No. But the post I quoted was and I think you know that at this point.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

That's a good post, mike.


That's just dumb as shit.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

Who owes whom an apology?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

It is.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

I do understand the point of fetus viability outside the womb, but it seems a main talking point of pro-choice people is that we shouldn't tell a woman what to do with her body, and as you alluded to, in viability cases we would be forcing a woman to give birth, which doesn't seem to be very pro-choice to me.

Personally, I'm pretty much on board with viability being the decider, but I wouldn't really call that pro-choice.

Human life begins at conception was settled until, and even after, abortion became legal.

So in conclusion, it was science, until people were given the ability to dispose of their unborn children.

_________________

It's not a scientific question. It's a philosophical question.

Seacrest, you can stop arguing that science can "never be settled" in other threads now.

_________________

Are you confused? Science doesn't stay as "fact" because it was in a book written over 2,000 years ago.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Do you love your father? Prove it.

/thread

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

Dude you're talking to a guy who believes at least two people have been risen from the not too recent dead and that a woman who was engaged and found herself pregnant and claimed to be a virgin had a child rather than the simple explanation being possible she got busy at some point and came up with an elaborate cover up. No! I didn't have sex out of wedlock! GOD got me pregnant in a dream! Yeah... that's gotta be the simplest explanation.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

Remember, all the trouble in the world came from one bad apple.

_________________

The Hippocratic Oath was recited in this country by doctors until, and even after, abortion became legal.

Look, you think its OK to kill unborn kids. I don't. If that makes me an asshole, so be it.

_________________

At conception.

Separate person.

Separate DNA.

A unique individual that will never be repeated.

That's science, not philosophy.

_________________

It's not just one or the other. Pro-choice people are willing to compromise. I mean, the pro-life people are ok with letting a man or woman cease caring for a kid as soon as they are born by putting them up for adoption but that doesn't mean their stance is against pro-life.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Incorrect. That's your opinion of what human life is. The individual statements you made may be factually true through science, but deciding at what point it is "human life" depends entirely on how we define human life. It's philosophy, not science.

_________________

So?
Your opinion does not. Your misinformation campaign in this thread does.

Don't get all mad because you literally couldn't even respond to my post.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

No, DNA is not philosophy.

That is a scientific reality of what happens at conception. Their exists a unique individual, with their own DNA, then will NEVER be repeated again.

It's unfortunate to hear all the "science" guys run from real science when it disagrees with their world view.

_________________

You have yet to refute what science held as true for over 2000 years, BEFORE, the knowledge of DNA confirmed it.

Don't accuse me of being mad because all you can do is stick your fingers in your ear and yell "is not, is not is not!".

Just accept what science has taught us.

_________________

I don't know how to get you to understand it.

No one is arguing that DNA isn't a scientific reality. But that doesn't mean that having DNA = Human life. That is a question that is philosophical and that people will likely never agree on.

If you're going to respond again, please respond to that and not things I'm not disagreeing with.

_________________

Sure I have. There is a reason you completely ignored it.

If DNA = life then how do you explain that DNA exists long after you die?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

What you don't understand is that this is a reality whether you and I agree with it or not.

Like so many other issues here, shots get fired at the messenger when others don't like the message.

_________________

You are not even attempting to address the argument. I don't know if it's because you don't understand it or because you're choosing not to do so.

Sitting here and saying "this is a reality. this is just truth" over and over is not an argument.

_________________

There is NO argument.

You are welcome to your opinion. And free to post it here. I posted what science says, you and Brick say it's not science.

Again, shots fired at the messenger.

_________________

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

I guess. It just seems like 'pro-choice' really isn't the main principle of the argument, viability of the fetus is. Once you start to get into a more nuanced argument, I know it comes out anyway, but it feels like general the "what a woman does is none of my business/we shouldn't legislate women's bodies" needs to be followed by "...to a point." I think you're basically saying that technically almost every position needs qualifiers, I just think in this case it's a pretty big one.

You've pointed out the science is mixed on when we should consider life begins. Let's just pretend that science at some point "proves" life begins at some point between conception and viability of the fetus. Would you still be pro-choice between the time of life beginning and fetus viability? If so, then I'd agree calling yourself pro-choice isn't disingenuous, or any more disingenuous than plenty of other positions/labels.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that a fertilized egg is a living thing. So you can stop making that argument.

If your position is that a zygote/fetus/unborn child in the womb is a separate person just like a person living outside the womb, then it should follow that a zygote/fetus/unborn child should be entitled to all the same rights and protections as a person living outside the womb. And if that's the case then you DO open yourself up to a whole host of philosophical questions.

Because if you're treating a zygote/fetus/unborn child the same way as you are treating a child living outside the womb, then you also granting certain rights to the parents of that child. For example, the father of a child living outside the womb is entitled to visit with and make parenting decisions with respect to that child. If a zygote/fetus/unborn child is treated the same way, it should follow that the father of an unborn child would be entitled to visit with and make parenting decisions regarding his unborn child.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion because that is all it is.

_________________

_________________

Kind of. You could say that by having a specific deadline(like 19 weeks, 6 days) allows the woman to make a choice even if she can't choose it later. It's not too different than being pro-life but being fine with adoption.

That's a tough question to answer. I would think that the "viability" time goes down before that though.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!