to abortion here on the EMB, that means abortion has to be legal. Is that your point? Because Im struggling to figure out why you guys keep chiming in without adding a GD thing to the discussion. No, because you're speaking from pure emotion. You don't even have a basic grasp of what you're talking about. You're embarrassing yourself (more than usual).
August 9, 20232 yr It was under the Georghe H.W. Bush Administration when embryonic stem cells were banned from research thanks to Republicans. Turns out Bush died of Parkinson's and would of benefited from stem cell research. On August 9, 2001, U.S. President George W. Bush introduced a ban on federal funding for research on newly created human embryonic stem (ES) cell lines. The policy was intended as a compromise and specified that research on lines created prior to that date would still be eligible for funding.
August 9, 20232 yr 12 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: We should believe the government implicitly Your BDS fever dream has convinced you that we're several months into WW3 but no one knows about it.
August 9, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: I already explained that. It has relevance to your stance that life begins at conception. If the law states that life begins at conception, then IVF goes out the window. "Life begins at conception" means that the second that conception happens, then legally that embryo is treated as a human being and all the same rights a person has gets applied to it. Well..... 1) Last I checked, you can't put a human being in a freezer 2) this would require that every single viable embryo that is created must then be implanted. This would obviously be in-feasible. So like I said, having the stance that life begins at conception would lead to a slippery slope that actually would lead to anti-life results. "Stem cell research is incredibly important but doesnt justify abortion on its own merit, IMO. " Again, I'm not talking about abortion. I'm talking about "life begins at conception" stance. Im not taking this stance as a matter of opinion, Im acknowledge an irrefutable scientific fact that human life begins at conception. I think youre the one on the slippery slope. Because the issue is not scientifically convenient and neatly packaged, youre letting the IVF/stem cell issue bleed into the principled debate over clinical abortion. In my mind, there is a clear distinction between a clinical abortion procedure and a very nuanced scientific discussion about IVF and stem cell research. To tie all of it together as one issue under the Abortion banner is not appropriate to me. I want to clarify Im not viewing this from a religious perspective but from a moral one. So youre going to be hard-pressed to convince me that clinical abortion, which statistics show is overwhelmingly performed due to convenience and not a medical need--should be somehow acceptable because scientific advances have allowed us to create life in a laboratory. To summarize, the fact that IVF exists doesn't negate the fact that human life begins at conception.
August 9, 20232 yr 14 minutes ago, Gannan said: No, because you're speaking from pure emotion. You don't even have a basic grasp of what you're talking about. You're embarrassing yourself (more than usual). Wrong.
August 9, 20232 yr 11 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Your BDS fever dream has convinced you that we're several months into WW3 but no one knows about it. When did I say that? Its amazing how the same people who stood firmly against OIF/OEF are now the biggest cheerleaders and defenders of whatever the hell we're doing in Ukraine. Just for the record: in your opinion, when should we stop sending Ukraine weapons and increasing our personnel presence all over eastern Europe?
August 9, 20232 yr 21 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: To summarize, the fact that IVF exists doesn't negate the fact that human life begins at conception. And it's OK to conveniently throw away a life that started in a lab? I am hearing this correctly?
August 9, 20232 yr 12 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: When did I say that? Ok, several weeks? A year? I'm not in the fever dream, so I don't know how long WW3 has been going on in your mind. 13 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: Its amazing how the same people who stood firmly against OIF/OEF are now the biggest cheerleaders and defenders of whatever the hell we're doing in Ukraine. Simultaneously, it's amazing how the same people that were adamantly for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and were still gung-ho for staying in until Trump told them to change their minds ) are now so against Ukraine (an objectively more just war from our perspective than Iraq), when we're not losing soldiers in the fight. It honestly seems like the right doesn't give a sheet about our troops or even the causes we're fighting for, they just blindly do as their told. 17 minutes ago, Mike31mt said: Just for the record: in your opinion, when should we stop sending Ukraine weapons and increasing our personnel presence all over eastern Europe? For the record: when Russia gets the F out of Ukraine.
August 9, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, Mike31mt said: Im not taking this stance as a matter of opinion, Im acknowledge an irrefutable scientific fact that human life begins at conception. I think youre the one on the slippery slope. Because the issue is not scientifically convenient and neatly packaged, youre letting the IVF/stem cell issue bleed into the principled debate over clinical abortion. In my mind, there is a clear distinction between a clinical abortion procedure and a very nuanced scientific discussion about IVF and stem cell research. To tie all of it together as one issue under the Abortion banner is not appropriate to me. I want to clarify Im not viewing this from a religious perspective but from a moral one. So youre going to be hard-pressed to convince me that clinical abortion, which statistics show is overwhelmingly performed due to convenience and not a medical need--should be somehow acceptable because scientific advances have allowed us to create life in a laboratory. To summarize, the fact that IVF exists doesn't negate the fact that human life begins at conception. "I think youre the one on the slippery slope. Because the issue is not scientifically convenient and neatly packaged, youre letting the IVF/stem cell issue bleed into the principled debate over clinical abortion." No, I'm not. As I already stated, you can be against abortion but still not think that the law should be based on the stance that life begins at conception. You can literally ban ALL elective abortions but still not have a law that states that life begins at conception. Basing the framework of abortion laws on the idea that life begins at conception is what would lead to the slippery slope of banning other procedures that actually are pro-life such as IVF and stem cell research. That's my point. This is a thread discussing the legal framework of abortion. So these things do matter when it comes to the law and how abortion law is to be written. "So youre going to be hard-pressed to convince me that clinical abortion, which statistics show is overwhelmingly performed due to convenience and not a medical need--should be somehow acceptable because scientific advances have allowed us to create life in a laboratory. " I did not say that. And again, I specifically stated that you can be against abortion while also not having the stance that life begins at conception. If I've misunderstood you and you are simply saying that there is life at conception, and not that the embryo is legally a person at conception, then my apologies. (just as if we were to find a plant on Mars, we'd say "Life was found on Mars!" but it doesn't mean that we've found something that has the legal protections that humans receive). But this is a rather important distinction as some states are going down the road of assigning the legality of life at conception, and that's what will lead to unintended consequences like making IVF illegal.
August 12, 20232 yr Texas: "Fetuses are people.” Woman: "Ok then I’m suing for wrongful death of my fetus that you caused.” Texas: "NOT LIKE THAT!!!” Texas questions rights of a fetus after a prison guard who had a stillborn baby sues The argument from the Texas attorney general’s office appears to be in tension with positions it has previously taken in defending abortion restrictions, contending all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court that "unborn children” should be recognized as people with legal rights. It also contrasts with statements by Texas’ Republican leaders, including Gov. Greg Abbott, who has touted the state’s abortion ban as protecting "every unborn child with a heartbeat.” ADVERTISEMENT
August 12, 20232 yr 8 hours ago, Tweek said: Texas: "Fetuses are people.” Woman: "Ok then I’m suing for wrongful death of my fetus that you caused.” Texas: "NOT LIKE THAT!!!” Texas questions rights of a fetus after a prison guard who had a stillborn baby sues The argument from the Texas attorney general’s office appears to be in tension with positions it has previously taken in defending abortion restrictions, contending all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court that "unborn children” should be recognized as people with legal rights. It also contrasts with statements by Texas’ Republican leaders, including Gov. Greg Abbott, who has touted the state’s abortion ban as protecting "every unborn child with a heartbeat.” ADVERTISEMENT Seems like a pretty open-and-shut case for the prison guard to me
August 13, 20232 yr 23 hours ago, Tweek said: Texas: "Fetuses are people.” Woman: "Ok then I’m suing for wrongful death of my fetus that you caused.” Texas: "NOT LIKE THAT!!!” Texas questions rights of a fetus after a prison guard who had a stillborn baby sues The argument from the Texas attorney general’s office appears to be in tension with positions it has previously taken in defending abortion restrictions, contending all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court that "unborn children” should be recognized as people with legal rights. It also contrasts with statements by Texas’ Republican leaders, including Gov. Greg Abbott, who has touted the state’s abortion ban as protecting "every unborn child with a heartbeat.” ADVERTISEMENT Such horsesh-t. Hypocrites….
August 14, 20232 yr And you jackasses are okay with this? Forcing a raped 7th grader to bear a child?
October 25, 20232 yr On 8/9/2023 at 2:04 PM, Mike31mt said: Its actually science. Too bad you only like science when you think its convenient to your deranged world view. No, it isn't. You just pretend that, because you like to make up dopey stuff. An egg is alive, a sperm is alive. Hell, a crystal can pass the life test. An embryo is not a person. It COULD become a person. It is not a person, this is why it can be frozen and thawed out and be viable. "Life begins at conception" is pseudo-science, not a scientific statement.
October 25, 20232 yr 8 minutes ago, Toastrel said: No, it isn't. You just pretend that, because you like to make up dopey stuff. An egg is alive, a sperm is alive. Hell, a crystal can pass the life test. An embryo is not a person. It COULD become a person. It is not a person, this is why it can be frozen and thawed out and be viable. "Life begins at conception" is pseudo-science, not a scientific statement. It took you over 2 months and youre still egregiously wrong because youre a deranged leftist trying to deny life itself. If an embryo isnt a person, what is it? A dog? Youre literally making up random ish and denying basic scientific facts because of your delusional political beliefs. Life begins at conception is literally a medical and scientific fact you disgusting ghoul.
October 25, 20232 yr maybe an embryo is, oh i don't know, an embryo ? . an unborn or unhatched offspring in the process of development, in particular a human offspring during the period from approximately the second to the eighth week after fertilization (after which it is usually termed a fetus).
Create an account or sign in to comment