History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedAbortion a human right?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
Author
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jun-2009 at 22:03
Originally posted by Cryptic Cryptic wrote:

... Strange, what could be so graphically offensive about a collection of cells and tissues?  Or was the picture showing something else.....
 
It showed a small human being, decapitated and in pieces, but with limbs and body clearly visible as human.
A small being that lacked all rights and that was thrown in a garbage can.
 
That's all.
 
Sorry to shock people for shown how a "bunch of cells" looks like, after being decapitated.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jun-2009 at 22:05
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

It is a bit ironic that today some Christian missionaries are accusing Native Americans in the Amazon region for infanticide. Also many times earlier missionaires has accused diverse indigenous peoples for cannibalism.
In the case of the infanticide charges, missionaries in Brasil are now acting for a law that makes it possible to remove native children from their parents...
 
And the Pope acusses developed countries of massive infanticide as well. So what's the difference?
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jun-2009 at 23:00

The difference is that the christian accusasions can directly influence Native American peoples lives in that they get their children taken away from them (as I mentioned this is and old christian/western tradition to take away indigenous peopls children to be able to raise them as christians and to "civilize" them).

When it concerns the developed countries they will not change their abortion policies just because the Pope wants that so his words in that case has not so much direct impact on peoples lives.
 
It seems that the Pope makes some strange statements in several questions, as the statement when he claimed that the using of condoms in Africa would lead to a worsening of the problem with people getting infected by HIV.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16-Jun-2009 at 23:20
I would allow any woman to have an abortion, given they see their fetus in pieces. That's the only condition I would put.
 
I found it ridiculous that abortionists use censorship to forbid the display of such crimes, just to protect the people who commit them. It is like to forbid murdered to see pictures of theirs dead victims.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1368
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 00:18
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

I would allow any woman to have an abortion, given they see their fetus in pieces. That's the only condition I would put.
Pinguin, you are acting as if women have abortions done like they have their nails done.  This is a ridiculous and misguided notion to have in your head.  The fact of the matter is that no one makes this decision lightly, it weighs on the mind of the individual often with mental affects (like depression). Nobody goes into the decision nonchalantly, people agonize over it and ultimately have to come a decision that is right for them, not you or anybody else just the person making the decision.  Get off your high horse!  Have you ever known anybody who went through with an abortion?  I have seen a very good friend go through this dilemma and I have seen how it affected her.  You should be so lucky as to never see a friend go through what she did.  You should also count yourself lucky that you will never have to make that decision for yourself.  
 
Quote I found it ridiculous that abortionists use censorship to forbid the display of such crimes, just to protect the people who commit them. It is like to forbid murdered to see pictures of theirs dead victims.
1. Your photo was removed because it violated the CoC VII.B.4.  Specifically it violated the prohibition regarding graphic images, as Seko pointed out.  This is not censorship but terms of use and conduct that you agree to when you join.  Your point was never censored, the text of your post was left only the picture was removed.  If you have an issue with a decision made by a staff member (mod or admin) pm that person but don't do it publicly, that's poor form.

2. The murdered can't see any pictures because they are the victims and by definition deceased.  I believe you want your sentence to read: "It is like forbidding a murderer to see pictures of their dead victims."  However, the point implied with this statement is not even close to comparable to abortion.  By this I mean that a murderer viewing pictures of his/her victim(s) is tantamount to discovery (a legal principle whereby the prosecution in a case has to turn over to the defense all documentation, evidence, and witness lists).  Pictures of murder victims (the murdered, if you will) are essentially evidence of a crime used to show the jury the affects of the actions of the accused; used much like video footage of a crime.  It should be pointed out that pictures of murder victims are rarely used in trials.  Pictures of dead fetus' are just meant to shock people, nothing more.  Abortion is legal in many states and therefore a picture of a dead fetus is not evidence of a crime, it's like showing a child who had a compound fracture of the leg (that is a fracture where the bone is protruding from the skin).  Both are gross and hard to look at but neither is evidence of a crime.

3. Not all people who are pro-Choice would actually get an abortion performed.  Some would not be able to go through with an abortion but still think that the right of a woman to choose what her options are is tantamount to her right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Please don't act like people just go into an abortion willy-nilly, that's just not the case.  There are many things to consider when one is deciding whether or not to get an abortion and nobody makes those decisions easily.  On this issue you are talking about things about which you don't know.  It's ok to have an opinion about an issue such as this but it's not ok to make somebody, who has a different opinion and who has acted on what she decided was right for her, feel bad.  The fact of the matter is she is already anguishing over what she is doing but ultimately the only one who knows if she is making the right decision is her.  So, again, get off your high horse!
Back to Top
Mixcoatl View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 4581
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mixcoatl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 02:05
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

I would allow any woman to have an abortion, given they see their fetus in pieces. That's the only condition I would put.
 
I found it ridiculous that abortionists use censorship to forbid the display of such crimes, just to protect the people who commit them. It is like to forbid murdered to see pictures of theirs dead victims.

That's nonsense. I don't think you nor me nor most other AE users will be very happy to see photographs of open heart surgeries. Yet nobody has ever claimed that because open heart surgeries look gory they should be banned.
"Some argue that atheism partly stems from a failure to fairly and judiciously consider the facts"
"Atheists deny the existence of Satan, while simultaneously doing his work."

- Conservapedia
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 02:05

What you don't understand, King John, is that people in Latin America has seen hundred of hours of reports on abortion, where the babies killed are shown literally.

Most of those movies and reports have been filmed in North America, but sold overseas because showing there is forbidden.
 
I wonder what your public would feel if the had the chance to SEE the truth.
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2096
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 03:14
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

The difference is that the christian accusasions can directly influence Native American peoples lives in that they get their children taken away from them (as I mentioned this is and old christian/western tradition to take away indigenous peopls children to be able to raise them as christians and to "civilize" them).


No doubt they can have an influence, but there isn't anything particularly "Christian" or "Western" about them. Indeed, they are methods that have been rather generally employed, throughout history, by "civilized" peoples against "barbarous" peoples as a means of exerting cultural hegemony.

Quote
When it concerns the developed countries they will not change their abortion policies just because the Pope wants that so his words in that case has not so much direct impact on peoples lives.


Suffice it to say, by way of response, that the Pope represents the Roman Catholic Church, and as such is not my representative -- although I do generally consider him a better voice for morality and ethical standards than the sorts we have generally put in charge of such things in the modern era.

Quote It seems that the Pope makes some strange statements in several questions, as the statement when he claimed that the using of condoms in Africa would lead to a worsening of the problem with people getting infected by HIV.


I understand that you have prepared criticisms which you've been dying to voice against every aspect of the Christian faith, but it would really be easier for all of us if you could keep them relevant to the context of our discussions.

-Akolouthos
Back to Top
King John View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-Dec-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1368
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote King John Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 04:21
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

What you don't understand, King John, is that people in Latin America has seen hundred of hours of reports on abortion, where the babies killed are shown literally.

Most of those movies and reports have been filmed in North America, but sold overseas because showing there is forbidden.
 
I wonder what your public would feel if the had the chance to SEE the truth.
1. In what way is this a response to what I posted?  I really don't care what you have seen, it's no different than what I have seen (see #2).

2. Show me one law that forbids those pictures being shown in the USA.  When were these laws enacted?  If you go to any Planned Parenthood you can see a number of protesters holding pictures of aborted fetuses; I've seen billboards on highways with pictures of aborted fetuses in the USA.  The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that activists can show pictures of aborted fetuses.  There is a planned parenthood not far from where I live (within 1 mile) that has protesters out front on a regular basis with pictures of aborted fetuses.  There are a number of documentaries done on abortion that have been shown in the US.  One was shown on PBS, if I remember correctly it was shown on a program called Frontline.  What about films like Lake of Fire directed by Tony Kaye (the guy who did American History X)?  That was shown in the USA and Canada with no law forbidding it from being shown.  It opened in Canada in September 2005 and in the USA October 3, 2007 to critical acclaim.  I mean even Fox News has produced a documentary on abortion called Facing Reality: Choice.  So again you are talking about things about which you know nothing.  Educate yourself before you open your mouth (or in this case type a response).

3. The public would be split just the way it is now, but it wouldn't change the minds of the pro-choice people.  You seem to think that people don't know what they are doing when they have an abortion or just don't care and do it like they would make a sandwich.  My point is this everybody who does this (gets an abortion) knows exactly what they are doing and agonize over the decision–nobody takes the decision lightly.  Each person making the decision makes the right decision for themselves; just because you don't agree with it doesn't make your stance more "truthful."
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Status: Offline
Points: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 10:55
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

FlipperIf i may ask, was it Gudrun Schyman that called that a human right? She's the only one i can think of using those words.

Yes, it was indeed Gudrun Schyman. Here you can hear her debating this issue with Chatrine Pålsson Ahlgren from KD:
 
 


Hehe, i knew it.
I heard the discussion between them. However, i'm suprised that Gudrun is not troubled by the fact that Sweden is in the top 5 list of abortions together with Russia, Bulgaria, Hungary and Cuba.

Lets note that Sweden, has good sexual education in schools and people in general are not ignorant on such matters. According to the numbers, one can guess many things like there are too many people not taking some things seriously regarding sex.

To get an unexpected pregnancy can happen anyone basically. However, what excuse is there for people that do it 2 or 3 times and still don't act responsibly?

Personaly i don't believe abortion should be banned. However, I strongly believe there should be legal consiquences for people that simply don't learn from their mistakes.

Also, a human right is a heavy word for this process. As i mentioned before i see it as an unfortunate necessity for some individuals.

Personaly for me an embryo is a human and my belief is based on personal experience. However, i don't expect everyone to agree with that.


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 11:46
Akolouthos: No doubt they can have an influence, but there isn't anything particularly "Christian" or "Western" about them. Indeed, they are methods that have been rather generally employed, throughout history, by "civilized" peoples against "barbarous" peoples as a means of exerting cultural hegemony.
 
I know the christians are not alone excerzising power against indigenous peoples but since the christian culture has been rather dominant in many places for a rather long period it´s not wrong to adress these issues.

Akolouthos: Suffice it to say, by way of response, that the Pope represents the Roman Catholic Church, and as such is not my representative -- although I do generally consider him a better voice for morality and ethical standards than the sorts we have generally put in charge of such things in the modern era.

In some things that he know nothing about it would be better if he didn´t talk at all.

Akolouthos. I understand that you have prepared criticisms which you've been dying to voice against every aspect of the Christian faith, but it would really be easier for all of us if you could keep them relevant to the context of our discussions.

One can see the Popes statements about condoms in the same context as his talk about  abortions so it´s rather relevant, especially since this thread is about abortion.
 
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 24-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2096
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 12:03
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Akolouthos: No doubt they can have an influence, but there isn't anything particularly "Christian" or "Western" about them. Indeed, they are methods that have been rather generally employed, throughout history, by "civilized" peoples against "barbarous" peoples as a means of exerting cultural hegemony.
 
I know the christians are not alone excerzising power against indigenous peoples but since the christian culture has been rather dominant in many places for a rather long period it´s not wrong to adress these issues.


No, it is not wrong to address these issues; what is wrong is the way in which you were doing it. Wink

Quote Akolouthos: Suffice it to say, by way of response, that the Pope represents the Roman Catholic Church, and as such is not my representative -- although I do generally consider him a better voice for morality and ethical standards than the sorts we have generally put in charge of such things in the modern era.

In some things that he know nothing about it would be better if he didn´t talk at all.


A fine instruction to all of us; sadly enough, I have seldom met anyone who heeded it.

Quote Akolouthos. I understand that you have prepared criticisms which you've been dying to voice against every aspect of the Christian faith, but it would really be easier for all of us if you could keep them relevant to the context of our discussions.

One can see the Popes statements about condoms in the same context as his talk about  abortions so it´s rather relevant, especially since this thread is about abortion.


I suppose you might be able to, but you'll still need to provide some context to get me on board. I suspect the comment has more to do with your desire to attack one of the most visible religious figures, rather than from a desire to better understand the question at hand. With regard to the issue you have raised, it would have been a rather simple thing to do. Wink

-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Status: Offline
Points: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 13:07
Originally posted by xristar xristar wrote:

No it's not a human right.
Cahaya and Al Jassas covered what I wanted to say pretty well.
1)If a woman really wants to not get pregnant there are so many ways she can make sure.
2)A woman cannot kill a baby if the father does not agree. Since the baby has been concieved, it's not hers only, it's also part of its father.

I'd say abortion should be allowed when baby is certainly going to suffer somehow if it's born:
1)baby was concieved after sex without consensus (rape). Mother doesn't want a baby of her rapist
2)baby's gonna have medical issues (retard, criple etc). If that's clear during pregnancy, it can be spared the torture of living.
3)mother and father below 16 (or 18, depends) years old. It's really mean to force a baby to have immature and irresponsible parents, who propably won't stay together (broke family).
4 -dubious-)any baby that its parents agree they don't want. What's the point of a baby getting born and have no parents to love it and care for it. Though I'd say, orphans fall also in this category, yet they often have quite normal lives. I'm not sure about No4
5)If child threatens mother's life. Mother is first priority always.


I think this is the most complete and unbiased answer so far. I basically agree with everything. If i had to add something, it would be that somekind of penalty should be applied to careless people that had already a abortion experience.

A good point as well is that the father should agree as well with the abortion. If a woman gets pregnant and wants to keep the baby against the fathers will, he will have to pay for that "unwanted child" (i hate to say this). So, in that case Gudrun Schyman should stick to her equality of genders idea. The fact that the baby is inside her body does not make it 100% her decision.

As I said before, if it was about me, i would never kill my descendant. Even if it could f**k up my life, i would stand for my actions. There are 1230102391023910239 things that can f**k up my life and i will have to suck them up if i'm not careful. If i was younger and was unable to raise a child or give it a quality of living i would be glad to make a pair that can't have kids happy.

In any case, abortion should not be illegal, nor should it be called a human right. We should  educate people and make them understand that inresponsibility of such type, is a really bad thing.




Edited by Flipper - 17-Jun-2009 at 13:09


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Status: Offline
Points: 1814
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 13:31
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Here you can hear her debating this issue with Chatrine Pålsson Ahlgren from KD:
 
 


Something else about Schyman that used as an argument "The woman should do whatever she wants with her body".

But that does not apply to prostitution like some people wrote on the comments of the video. Meanwhile illegal prostitution has exploded, where young girls from Russia and the ex USSR countries are exploited for a peace of food. I dunno if you have seen that Russian movie about it?




Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 15:02
The abortion topic shouldn't be focus from the religious point of view. There are many people that understand fetus are humans. And to get that it is not necessary to believe in God, but only in justice.
 
I am agnostic, for instance. And I was a member of freemasonry, once.
 
However, for me it is quite clear the biggest crime is not abortion itself, but to deny the "human citizenship" to unborn babies.
 
That has been the same tactic applied before the large genocides of history. First you take away the label "human" from your fellow hominids, and then you can kill them at will. That happened with Amerindians, Blacks, Jews, Russians and many other people in the past. Today the target are the babies.
 
That's what I think, anyways.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Styrbiorn View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 2818
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Styrbiorn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 15:18
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

The abortion topic shouldn't be focus from the religious point of view. There are many people that understand fetus are humans. And to get that it is not necessary to believe in God, but only in justice.
 
I am agnostic, for instance. And I was a member of freemasonry, once.
 
However, for me it is quite clear the biggest crime is not abortion itself, but to deny the "human citizenship" to unborn babies.
 
That has been the same tactic applied before the large genocides of history. First you take away the label "human" from your fellow hominids, and then you can kill them at will. That happened with Amerindians, Blacks, Jews, Russians and many other people in the past. Today the target are the babies.
 
That's what I think, anyways.
 
 
 
 

You might as well draw the limit a little further and argue for a ban of masturbation. Those little creatures are potential humans too.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 15:26
Originally posted by Styrbiorn Styrbiorn wrote:

...You might as well draw the limit a little further and argue for a ban of masturbation. Those little creatures are potential humans too.
 
Don't be silly. There aren't rational shifting of the limits a "little bit further" to ridiculize the quality of humans of fetus. You well know life start at the conception.
 
By the way, I have some excelent pictures of a so called "partial birth". There, a 9 month fetus is decapitated, in orden women excercise theirs rights. I can send you them by private e-mail if you like. There you can see the big smile of the "mommy" Confused
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 17-Jun-2009 at 15:28
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 16:03
pinguin:
Don't be silly. There aren't rational shifting of the limits a "little bit further" to ridiculize the quality of humans of fetus. You well know life start at the conception.
 
Genetically and biologically  both sperms and eggcells are half humans and they are as much alive as a fertilized embryo 
 
 


Edited by Carcharodon - 17-Jun-2009 at 16:21
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Baron
Baron


Joined: 04-May-2007
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 479
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 16:21
Akolouthos:

A fine instruction to all of us; sadly enough, I have seldom met anyone who heeded it.

I suppose you might be able to, but you'll still need to provide some context to get me on board. I suspect the comment has more to do with your desire to attack one of the most visible religious figures, rather than from a desire to better understand the question at hand. With regard to the issue you have raised, it would have been a rather simple thing to do.

 
A figure like the Pope has (unfortunately) a lot of influence on many catholic peoples minds. That is why he really shouldn´t talk about things he obviously doesn´t understand.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Jun-2009 at 17:40
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

pinguin:
Don't be silly. There aren't rational shifting of the limits a "little bit further" to ridiculize the quality of humans of fetus. You well know life start at the conception.
 
Genetically and biologically  both sperms and eggcells are half humans and they are as much alive as a fertilized embryo 
 
I can't believe that you, a self-name deffender of Indian rights, is at the same time a man that denies humanity in small babies.
 
That's so contradictory, that makes me think your love for Indians is symply hypocresy. For you is OK to send yours unborn babies to the garbage can, but it is fine to deffend Indian lives.
 
Double standard?
 
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 3456>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.