Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RobGMN" data-source="post: 8885854" data-attributes="member: 683408">True. Over 170 countries issue SSNs, so the odds are decent that someone coming here illegally has one.Over 170 countries use SSNs of some type, so the odds are good an immigrant will have one.But why did you think it would be legal to kill an illegal just because they have no B.C. or SSN?Something you advocate or wish for? Remember: YOU brought it up.Very cool. Is she or was she an illegal immigrant here? Is she the reason you wondered if we should legally kill people without a B.C. or SSN?Incorrect. I said an embryo is not legally a PERSON and therefore cannot be issued a B.C. or SSN.I also said a ***** is human but not "a human" until it is born.Exactly. But you think a ***** is a baby. Babies can be issued a B.C and an SSN, right?If a ***** is a baby, why can't we issue a B.C. and an SSN to a *****?Abortion law. It's based on tenets of religion.Blue laws. Based on tenets of religion.You think both are appropriate. You told me directly that it is OK to base law on religion.Did you misunderstand when I asked about it? Do you NOT believe tenets of religion should be used to create law?But abortion should be illegal because you believe so. Right?Yes. I saw it all in seminary and had endless questions about the contradictory nature of so much of it.And you simply support my statement that the Bible is not a history book, nor a science book.And you only reinforce my statement that it should not be used as a basis for US law.It's a human cell. A single cell that will go through cell division to become more.YOU said aborting a zygote is OK because the cells have not "come together". We haven't cleared THAT one up yet, but If a zygote is a single cell that eventual subdivides a billion times to become what will eventual be the *****, do you think aborting a zygote is OK?If so, WHEN does it become NOT OK?No. I want you to tell me when it is NOT OK to abort, if you think it IS OK to abort a zygote.Specificity is important if we want to discuss reasons abortion should NOT be allowed.Yes, I am. You expressed very clearly that you didn't know what a zygote is. You said it's OK to abort it because the cells haven't "come together" even though a zygote is what you get following conception (the UNION of sperm and egg).Then you indicated a dog ***** should not be aborted because it is human and the cells have "come together", which is not how development occurs.Huh?It's also probably a felony to chop someone's finger off without their consent, yet you CAN do it WITH their consent.It makes TOTAL sense that it would be illegal to kill the ***** without the consent of the woman carrying it.Tell me: When the court case happens, who is named as the plaintiff?BTW - Penal Code 187 exempt abortion  and describes the fetal killing as having to be "unlawful" It is "unlawful" to do something to the body of a person who is unwilling and has not consented.The law you describe makes TOTAL sense.OK. We're making progress. So, at what stage in the process does abortion go from OK, to unacceptable?Afraid the link is bad, but it's from a Christian pro-life page so there might be some bias in there(?)[ATTACH=full]61929[/ATTACH]It's not up to me, but I would say once the ***** is able to survive without life support system in place.Kind of the obverse of being able to remove life support from someone who will forever be tied to it..Yes there are variables, but find an average and set it as a hard line.Yes. And thus it's really hard to use it as a reference for how our laws should be set or how people should live their lives.Pork was forbidden by some religions. Reasons vary from the difficulty to raise them, to them being "unhealthy" becasue they do not chew their cud.What better way to keep your uneducated people strong than to tell them "god" doesn't want them to eat it. No different than telling a child to stay away form the pond or the "monster" will get them. Kids simply don't understand "danger" or "you will drown and die".Religion was created to effectively control huge populations of "children" by giving them rules and a reason to follow them:Scare the shit out of them with the punishment of eternal damnation rom an angry god.So we want to use a book of fairy tales to create law?No, I'm saying that you are posting things that are pretty much a word-for-word copy of the AI-generated result Google gives when you search for certain phrases. AI-generated result: "most biologists, including many who identify as pro-choice, agree that a human life begins at fertilization, meaning they would consider an embryo to be a human being"They are already seeing many instances where the AI-generated results are wrong, but are simply grabbed from the info the system gathers.For example: If a million people posted that grass is pink, and a hundred posted it is green, the AI crawling bots would probably tell you grass is pink. "Survey says"...For the same reason you wouldn't just believe me if I said the opposite.And I wouldn't expect you to.We are all anonymous here. Our "word" doesn't mean ANYTHING.You never did. Because only a legal person can get one.If only a legal person can get one, a ***** must not be a legal person. Get it?Answered above. But "viability" makes the most sense to me.ALL of that said, this is the type of back-and-forth I am trying to have here, but get stymied by the likes of Thx, Spoke, etc, who simply want to make a claim, demand it be accepted wihtout question, and then get pissed off if it IS questioned.You have trended there too, but I'm TRYING to keep it a true back-and-forth. See above.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list